Gay Marriage

In the wake of yesterday's vote in North Carolina concerning gay marriage, I think it's time to discuss both marriage and homosexuality. Proponents of the state constitutional  amendment claim they're not anti-gay, just pro-marriage, and I think we should accept that statement at face value.

So, what is marriage, and what constitutes a valid marriage? When I was a small boy in parochial school I recall Sister John Terrence telling us that only a wedding performed by a Catholic priest was truly valid. As an eight year old, I wasn't experienced enough to question what she said (And I liked Sister very much.), but as I grew up I began to wonder if she was right, and finally rejected her argument completely. Now I know such a position is hopelessly chauvinistic. I'll bet Sister John does too, if she's still living.

Still, it seems to me that a wedding, and the marriage that follows it, is a religious rite. My opinion is that if a couple can find a minister who will marry them, they are married, and it doesn't matter what credentials the minister has, even if the answer really is that the minister has no credentials. Besides, all the theology I know says the couple marry each other and the reverend/priest/rabbi merely officiates at the wedding.

The whole controversy over gay marriage has come about because we have co-mingled the religious ceremony of marriage with the civil process of living together. I think the problem could be solved in large part by separating the two concepts. People get married by a religious figure. They sign papers to live together, share and inherit property, file joint tax returns, and do other things that committed couples do, according to the laws of the state they live in. Call those papers what you will as long as they're not called a marriage license. Since gay people are entitled to equal protection under the law, I cannot think of any reason why a state could deny a same-sex couple such a license. I might be a kind of libertarian about this, but I can't see what business it is of a state to approve or disapprove of what consenting adults do behind closed doors.

Now about homosexuality. If there's a god, and if god loves us, I cannot see how he could create people and then tell them their deepest yearnings cannot be fulfilled in any sanctified way. It seems like such a god is playing a kind of sick joke on people, and a loving god would not do such a thing. Some objectors might counter that the deepest yearnings of some people are clearly not meant to be fulfilled in any  decent society - pedophilia, bestiality, sadism and so forth - but it's not the same thing. We're only talking about consensual sexual relations between adults here.

Where does anyone get the prerogative to judge the righteousness or validity of what other grownup people do voluntarily in private? Let's just be kind and accepting of each other. It will work out much better for all of us.