Gay marriage poses no threat

Opponents of same-sex marriage typically have two objections to granting gay men and lesbian women a right that every heterosexual person has. First, opponents claim “marriage” is a religious institution. They believe that, based on the Bible, God is against homosexuality. Whether or not the Bible actually prohibits homosexuality, or if the Bible is even a direct guide to modern life at all, is a complicated theological discussion. What is clear, however, is that not all religions follow the Bible and those that do interpret it differently.

Whether or not a particular religion chooses to bless marriage between members of the same sex should be up to the leaders of that religion. The state, however, has a greater responsibility to all citizens and it cannot deny rights to a group of people based on such trivial distinctions as race, religion or sexual orientation. Just as it is no longer legal to prohibit interracial marriage, it should not be legal to ban gay unions. Everybody should be allowed to have a civil ceremony regardless of sexuality. We can call all vows exchanged before a religious leader “marriages” and those recited before a justice of the peace “civil unions.”

The other objection people raise against gay marriage is that it threatens “families, children and society,” in the words of President Bush. As for society, I can’t see how same-sex unions can be any more harmful than the rising divorce rate and shows like “Married by America.” American society is no longer structured around healthy marriages and nuclear families. In fact, some historians argue that the traditional “Leave it to Beaver” family never existed. Certainly few families embody that ideal today. Allowing members of the same sex to form legal partnerships will not change that.

The issue of children is most controversial. Even among supporters of gay marriage, gay parenthood is a sticky subject. Allowing gay marriage would most likely increase the number of gay parents. Some states are able to bar gay people from adopting because they are single and the states prohibit single people from adopting. Some judges do not grant custody to divorced parents who come out of the closet because they think they are “deviant.” Legalizing gay marriage would legitimize homosexuality and this trend would slow.

But do gay men and lesbian women make good parents? Popular mythology concludes children are more likely to be sexually abused in a homosexual household, they will be teased too much, will become gay themselves or have developmental problems. Although research into the effects of being raised by gay or lesbian parents is limited, according to the American Psychological Association, “the results of existing research...are quite uniform: common stereotypes are not supported by the data.”

The National Adoption Information Clearinghouse (NAIC), part of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, said, “A child’s risk of being molested by his or her relative’s heterosexual partner is over one hundred times greater than by someone who might be...homosexual,” in a pamphlet the group published about gay and lesbian adoption. As for teasing, last I checked, children teased each other for everything. There is no reason to prevent homosexuals from having children because they might be teased. As the authors of one article said, “Teasing is what children do. Does this mean that child welfare policy must be set at a level no higher than the social interactions of children?”

Other people fear that children raised in homosexual households will become gay or will not develop “correct” sexual identities. First, homosexuality is not deviant and there is nothing to fear about it. But, people who think otherwise will take comfort in learning that no legitimate studies have shown any difference in the proportion of homosexuality between gay and straight families. After all, “if heterosexual parenting is insufficient to ensure that children will also be heterosexual, then there is no reason to conclude that children of homosexuals also will be gay.” Furthermore, studies show that children develop normal sexual identities and gender-role behavior in both gay and straight families.

Clearly, there is no scientific evidence that homosexual individuals differ as parents from heterosexual people or that being raised by gay or lesbian parents has a negative effect on children. Therefore, there is no threat posed to children by legalizing gay marriage and opening the door for increased gay parenthood. In fact, some children may stand to benefit. In 1999, the Department of Health and Human Services estimated that 117,000 children were eligible for adoption. However, “there were qualified adoptive families...available for only 20 percent of these children.” Legalizing same-sex marriage and allowing gay people to adopt could get more children out of foster care.

Legalizing same-sex marriage has other beneficiaries, first and foremost gay men and lesbian women. Being able to marry would legitimize their love. They would receive benefits normally limited to heterosexual couples: they could share pensions and custody of children, qualify as next-of-kin and generally not have to hide anymore. One cannot underestimate the pain two people experience keeping their love secret. And, as “The Simpsons” acknowledged, the economy would benefit. Marriage is big business, what with lavish ceremonies, expensive rings and tropical honeymoons.

The groundless objections of people like Bush cannot stand up to the possible benefits of legalizing gay marriage. Eventually his amendment proposal will go the way of slavery and Prohibition and everybody will be free to love as they wish.