Straight Guy’s Perspective on My Brother’s Same-Sex Marriage

This is an invited guest blog from my twin brother, J. I asked him to write it because I have been puzzled a great deal about why some people say publicly that my marriage to the man I love somehow changes the definition of marriage. My brother is a practicing Catholic, and is married to a woman.

————————–
Handsrings01First of all, let me publicly express that I was thrilled to have the honor to serve as the Best Man (in a sense) at the marriage ceremony for my brother and the man he has loved for 20 years. I say that I was Best Man “in a sense” because the marriage ceremony was conducted as a civil matter by a judge in the county courthouse — it was not a wedding attended by guests followed by a reception, party, or public celebration.

My brother and I were raised in a huge family, most of whom remain active members of the Catholic Church. Some of my siblings chose to leave the Church for various reasons — my brother included. We have had many long discussions about this matter. Let me suffice it to say that I believe that my brother is a man of Faith — I see it every day in his actions. But enough about that.

So I am straight, married to a woman, and a Catholic. How, then, could I stand beside my brother when me was married to a man? Doesn’t it somehow change the definition of marriage when the State allows men to marry each other?

I have read many blogs and posts from a variety of people on the Internet and in the newspapers — particularly back home in Italy which is not nearly as progressive as other countries of Europe. Some of the items that I read express rather extreme and hateful points-of-view. The authors come across as hypocrites and bellicose Bible-thumpers. These type of people do nothing to win favor to their position against same-sex marriage.

Some more moderate people, regardless of religious belief, have expressed that they think that same-sex couples should be allowed to have a civil union and therefore obtain the same rights as opposite-sex couples have when they marry. Trouble is, each state in the United States and the U.S. Federal Government recognize “marriage” and provide certain rights to married couples, but the language in the law reserves the legal recognition and extension of rights to people who are “married” but not “unioned” (or whatever the term may be.)

For me, personally, having served the United States Government in the Military and in Federal Service for 32 years, I strongly believe in what the Founding Fathers of the United States designed: complete separation of church and state (government.) Our Government should not be engaged in any way with religious beliefs. It should be totally non-secular. Not anti-religion, but not religious. That is a big deal.

It comes down to the State (government) providing for a way for my brother and his spouse to be recognized as a married couple so they can receive the same treatment under the law as any other married couple. Yes, call this “marriage equality” but don’t call it “redefinition of marriage.”

In my opinion, marriage is not redefined because the State allows in its laws for same-sex couples to obtain a marriage certificate, have a civil legal procedure performed, and as a result, be labeled a “married couple.” Marriage is a civil act — anyone who wants to marry must obtain a marriage certificate from the State, regardless if they are opposite-sex or same-sex couples, and regardless if they are gay or straight.

My perspective on all this? Basta with the politics. Basta with the religious hype. On with the deserved legal recognition of a relationship I have admired for many years. My brother has done so much for and with his spouse, I could not imagine any other way to describe it — LOVE. Why deny rights to loving couples? How does their marriage in any way damage or affect your marriage? I just don’t get it.

I am thrilled to have a brother of integrity, honesty, faith, and determination as I have in my twin, and appreciate and recognize that my brother-in-law shares these same values. I love them both, and always will.

Congratulations, and much love from me and my wife. Now, let’s gather the whole fam-damily and party!

So Much for the Quiet Marriage

MarriageCertMy twin brother, bless him… he used his access to this blog to write a short message yesterday which publicly announced that marriage is imminent for my best half and me. My brother and his wife arrive today from Italy. I intend to meet them at the airport, then promptly dump my brother off a bridge…
Continue reading

Holding Out for My Man

MarylandflaggayringsMany of my blog readers are aware that the state where my fiance and I live now permits same-sex marriage. My partner said, “yes, of course, silly” when I asked him to marry me once we knew that we could get married legally in our state.

We had discussed marrying on the date of our 20th anniversary of the day we met, which is in April. However…
Continue reading

Dr. Smith and Mr. Jones

MdmarriagelicenseWhen same-sex couples marry, there are various ways that they recognize their union in the names they use.

My fiance and I have talked about this matter and what names we will use after we marry. This came to our attention when I received Christmas cards addressed to “Myname and Hisname Smith” — implying that my fiance will change his last name to mine OR another card addressed to “Hisname and Myname Jones” — implying that I will take his last name.

What options are there and what have we decided?
Continue reading

One Straight Man’s Perspective on Gay Marriage

This guest post was written by someone who wrote to me after reading my post about marrying my partner. He gave me permission to post his message on this blog.

I read your blog about marrying your partner. Congratulations. I’m glad that will work for you. I also read your post about a low-key event–glad you’re doing it that way. I want to comment on my perspective of the difference between a same sex marriage and a same sex wedding.
Continue reading

Why Low-Key Marriage?

After yesterday’s announcement that my partner and I will marry, now that our home state became the first in the nation to allow same-sex marriage by a popular vote of the people (Maine was second, but also should be recognized and applauded)… several people asked us about our “wedding plans.”

In fact, I had several elected officials in our state’s general assembly ask if they could attend our wedding.

None of those asking us about our wedding saw the comments in yesterday’s blog post about our intent to go “low key” with our marriage. I gently explained to them why.
Continue reading

Will You Marry Me?

To my wonderful partner:

Will you marry me? Will you continue to make my heart sing with joy each time I see your smile? Will you continue to walk by my side — not in front, not behind, but right next to me as we take our bootsteps on our life’s journey?

Will you marry me and be mine in Spring, Summer, Autumn, and Winter? All seasons for all reasons, you are my man and I am yours.

Will you marry me? Now that our state’s legislature has passed a civil marriage act, and which was just upheld when challenged by referendum? The law becomes effective January 1, 2013. Finally… legal same-sex marriage in our home state, the state I have called home my entire life.

Will you marry me? Building our life together for the past 7,137 days, each day is a new day of joy, of life, of celebration of deep devotion and love.

Will you marry me? You have cared for me when I have been injured or ill, solidly stood by me as I was dealt some serious blows, and held me close as I grieved for the loss of my mother, aunts, uncles, cousins, and close friends. In turn, I have been your champion as you have endured life’s challenges as well, and cared for you during recovery from surgeries and your long illness. In sickness and in health — we care for each other.

Will you marry me? Make my smile, hold my hand, love me, cherish me, as I cherish and love you?

…with all of my heart, every fibre of my being, I love you and feel your love in return. Each day, each hour, each minute.

So blessed, such love, such joy. Thank you, Maryland! We can get married! I am so happy!

My Take on Same-Sex Marriage

Lately, there has been a lot of news about same-sex marriage, especially in light of the state of North Carolina placing bigotry and hatred into its state constitution by a referendum that appeared on its May 8 statewide primary election ballot. Hmmm… I guess you can tell where I stand on this matter, huh?

It’s more than that, and quite complicated.
Continue reading

Marriage Is Postponed

I was deeply saddened, but to be honest, not surprised, that the bill in my home state of Maryland that would afford my partner and me, and all same-sex loving couples in my state, the ability to marry, was referred back to Committee on Friday, March 11, by our state’s House of Quivering Delegates. That action (or inaction) effectively killed it for the year.

There were many articles about this decision that appeared in various media outlets and political blogs. I also read many messages about it from some Delegates who represent areas of the county where my partner and I have our home.

The only good news, if there is good news, is that the bill was referred back to Committee, so it can come up again in the House next year and not have to be re-introduced and go through our State Senate again. Just because it passed in our Senate this year doesn’t mean that it will next year. Elected leaders change minds sometimes.

After reading through the wailing and the political stuff, what became apparent is that the reason why the bill didn’t pass our House of Delegates was last-minute pressure put on Delegates who serve a county south of us, whose population is predominantly African American, many of whom belong to organized megachurches. While this bill was never a religious matter — in fact it’s title and content called it, “Religious Freedom and Protection” because it clearly stated that a religious institution did not have to conduct same-sex marriages if it didn’t want to — nonetheless, the members of what the media describes as “Black Megachurches” became active on the matter when our State Senate passed the bill. The church members took that action as a “wake-up call” and began calling and visiting their Delegates, telling them to oppose the bill.

This puzzled me, but after looking into it, and with the help of a good friend who is much more knowledgable on these issues than I am, I learned what happened and why it happened. My friend wrote me an explanative piece which I would like to feature, below, as a guest blog post. Read on.

————————-
I had very high hopes for a positive outcome and it saddens me that once again our rights have been denied in the name of Christianity. I have to remember that the fight for civil rights is an ongoing struggle. Thanks for thinking of me as you wrestle with this matter. As one who grew up in the black church and with family members who have been very active and have led churches, I think I can shed some light. There are several points that come to mind.

By and large, black churches are represented by evangelical denominations that focus on a literal and conservative interpretation of the Bible and believe the words written there were not influenced by those societies and are timeless.

Historically, Baptist and Methodist denominations have been most influential in establishing black churches throughout the country from the era of slavery through Jim Crow. Maryland, Virginia, and other southern states with large slave populations were fertile grounds to these denominations. In my experience, these dominations believe in a literal Biblical interpretation. Each will point to the clobber passages, the verses about Sodom and Gamorrah, and Paul’s writing in the New Testament to say that homosexuality is a sin. Combine that with the evangelical position that to be a true Christian you must denounce sin and ask God to change your sinful nature, you have a recipe that doesn’t allow room for the consideration that homosexuality is another variant of human sexuality, and no more or less sinful than heterosexuality. Once you are baptized, by full immersion, you are a “new creature” who is expected to reject your sinful past and embraces everything holy.

When I was growing up in the 60s and 70s, it used to be common practice for churches to require young women who became pregnant out of wedlock, to come to the front of the church to apologize to the congregation for ther sin. In fact, about 10 years ago a cousin my age did just that at the church her father pastored in Tennessee. It was only after she did so that she was considered to be fully repentant of that sin. I’m sure my uncle took that memory to his grave feeling that he could rest easily. So, it’s not that homosexuality is a greater sin than any other, it’s just that, like pregnancy out of wedlock, it’s readily observable, easily identified, and in the mind of the devoute, the result of willful behavior.

I give that example to show the conservative nature of many black churches in rigid belief systems that tend to make no allowance for any position that does not fit squarely into what a literal interpretation of the Bible affords. It’s not just their belief that we as gays are sinners, but that we’re unrepentant sinners that forces them to fight so diligently against our rights. They truly believe that if we just stop the sinning, there will be no need for special rights and considerations.

This rigid belief system makes them very easy prey to the exploitations of organizations like NOM, Focus on the Family, and others like them. Because, at the end of the day, this only became an issue for the black churches to become involved in at 11th hour. This is not a platform that black churches routinely focus upon. Employment, education, and adequate health care in the black community are the issues of greatest interest and need. The megachurches no doubt were willing to enter the fray given their view of the role of civil government. According to the website of Metropolitan Baptist Church, a black megachurch in that area, “We believe that civil government is of divine appointment, for the interests and good order of human society (1); and that magistrates are to be prayed for, conscientiously honored and obeyed (2); except only in things opposed to the will of our Lord Jesus Christ (3) who is the only Lord of the conscience, and the Prince of the kings of the earth (4).” I’m sure the anti-gay organizations played upon this to elicit their support.

What LGBT organizations have to learn is that marriage equality will never be seen by these types of black churches as a civil rights issue until they can demonstrate that black LGBT families suffer disproportionately when these rights are not preserved.

Marriage says to my employer that my spouse is covered by my health benefits with no questions asked. Even a progressive employer might provide benefits for my partner, but as you know, they’re taxed. That represents less money for basic necessities for your family. Couple that with the fact that black households typically earn less than white households, you begin to demonstrate the unfairness that not having marriage equality produces.

I took a look at the website of your state’s LGBT-serving organization and my suspicions were confirmed. They suffer from a lack of diversity that make them appear to be an organization interested only in the rights of middle and upper middle class white gays and lesbians — a population that’s very foreign to the black church community. So, at first glance, gay marriage is not a issue of concern for the black community.

The role of the black megachurches in Maryland can be seen as comparable to the Jerry Falwell Christian Right of the Reagan era. The Maryland Delegates were no fools in not ignoring their voices. Megachurches have million dollar budgets and the loyal financial support of thousands of congregants. The black church teaches the principle of tithing. So, devout members regardless of income, willingly offer 10 percent of earnings each Sunday morning. The message to a Delegate is that he can either listen to this voice, or be replaced in the next election by someone who will. Harry Jackson has said as much in a recent statement.

So, where does this leave us? Will the black church move to a more inclusive stance? It’s doubtful as long as it holds steadfastly to its evangelical stance. I wrote to you earlier this year that I have become an Episcopalian. In addition to being a gay affirming and welcoming denomination, for the most part, the church’s history of facing and working through its race, LGBT, and gender issues is very appealing to me. There will be hope for black churches when they go the same exercise and realize that welcoming those who only look, think, and behave like you isn’t what you’ve been called upon to do. Many seem to have forgotten that those Jesus associated with were those on the fringes of society…tax collectors, lepers, non-Jews, and women. And those he had the harshest lessons for were the religious.

—————————–

[BHD back again]: I should point out that it is not “all” Black churches or clergy in my state who oppose same-sex marriage. Several brave clergy members representing those churches stood up to be counted and made impassioned pleas on behalf of those of us who are gay. However, there were not enough of them, and the majority (closed-minded) opinion won the day.

I appreciate my friend’s knowledge and insights which help me to understand what needs to be done next year. The battle ain’t over by a long shot, and some day, I will stand in a civil proceeding in my state and look my partner in the eye, and say, “I Do.”

Life is short: let us marry.