GAY AREA

Frequently Asked Questions on Gay Wedding

Q.	“I believe God meant marriage for men and women. How can I support marriage for same-sex couples?”
A.	Many people who believe in God — and fairness and justice for all — ask this question. They feel a tension between religious beliefs and democratic values that has been experienced in many different ways throughout our nation’s history. That is why the framers of our Constitution established the principle of separation of church and state. That principle applies no less to the marriage issue than it does to any other. Indeed, the answer to the apparent dilemma between religious beliefs and support for equal protections for all families lies in recognizing that marriage has a significant religious meaning for many people, but that it is also a legal contract. And it is strictly the legal — not the religious — dimension of marriage that is being debated now. Granting marriage rights to same-sex couples would not require Christian, Jewish, Muslim or any other religions to perform these marriages. It would not require religious institutions to permit these ceremonies to be held on their grounds. It would not even require that religious communities discuss the issue. People of faith would remain free to make their own judgments about what makes a marriage in the eyes of God — just as they are today. Consider, for example, the difference in how the Catholic Church and the U.S. government view couples who have divorced and remarried. Because church tenets do not sanction divorce, the second marriage is not valid in the church’s view. The government, however, recognizes the marriage by extending to the remarried couple the same rights and protections as those granted to every other married couple in America. In this situation — as would be the case in marriage for same-sex couples— the church remains free to establish its own teachings on the religious dimension of marriage while the government upholds equality under law. It should also be noted that there are a growing number of religious communities that have decided to bless same-sex unions. Among them are Reform Judaism, Unitarian Universalists and the Metropolitan Community Church. The Presbyterian Church (USA) also allows ceremonies to be performed, although they are not considered the same as marriage. The Episcopal Church and United Church of Christ allow individual churches to set their own policies on same-sex unions.
Q.	“This is different from interracial marriage. Sexual orientation is a choice.”
A.	“We cannot keep turning our backs on gay and lesbian Americans. I have fought too hard and too long against discrimination based on race and color not to stand up against discrimination based on sexual orientation. I've heard the reasons for opposing civil marriage for same-sex couples. Cut through the distractions, and they stink of the same fear, hatred, and intolerance I have known in racism and in bigotry.” — Rep. John Lewis, D-Ga., a leader of the black civil rights movement, writing in The Boston Globe, Nov. 25, 2003 Decades of research all point to the fact that sexual orientation is not a choice, and that a person’s sexual orientation cannot be changed. Who one is drawn to is a fundamental aspect of who we are. In this way, the struggle for marriage equality for same-sex couples is just as basic as the fight for interracial marriage was. It recognizes that Americans should not be coerced into false and unhappy marriages but be free to marry the person they love — thereby building marriage on a true and stable foundation.
Q.	“Won’t this create a free-for-all and make the whole idea of marriage meaningless?”
A.	Many people share this concern because opponents of gay and lesbian people have used this argument as a scare tactic. But it is not true. Granting same-sex couples the right to marry would in no way change the number of people who could enter into a marriage (or eliminate restrictions on the age or familial relationships of those who may marry). Marriage would continue to recognize the highest possible commitment that can be made between two adults, plain and simple. Organizations that Support Same-sex Parenting: • American Academy of Pediatrics • American Academy of Family Physicians • Child Welfare League of America • National Association of Social Workers • North American Council on Adoptable Children • American Bar Association • American Psychological Association • American Psychiatric Association • American Psychoanalytic Association
Q.	“I strongly believe children need a mother and a father.”
A.	Many of us grew up believing that everyone needs a mother and father, regardless of whether we ourselves happened to have two parents, or two good parents. But as families have grown more diverse in recent decades, and researchers have studied how these different family relationships affect children, it has become clear that the quality of a family’s relationship is more important than the particular structure of families that exist today. In other words, the qualities that help children grow into good and responsible adults — learning how to learn, to have compassion for others, to contribute to society and be respectful of others and their differences — do not depend on the sexual orientation of their parents but on their parents’ ability to provide a loving, stable and happy home, something no class of Americans has an exclusive hold on. That is why research studies have consistently shown that children raised by gay and lesbian parents do just as well on all conventional measures of child development, such as academic achievement, psychological well-being and social abilities, as children raised by heterosexual parents. That is also why the nation’s leading child welfare organizations, including the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Academy of Family Physicians and others, have issued statements that dismiss assertions that only heterosexual couples can be good parents — and declare that the focus should now be on providing greater protections for the 1 million to 9 million children being raised by gay and lesbian parents in the United States today.
Q.	“What would be wrong with a constitutional amendment to define marriage as a union of a man and woman?”
A.	In more than 200 years of American history, the U.S. Constitution has been amended only 17 times since the Bill of Rights — and in each instance (except forProhibition, which was repealed), it was to extend rights and liberties to the American people, not restrict them. For example, our Constitution was amended to end our nation’s tragic history of slavery. It was also amended to guarantee people of color, young people and women the right to vote. The amendment currently under consideration (called the Federal MarriageAmendment) would be the only one that would single out one class of Americans for discrimination by ensuring that same-sex couples would not be granted the equal protections that marriage brings to American families.Moreover, the amendment could go even further by stripping same-sex couples of some of the more limited protections they now have, such as access to health insurance for domestic partners and their children. Neither enshrining discrimination in our Constitution nor stripping millions of families of basic protections would serve our nation’s best interest. The Constitution is supposed to protect and ensure equal treatment for all people. It should not be used to single out a group of people for different treatment.
Q.	“Marriage in the United States shall consist only of the union of a man and a woman."
A.	Neither this [C]onstitution [n]or the constitution of any state, nor state or federal law, shall be construed to require that marital status or the legal incidents thereof be conferred upon unmarried couples or groups.” — H.J. Resolution 56, introduced by Rep. Marilyn Musgrave, R-Colo., in May 2003. It has more than 100 co-sponsors. A similar bill was introduced in the U.S. Senate in November 2003. In February 2004, President Bush said that he would support a constitutional amendment to define marriage as between only a man and a woman.
Q.	“How could marriage for same-sex couples possibly be good for the American family — or our country?”
A.	“We shouldn’t just allow gay marriage. We should insist on gay marriage. We should regard it as scandalous that two people could claim to love each other and not want to sanctify their love with marriage and fidelity.”— Conservative Columnist David Brooks, writing in The New York Times,Nov. 22, 2003. The prospect of a significant change in our laws and customs has often caused people to worry more about dire consequences that could result than about the potential positive outcomes. In fact, precisely the same anxiety arose when some people fought to overturn the laws prohibiting marriage between people of different races in the 1950s and 1960s. (One Virginia judge even declared that “God intended to separate the races.”) But in reality, opening marriage to couples who are so willing to fight for it could only strengthen the institution for all. It would open the doors to more supporters, not opponents. And it would help keep the age-old institution alive. As history has repeatedly proven, institutions that fail to take account of the changing needs of the population are those that grow weak; those that recognize and accommodate changing needs grow strong. For example, the U.S. military, like American colleges and universities, grew stronger after permitting African Americans and women to join its ranks. Similarly, granting same-sex couples the right to marry would strengthen the institution of marriage by allowing it to better meet the needs of the true diversity of family structures in America today. NOTE: When gay or lesbian people grow old and in need of nursing home care, there is no legal document that can give them the right to Medicaid coverage without potentially causing their partner to be forced from their home.
Q.	"Is homosexuality a mental illness or emotional problem?"
A.	No. Psychologists, psychiatrists and other mental health professionals agree that homosexuality is not an illness, mental disorder or emotional problem. Much objective scientific research over the past 35 years shows us that homosexual orientation, in and of itself, is not associated with emotional of social problems. Homosexuality was thought to be a mental illness in the past because mental health professionals and society had biased information about homosexuality since most studies only involved lesbians and gay men in therapy. when researchers examined data about gay people who were not in therapy, the idea that homosexuality was a mental illness was found to be untrue. In 1973 the American Psychiatric Association confirmed the importance of the new research by removing the term 'homosexuality' from the official manual that list all mental and emotional disorders. In 1975 the American Psychological Association passed a resolution supporting this action. Both associations urge all mental health professionals to help dispel the stigma of mental illness that some people still associate with homosexual orientation. Since original declassification of homosexuality as a mental disorder, this decision has subsequently been reaffirmed by additional research findings and both associations.
Q.	"Can lesbians and gay men be good parents?
A.	Yes. Studies comparing groups of children raised by homosexual and by heterosexual parents find no developmental differences between the two groups of children in their intelligence, psychological adjustment, social adjustment, popularity with friends, development of social sex role identity or development of sexual orientation. Another stereotype about homosexuality is the mistaken belief that gay men have more of a tendency than heterosexual men to sexually molest children. There is no evidence indicating that homosexuals are more likely than heterosexuals to molest children.
Q.	"Why do some gay men and lesbians tell people about their sexual orientation? "
A.	Because sharing that aspect of themselves with others is important to their mental health. In fact, the process of identity development for lesbians and gay men, usually called 'coming out', has been found to be strongly related to psychological adjustment - the more positive the gay male or lesbian identity, the better one's mental health and the higher one's self-esteem.
Q.	"Why is the 'coming out' process difficult for some gays and lesbians?"
A.	Because of false stereotypes and unwarranted prejudice towards them, the process of 'coming out' for lesbians and gay men can be a very challenging process which may cause emotional pain. Lesbian and gay people often feel 'different' and alone when they first become aware of same-sex attractions. They may also fear being rejected by family, friends, co-workers and religious institutions if they do 'come out'. In addition, homosexuals are frequently the targets of discrimination and violence. This threat of violence and discrimination is an obstacle to lesbian and gay people's development. In a 1989 national survey, 5% of the gay men and 10% of the lesbians reported physical abuse or assault related to being lesbian or gay in the last year; 47% reported some form of discrimination over their lifetime. Other research has shown similarly high rates of discrimination or violence.
Q.	"What can be done to help lesbians and gay men overcome prejudice and discrimination against them?"
A.	The people who have the most positive attitudes toward gay men and lesbians are those who say they know one or more gay person well. For this reason, psychologists believe negative attitudes toward gays as a group are prejudices that are not grounded in actual experience with lesbians or gay men but on stereotypes and prejudice. Furthermore, protection against violence and discrimination are very important, just as they are for other minority groups. Some states include violence against an individual on the basis of her or his sexual orientation as a 'hate crime' and eight U.S. states have laws against discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.