Monday, November 16, 2009

Two Steps Forward, But How Many Steps Back?

I've read one interesting and one infuriating article about same-sex marriage published in the past few days that are definitely worth sharing. The first, from The New York Times, talks about the dichotomy of popular mainstream lesbian celebrities like Ellen DeGeneres and the struggle for same-sex marriage rights in the US:
In what may have been the most public display of gushingly romantic affection between two gay or lesbian celebrities, Ellen DeGeneres and Portia de Rossi professed their love in the secular chapel of Oprah Winfrey’s daytime talk show on Monday.

The moment came less than a week after voters in Maine, like those in 30 states before it, rejected same-sex marriage, and just a day before New York legislators would again postpone consideration of a bill to legalize such weddings, conceding inadequate support.


In the handful of states where same-sex marriage is legal, legislatures and courts — not voters — have made it so. A few polls in recent months have suggested that while a majority of Americans believe that gay couples should be able to enter into unions with some of the legal protections of marriage, a minority believe that gays and lesbians should be permitted to “marry,” per se. Same-sex marriage doesn’t fit into the kind of family that many Americans believe should be idealized; it offends many others’ deeply felt religious principles.

And yet Ms. DeGeneres, who exchanged vows with Ms. de Rossi during a span last year when same-sex marriage was legal in California, seems more popular than ever — and among audiences squarely in the mainstream.

The second, from The Washington Post, reports on possibly the shittiest thing the Catholic Church has done (or, in this case, threatened to do) in recent memory (and that's saying something):
The Catholic Archdiocese of Washington said Wednesday that it will be unable to continue the social service programs it runs for the District if the city doesn't change a proposed same-sex marriage law, a threat that could affect tens of thousands of people the church helps with adoption, homelessness and health care.

Under the bill, headed for a D.C. Council vote next month, religious organizations would not be required to perform or make space available for same-sex weddings. But they would have to obey city laws prohibiting discrimination against gay men and lesbians.

Fearful that they could be forced, among other things, to extend employee benefits to same-sex married couples, church officials said they would have no choice but to abandon their contracts with the city.

I mean, really, what a better way to say "God is love" than to threaten to stop helping people if you don't get what you want!

(H/T Kate R. for the links)

1 comment:

Dr. Jay SW said...

Keep in mind we're talking about the religious organization that excommunicated a teenage girl for having an abortion, but not the man who raped her, who happened to be her own father. For that matter, I remember when famously brutal Philly mob boss Angelo Bruno, murderer of god-only-knows-how-many people, died. The church wouldn't bury him in consecrated ground because...are ya ready for this?...he was divorced!

It's all about priorities, I guess...