ARE ALL COUPLES ALIKE? Dan responds to Dale

Dale suggests that my critique of the proposed redefinition of marriage is based on the assumption that "there's nothing very noble or socially productive in gay relationships?" I have never made such a claim and would be reluctant to do so. Human relationships are too complex and multi-layered for such global judgements. I have observed specific "gay relationships" that I would describe as "redemptive" not just "socially productive."

Dale suggests that the failure to extend marriage to same-sex unions constitutes, in effect, a public declaration that gay relationships are "unworthy". This line of argument was central to the Canadian debates. The Beyond Conjugality report of the Law Commission of Canada noted that for same-sex couples this exclusion "represents a rejection of their personal aspirations and the non-recognition of their personhood."

In the Ontario decision Justice Harry LaForme stated, "Excluding gays and lesbians from marriage…declares an entire class of persons unworthy of the recognition and support of state sanction for their marriage." Judge Lemelin concured citing the "appalling" separate but equal doctrine. In the words of an applicant in the Quebec case, "Marriage is the gold standard in terms of social respectability."

To speak of marriage as the "gold standard" for close relationships skews social reality. First, entering into marriage does not indicate any form of public approval of the "worthiness" of the particular relationship. All kinds of people enter into marriage including rapists and pedophiles. They enter into an institution geared to certain broad but distinctive social purposes. A marriage is marker of a journey begun; their ability to engage the purposes of the institution, to walk the walk, remains to be seen.

Second, worthy human relationships are far too diverse and too complex to be contained within the single category of marital unions. They cluster in many different classes of relationships: friendships, collegial relationships, professional relationships, sibling relationships, domestic partnerships, sexual relationships, spiritual relationships, same-sex relationships, and more. In many traditions there are forms of human relationship that are ranked above marriage (e.g. celibate or "consecrated" life in the Catholic tradition). While marriage has a unique and indispensable place in human existence, nevertheless it is neither necessary nor good that every human person should enter into this particular form of social union. The distinctive role of marriage can be affirmed without prejudice to the fact that there are other forms of close personal relationships that have their own distinct dignity and purpose.

The misleading view that marriage is the benchmark of social recognition for close human relationships may be due to the fact that marriage is the only form of close personal relationship that has been granted national legal status in most jurisdictions. With the evolution of society there is an argument that there is a need to clarify the legal status of alternative forms of adult close relationships, other than marriage, in law. The state should not be restricted and constrained to operate within the single category of marital union. The confusions caused by the failure to recognize such relationships within a national legal framework are evident in the numerous jurisdictional problems posed by "civil unions" enacted by the state legislature in Vermont. There are also questions about the breadth of such alternative "close relationship" categories. The Canadian report, Beyond Conjugality, suggests a big tent to embrace the wide variety of interdependent close relationships in contemporary society that do not receive adequate legal recognition.








posted by maggie at 12:38 PM VOTE

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home