The Reverend Delman Coates heads a black church in Prince George County, and in stark opposition to many other African-American clergy, he supports marriage equality. In an eloquent and thoughtful interview with NPR’s The Takeaway, he points out that theology should not determine public policy in this country. He has testified before Maryland Governor Martin O’Malley in support of marriage equality, and he has taken fire from fellow preachers for his position.
The opening moments of the interview feature a short excerpt from one of Reverend Coates’ sermons; it’s delivered in that intense rhetorical style traditionally favored by fire-and-brimstone preachers, except that he’s using this voice to scold his flock for religion-based bigotry. It makes for remarkable listening, and the interview that follows will put heart into LGBT activists who have despaired of other Christian leaders’ position on civil rights. If he’s a political conservative (and he declines to discuss his personal views on homosexuality), then he’s a rational, intellectually honest one of a type we seldom hear from these days.
“My support for the Civil Marriage Protection Act,” says Reverend Coates, “is rooted in my heartfelt sense that in America, we have to protect public policy from personal and private theology and personal belief.
“I think the principles of our country are founded upon the ideals of our Constitution which protect religious freedom and institutional autonomy, yet at the same time preserve individual liberty as well. I’m really concerned about the way in which in many of our public-policy conversations…people are using theology as a basis for public policy. I think that’s a dangerous precedent.
“Governments fund things that are against people’s religious beliefs, personal theology and doctrine, all the time. Right now, local governments and municipalities allow for alcohol establishments, liquor stores in communities, gambling, and yet at the same time religious institutions teach their parishioners not to engage in these activities.
“There’s a difference between our public policy imperatives and our theological imperatives. Our challenge is to live in our faith…not to legislate it.
“We want foreign policy decisions as Americans to be based on sound intelligence. We want it to be based on credible threats. We don’t want foreign policy decisions for example, to be based on the theology of a particular religious tradition….
“We know that there could come a point in the future when the majority now is no longer the majority…I want to make sure that, 200 years from now, if my local church and those who worship in the local church, are no longer the majority in the local and national community, that our rights are preserved from the theological musings and understandings of whomever might be in the majority at that time. So I think it’s critically important for us to figure out a way to segregate and to separate public policy from theology.”
The news and editorial departments of the New York Times have been giving a lot of (well-deserved) attention to the issue of marriage equality recently. In fact, the paper’s editorial board has emerged as a forceful advocate for the freedom to marry.
A recent column by economics and behavioral science professor Richard H. Thaler, titled Gay Marriage Debate is About Money, Too, makes a good argument for marriage equality in terms of dollars and cents. (I and many others wish the American media, including the Times, would stop using the inaccurate and misleading term “gay marriage,” but that’s for another post entirely.) However, Thaler’s central argument is flawed at its core:
In my ideal world. . . the legal unions that are now called marriages would be called domestic partnerships, which would be offered to same-sex as well as heterosexual couples. But if some states are unwilling to enact such statutes, same-sex couples who live in those states could simply go to a state that does offer same-sex domestic partnerships, and would then be treated as such by the federal government, with all the attendant financial benefits and responsibilities. Companies can choose the state in which they incorporate, so couples should have that privilege, too.
Marriage, of course, would continue, but would no longer be regulated by the government. Instead, weddings would become like many other important ceremonies from graduations to funerals: private matters. (Conservatives may applaud now.)
First, Prof. Thaler, I hate to burst your bubble, but conservatives won’t be clapping. They don’t just oppose marriage equality, but seek to block any and all legal recognition of the basic human rights of LGBT people (employment protections, anti-bullying laws, hate crimes laws, etc.). Second, they won’t accept marriage for same-sex couples by another name. For proof, look no further than the texts of the marriage discrimination amendments found in state constitutions all across the country. Most of them look like this one from my home state of Wisconsin:
Only a marriage between one man and one woman shall be valid or recognized as a marriage in this state. A legal status identical or substantially similar to that of marriage for unmarried individuals shall not be valid or recognized in this state.
Third, sir, do you really think that marriage recognition for same-sex couples should be contingent upon the state in which they live, or that couples who can’t afford to “simply go to a state that [offers] same-sex domestic partnerships” should just keep their heads down and accept their second-class status? Do you really think marriages — but again, only same-sex marriages — should dissolve once a legally-married same-sex couple crosses state lines? The assertion would be laughable if it weren’t so galling.
Finally, professor, even if your plan was magically implemented tomorrow and all couples, whether same-sex or opposite-sex, would only be able to enter into domestic partnerships in the eyes of the state, a two-tiered marriage system would still exist because of the tens of millions of opposite-sex couples and thousands of same-sex couples who’ve been legally married up until that point. The only “fair” way to enact your ludicrous plan would be to unilaterally commute all current civil marriages — opposite-sex and same-sex — to domestic partnerships. And if you or anyone else thinks heterosexual couples will be willing to give up the privilege and the federal protections that the word “marriage” entails, I’ve got a bridge in Brooklyn I’d like to sell you.
Contrast Thaler’s tortured reasoning and flawed “logic” with the eloquent words of openly gay op-ed columnist Frank Bruni. In an opinion piece published today in the Times titled Value Our Families, he writes:
In the intensifying debate over same-sex marriage, what I sometimes find hardest to understand is why so many opponents don’t see gay people’s longing to be wedded as the fundamentally conservative, lavishly complimentary desire it is. It says marriage is worth aspiring to and fighting for. Flatters it. Gives it reinvigorated cachet, extra currency, a sorely needed infusion of fresh energy. . .
Both [pro-equality Maryland governor Martin O'Malley and anti-equality New Jersey governor Chris Christie] were talking about family values, two words that have often been invoked in the argument against same-sex marriage. It’s time to turn the phrase around. What gay and lesbian couples are asking is to be recognized as families. And they’re just idealistic enough to hope that everyone realizes how much value there is in that.
Other than advising Professor Thaler to take a memo, I don’t think anything else needs to be said.
“Ex-gay” Greg Quinlan, who needs you to know that, even when he wasn’t repressing his natural desires, he wasn’t a “flaming faggot,” is really, really, well, really flaming upset about what’s going on with marriage equality in these here United States. One might even say he’s queening out over it. One would think that as the president of a hate group he wouldn’t get so breathlessly hysterical, but then again his screed is posted on the blog of another breathlessly hysterical hate group leader. Let’s look at what he has to say:
On Monday, the New Jersey Senate voted 24-16 to corrupt the definition of marriage to include homosexual couples. Many called it a civil right. Homosexuality is NOT a civil right. It simply does not measure up to the criteria of a civil right.
It would be too much to ask for Greg to define the criteria of a “civil right,” wouldn’t it?
Thursday (today) the Democrat-controlled New Jersey Assembly (lower Chamber) voted. There was a slim chance that it would not get the required 41 votes for passage. [But the "same-sex marriage" bill passed the by a vote of 42-33; New Jersey governor Chris Christie has vowed to veto the bill.]
Please pray for us and that the elected officials nationwide will do the right thing. And that the Lord God will accomplish His will any way He sees fit. May HE have mercy on this state, and this nation, which seems to have forgotten Him.
What if the way God accomplishes His will runs counter to Greg’s self-loathing bigotry?
Please pray for the other states facing the lie of homosexual “marriage.” A bill has just been introduced in Illinois to legalize counterfeit “gay marriage.’ It is mischievously titled the “Religious Freedom and Marriage Fairness Act.”
The bill is “mischievously” titled. One might even call it “fierce!”
Maryland is under a more imminent threat of homosexual “marriage” as well as a bill that would enable transsexual, cross-dressing men to use the restrooms of women and young girls. INSANITY.
Now this is one of those moments where the utter brainwashing of being a wingnut really shines through. As a “former gay activist,” even if he still really needs us to know he wasn’t a nelly queer, Greg Quinlan should know full well that the Religious Right fearmongering about “cross-dressing men” using the little girls’ room is absolutely disgusting and simply not based in fact. He theoretically should have an understanding, at least, of what the issue is about, even if he disagrees with it. But he’s become his own abuser and apparently needs to please his new wingnut gods, so he just lies. He’s a man of stellar character.
In Washington State, legislators passed homosexual “marriage” and imposed it upon their citizens, with the help of the state’s governor, Christine Gregoire, a new “gay marriage convert who ignored the dictates of her own Catholic religion to usher in this radical redefinition of an ancient institution. However, the people of Washington State are now working to get the issue on the ballot so that citizens decide whether to reverse the homosexual “marriage” law.
And if they get it on the ballot and the voters uphold marriage equality, expect a hysterical screed from Greg condemning the activist voters of Washington state.
New Hampshire is in a similar situation to Washington State (conterfeit “gay marriage” has been legal since 2009; see this Concord Monitor article on the GOP-led effort to repeal homosexual “marriage”). Minnesota voters will be able to vote on a statewide referendum this November to amend their state constitutions to preserve man-woman marriage, while North Carolina has a pro-traditional marriage amendmet vote in early May.
Iowans fired three of the judges that imposed homosexual “marriage” on them at the ballot box. They are now trying to reverse their dictatorial decision by putting it on the ballot.
Blah blah blah, more good news, and some gross news from Minnesota and North Carolina. On balance, though, we’re so winning.
California’s marriage battle will likely go to the U.S. Supreme Court, where Barack Obama appointed potential lesbian Elena Kagan and ultra liberal Sonia Sotomayer – who will both likely will decide against natural, God-ordained marriage.
Elena Kagan, the “potential lesbian.” If she would only apply herself!
The assault on natural marriage and rebellion against God is so vicious now that we need prayer for these individual states and our nation.
God save us from ourselves.
That last line…something about it…it just sums up what it means to be a wingnut. To be so frightened of one’s own inner desires, urges, hopes and dreams that they need authority figures [in this case God, but it can just as easily be the Pope or Tony Perkins or some wingnut pastor] to protect them from themselves.
Anyway, from Greg’s report, we can see that things are actually going pretty well on the marriage equality front. We already knew that this “culture war” was basically won, simply due to demographics, but it’s nice to see a bird’s eye view of how fast things are moving. Thanks, Greg!
The governor of Maryland, Martin O’Malley, will lay out a strategy tomorrow to get marriage equality passed in his state:
Activists have been working for months to persuade him to put his name on the controversial bill and include it in his legislative agenda. “I supported it last year,” he said. “I support it now.”
[...]
O’Malley this morning noted that the recently enacted gay marriage law in New York shows “that we can protect religious freedoms and equality of civil marital rights at the same time.”
Much of the lengthy debate on the issue in Maryland centered on ensuring that churches, synagogues and other religious institutions could opt-out of performing ceremonies their faith does not condone. Supporters accepted amendments in committee and on the Senate floor to beef up that section of the bill — making it clear that churches would not have to change their practices to accommodate gay members.
As is typical, anti-gay marriage factions wanted special rights to discriminate in areas outside the practice of their religion, and they will want them again, but hopefully the New York law will provide a decent blueprint for how Maryland and other wavering states can get this done.
This is the Society for the Defense of Tradition, and they are very serious, you guys, don’t laugh!
They are standing up for tradishnul marriage in Maryland! At one point some people flip them off from a passing car, and the word “Tolerance?” appears on the screen. Being flipped off, for these people is probably not only a hate crime, but also blood libel, since that seems to be one of the new catchphrases for wingnuts. THEN, a guy questions their motives, and they label him an “attacker,” because if there is one thing all conservative religious groups have in common, it is their victim status, which they will remind of of constantly.
The Maryland House has postponed a vote on the marriage equality bill, sending it back to committee, perhaps because supporters didn’t feel it had the votes to pass.
We are upset because the argument for gay marriage is out of step with orthodox Christianity and Judaism and is seen by those who know the Bible as mankind’s way to make the Bible meaningless, and for man to insert his own sinful way. To put it another way, every time someone says that homosexuality is fine and gay marriage is just a “civil rights” issue, it feels like the devil handing us an apple to eat.
That came from a letter to the editor in the Baltimore Sun, in response to the paper’s endorsement of the marriage equality bill making its way through Maryland’s houses of government right now. I don’t usually quote letters to the editor, but that one just made me laugh. It feels like the Devil is Handing them Apples! I personally don’t know how that feels, but I’m not a professional victim, as Fundamentalists are trained to be. Well dude? You live in a secular democracy, and soon you will have to learn to deal with the fact that no, your religious beliefs do not trump my civil rights. So I ask: HOW YOU LIKE DEM APPLES?
CHEYENNE-The Wyoming Senate narrowly voted Friday to stop recognition of same-sex marriages and civil unions from outside the state.
House Bill 74 passed 16-14 after tagging on a last-second amendment guaranteeing out-of-state couples in civil unions access to Wyoming courts.
Because of the amendment, the bill will now head back to the House to approve the changes. The House passed the legislation late last month 32-27.
Supporters of the bill, House Bill 74, said the legislation is needed to resolve a conflict in Wyoming law, which defines marriage as a contract “between a male and a female person” but also recognizes any valid marriage performed outside the state.
A Maryland state Senate committee approved legislation allowing same-sex marriage Thursday afternoon, allowing the bill to move to the full Senate floor for a vote.
The Judicial Proceedings Committee passed the legislation in a 7-4 vote.
Already, gay rights activists are rallying state senators in order to gain the 24 votes needed to pass the same-sex legislation in the Senate and move it to the House of Delegates.
Senate President Thomas V. Mike Miller Jr. (D-Calvert) predicted that the bill will pass, although with a close vote, in the Senate.
[...]
Supporters of the bill believe if it makes it to the House, state delegates will approve the legislation and pass it on to Gov. Martin O’Malley.
O’Malley has pledged to sign the same-sex marriage bill into law.
What do we always say? The more anti-gay wingnuts talk, the more their words are exposed to wider audiences, the more hearts, minds and votes we win. They will never understand why their words do that, but that’s because they’re not normal people.
Maryland – The Senate Judicial Proceedings committee heard 7 hours of testimony last night on whether or not to legalize gay marriage, including from NOM’s Maggie Gallagher. Now one Senator, who was previously a foe, has said her testimony convinced him to support marriage equality.
Senator James Brochin (D) was one of the few Democrat Senators who was opposed to gay marriage. But after listening to testimony from Maggie Gallagher of the National Organization For Marriage (NOM), he’s said that her “demonization” of gay families has convinced him that he should side with marriage equality.
Good news for us, bad news for Maggie Gallagher’s Whack-A-Mole show. Nothing is a done deal yet, but it looks hopeful in Maryland:
Now it appears that the wait in Maryland is nearing an end. The State House’s Democratic majorities have been blocked by Senate President Thomas V. “Mike” Miller Jr., who has opposed gay marriage.
But not much longer. “We really feel like 2011 is the year,” said Morgan Meneses-Sheets, executive director of Equality Maryland, the state’s most prominent gay-marriage lobby group.
Miller has given his blessing to a committee realignment that all but ensures that a gay-marriage measure will make it to the Senate floor during this year’s session, which starts Wednesday – and presumably onto the desk of Gov. Martin O’Malley (D), who pledged last year to sign it.
Same-sex marriage, for all intents and purposes, already exists in Maryland. Last year, Attorney General Douglas F. Gansler issued an opinion that recognized out-of-state gay unions – legitimizing “MARC marriages,” where gay and lesbian couples can simply hop a train down to the District to get hitched before returning home with all the state rights and privileges afforded a married straight couple.
In other words, the debate at this point boils down to whether lawmakers want gay Maryland residents to spend their wedding budgets at home or in the District.
Two days after Governor Lincoln Chafee called on legislators to swiftly legalize same-sex marriage, a pair of lawmakers say they will introduce bills to do just that.
Representative Art Handy, Democrat of Cranston, and Senator Rhoda Perry, Democrat of Providence, said yesterday that they would reintroduce bills to legalize same-sex marriage. The bills died last year in the House and Senate.
The legislation has been introduced several times in recent years, but failed as it faced opposition from Governor Donald L. Carcieri, a Republican, and previous legislative leaders. Democrat Gordon Fox, who is openly gay and a cosponsor of the bill, became House speaker last year.
“I think the fact that we have a governor that’s enthusiastic about the legislation makes a huge difference,’’ Handy said.
If you live in Rhode Island or Maryland, now would be a good time to start calling your representatives.
