It isn't often (enough) that you get to watch history take place, but this afternoon I put everything aside to watch the first legal marriage take place between two people of the same sex in Southern California. (I'm not going to call it same-sex marriage, by the way; it's marriage, nothing more, nothing less. It is not different from marriage between people of the opposite sex, so why do we keep labeling it as if it were somehow different?) I cried almost as much as Robin Tyler and Diane Olson did today during their ceremony. Of course, every local channel had a news crew at the Beverly Hills Courthouse (one of the places where I have served jury duty, just as an aside), and apparently, so did every other channel in the world. The number of cameras was astounding.
Yet, despite the difficulty in seeing the couple at times, I watched every minute of it, even switching back and forth between channels to see it from different angles. Someday, people will talk about this moment as a significant historical event. I'm certain of that. After all of the years of lawsuits and ballot propositions and everything else, gay and lesbian people have the same right to marry as straight people do. It's been a long time in coming, and I couldn't help but feel emotional about its arrival.
Naturally, there were protesters, and I even heard a couple of their offensive comments during the ceremony. I know they don't like that the world is changing around them and they can't seem to stop it. I wish I could say to them that this country is held up to the rest of the world as beacon, a shining example of a place that offers everyone freedom and equality. At least, it claims to do so. But until and unless everyone has the same rights, is this country truly living up to the ideals expressed in our Constitution and Declaration of Independence? The gay and lesbian people who want to marry aren't asking for anything special or different; they just want the same things that everyone else has. If you believe in equality, you have to believe in it for everyone.
Yes, I realize that argument would go nowhere. It isn't as if members of my own family don't feel the way that the protesters do, but at least they have the smarts to keep their mouths shut about it around me. I know there's a long fight ahead with a proposed amendment to the state constitution, and we all know that many unpleasant, ugly things are going to be said between now and November. However, if we could be objective just for a little while and see the images from Tyler and Olson's wedding, maybe we have a chance of keeping bigotry and intolerance out of the document that serves as a foundation for our state government. These two women love each other and have made a commitment to each other; all they want is to share that with the rest of the world.
Better yet, look at the pictures of Del Martin and Phyllis Lyon, both now in their 80s. These two women have been together for more than 50 years and have now finally had their relationship recognized by the state of California. Who can truly sit in judgment of them? They have managed to maintain a stable relationship longer than almost any couple, gay or straight, and until tonight they were still treated as second class citizens in their home country. How can people truly feel in their hearts that they should decide that Martin and Lyon should not be together, that their relationship is somehow not a valid one? Who should decide our spouse for us? Do all married couples need to be placed on the ballot so that we can vote to accept their marriages, one by one, as appropriate? (Yes, I know that's a slippery slope argument; deal with it.)
I still recall when my home state of Mississippi had a ballot proposition that would have removed the ban on interracial marriage from the state constitution. Even though it was "merely" a formality, the U.S. Supreme Court having struck down such bans as unconstitutional years before, people still went to the polls and voted their prejudices. No, they didn't vote to get rid of the ban; they actually voted to keep it in the constitution. And, yes, they knew that it was, for the most part, a symbolic act. Let's hope that the people of California, who always claim to be more enlightened, won't have that same mentality in November.
There will be a time, hopefully while I am still alive, when all of this opposition will seem quaint, a time when we will read about the years before gays and lesbians could marry as if they were ancient history. Today, we took that first step in California.
For the record, I have no one to marry (and no one has me to marry, either). I don't even have any invitations to any weddings this summer, save for one to a straight couple's wedding. Still, I feel like going to every county clerk's office and courthouse in the state to applaud loudly and throw rice (or birdseed or whatever we're throwing these days) in celebration. If you're getting married, just know that there's a country boy in Los Angeles cheering you on.
No comments:
Post a Comment