During the last two years,
the struggle for gay rights, especially the initiatives for civil unions and
same-sex marriage, has seen more setbacks than gains throughout the United States.

In
2003, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court ruled that gays had a right to
marry, and the first ceremonies were held in 2004. Since then, seventeen states
have adopted constitutional amendments to ban gay marriage — most often by
popular vote — and ten of these states also ban civil unions and domestic
partnerships. In addition, California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger in
September vetoed a bill to legalize same-sex marriage.

Yet,
there are still important signs of progress.

In
the first weekend of October, gay couples in Connecticut, legally united for
the first time in civil unions, celebrated their partial victory in city halls
throughout the state. In Hartford, local officials flew a rainbow flag over the
main entrance to their city hall and passed out carnations to the newly united
couples. Connecticut now joins Vermont as the only two states recognizing civil
unions.

Connecticut
legislatures had passed a civil unions bill in April; a local university poll
found that 56% of Connecticut voters approved such unions while opposing
same-sex marriages. A key provision of the Connecticut civil-unions bill limits
the definition of marriage as a union between a man and woman.

As
the Rev. Bonnie Bardot of New Britain, Connecticut, said, “I think we need to
be really clear: civil unions are a big step, but it is not the same as
marriage…We are still separate but equal, which is not the same. Separate has
never been equal,” (Hartford Courant, Oct. 2, 2005).

One
man in a newly united couple said, “This is a historic day. We’re beyond
ecstatic,” but added, “It’s bittersweet because we’re being treated as
second-class citizens…It’s not full marriage equality.” (Boston Globe,
Oct. 2, 2005) Civil unions give same-sex couples equal protections and benefits
on the local and state level but are not subject to federal laws that affect
married couples.

At
the same time, across the border in Massachusetts, where gay marriage is the
law, Roman Catholic churches across the state launched “Protect Marriage
Sunday,” a crusade to repeal gay marriage and disallow civil unions. This is a
major organizing effort by the Christian right to regain lost political
momentum.

Last
September the Massachusetts House and Senate rejected a proposed constitutional
amendment to ban gay marriage in favor of civil unions. The vote in the
legislature was 157-39, fifty-two more votes in support of gay marriage than
the previous year.

Following
this setback in the legislature, conservative politicians in the Republican and
Democratic parties, evangelical churches, and the Roman Catholic church, all
began a petition campaign for an initiative to outlaw both gay marriage and
civil unions. A minimum of 65,825 certified signatures are needed for the
ballot initiative to go before the legislature, which will then vote to place
the question on the referendum in the 2008 elections. Fifty votes in two
legislative sessions are needed for a petition to achieve ballot status.

Every
Catholic school student in Massachusetts has been given a petition to bring
home, in effect turning schoolchildren into petition drive “volunteers.” In
most Catholic churches, the priest spoke from his pulpit in favor of the
petition, and parishioners were asked to sign it before leaving the church. Organizers
claim to have gathered 25,000 signatures within the week culminating in
“Protect Marriage Sunday.” Both supporters and opponents of the campaign expect
the petition to achieve double the amount of required signatures. That
outpouring of support would shield the petition from a legal challenge and
would place pressure on wavering legislators to endorse the petition in the
name of democracy.

Supporters
of gay rights have also been active. Protestors have demonstrated in front of
Catholic churches with signs that read, “Support Our Families, Too.”

Gay
& Lesbian Advocates & Defenders have filed a lawsuit to expand gay
marriage laws in the state. Republican Governor Romney, who opposes gay
marriage and civil unions, was unable to veto the gay marriage bill. He did,
however, unearth a little-known 1913 law that forbade out-of-state couples to
wed in Massachusetts if their marriages were not recognized in their home
states. The original intent of the 90-year-old law was to prevent interracial
marriages for couples who resided in the South. Gay rights activists are now
urging the Supreme Judicial Court, which ruled in favor of gay marriage in
2003, to expand the scope of their earlier decision. The case is expected to
last several months. Also, a lawsuit has also been filed in Connecticut to
force the state to grant full marriage rights to gay couples. That case is set
to begin in January.

Meanwhile,
a political battle of propaganda and politics is being fought. Former Boston
mayor and Vatican ambassador Raymond Flynn, one of the petition’s chief
sponsors, claims, “[The marriage petition] is not against anybody, it’s for
children and it’s for the stability of marriage, which is really the foundation
of our great nation,” (Boston Globe, Oct. 3, 2005)

But
the stability of Massachusetts, much less the nation, is not put at risk when
gays wed. Heterosexual couples lose nothing when gay couples proceed into
marriage. Children raised within same-sex marriages are not adversely affected.
Marriage, in fact, is not “under attack;” instead, its meaning is being
expanded and redefined.

This
is more than a matter of semantics. The redefinition of marriage has been
ongoing throughout American history. It is undeniable that as America has
evolved, marriage in America has evolved, as well. Married women, for instance,
were not always allowed control over their finances or inheritance; divorce was
not always legal; interracial marriage was banned throughout much of the 20th
century. Far from being fixed and eternal, changes in society have caused
changes in the institution of marriage. Such is the shift underway today. As
gays gain more acceptance in society at large, the question of gay marriage
will be posed ever more sharply.

Gays
and lesbians who choose marriage do so for a number of reasons, emotional and
practical, just as heterosexual couples do. Every American deserves that right.
It is the right to make the most personal of choices, to choose one’s life
partner freely without undue interference from any level of government. It is
an essential right that must not be limited or repealed even by popular vote. It
is a right based on the most fundamental premise of this country: that all
Americans are created equal.