Yesterday I broke open a bottle of champagne with a couple friends, a demi-sec Lanson, in celebration of the Supreme Court decision.
While pleased, I still find it startling when people think of it as a religious issue. For me it’s a simple matter of fairness about benefits. Someone else’s choice of partner does not change how I practice or what I believe. I am not offended if someone calls a partnership a “marriage,” and I find it perplexing when we think that God is worried about these sorts of definitions. And ff God does have a specific idea about marriage, I’ll make my case before the judgment seat and explain why I have erred on the side of charity and magnanimity for gay people. I’m not worried – the scriptures say that God is merciful.
There remain ways gay people live outside of marriage that can inform the culture about what a joyful sexuality might look like. And so I wonder if the conversation on marriage distracts us from some opportunities to understand how we might negotiate our rapidly changing culture. Although I think marriage is a crucial, imperfect sacramental institution, perhaps we can learn from gay people rather than insist they fit into a less threatening box.
And while all of this is happening, we’re seeing politicians actively attack reproductive health; the economy remains owned by a small class of powerful people; and our decision-making bodies have stalled on climate change. I find it disturbing that some who are most transforming (damaging?) our economy are the same people who fund marriage equality. So while I take joy that this symbol – and the benefits – are extended fairly, I hope that this enthusiasm can extend to other important movements upon which the fate of our country, and perhaps the world, depends.