Preachers' Kids

Posted by: Dan Savage
Topic: Response to Ed Young

Dear Ed,

I hear you. I haven't suggested that you've been anything less than respectful and diplomatic during these discussions. And I'm sorry if the same-sex marriage issue keeps coming up, but as we discuss marriage, mating, and dating, it's hard for me, as the only gay guest blogger here, to avoid touching on the subject of same-sex marriage. And it's hard for me, as a gay man in a long-term relationship, to refrain from taking opposition to same-sex marriage personally. For my part, I've been as diplomatic as possible--well, for me, at any rate. Anyone familiar with my other writings--my books, column, and other blogging--has to be shocked by my uncharacteristic restraint here.

A little background: Like you, Ed, I'm a preacher's kid--and I, too, try to live by the values my parents instilled in me, even if I don't believe anymore. My dad was an ordained Catholic deacon and was up on the altar every Sunday at the church I attended as a child. (A shout out to St. Jerome Parish on in Chicago's Rogers Park.) My mom was a lay minister, my parents were active in Marriage Encounter, I was altar boy, and even briefly contemplated going into the priesthood myself. (A shout out to Quigley North, the high school seminary I attended for two years.) My mother is still a practicing Catholic, and I identify as culturally Catholic. (Crucifix over the bed, cross myself on airplanes, had my son baptized.) So I'm not entirely ignorant of the existence of Christian folks, good ones--like the priest that baptized my son, for instance, and risked his clerical career by blessing my relationship.

But when you're constantly attacked, as gay people are, in the most bigoted terms by people that claim to speak on behalf of all Christians everywhere... well, let's just say it can be easy to start using "Christians" as shorthand for "bigot" without remembering to qualify the term with "conservative" or "fundamentalist." My mom is quick to slap me down for this oversight.

As for keeping the debate over gay marriage alive on this blog, well, so long as gay people are excluded from the rights, responsibilities, and protections of civil marriage, this debate will stay alive--it will roar along. If we want to end this debate, well, there's a simple way to do that: allow gay people to marry. It may not be what some people believe the bible commands... and those people are free to refrain from entering into same-sex marriages, if they believe gay marriage is wrong. But to insist that other people may not marry because your holy book forbids it, well, that is the definition of religious bigotry. Or tyranny.

As for those poll numbers... they continue to shift in favor of same-sex marriage. Young people favor marriage rights for same-sex couples by a wide margin. From Pew:

Opposition to gay marriage is most pronounced among older Americans, while younger people express relatively high levels of support for legalizing same-sex marriage. Among those 65 and older, three-in-four (73%) oppose legalizing gay marriage, while more than half (53%) of adults under the age of 30 favor this position.

Younger people also support adoptions by same sex couples:

When age is taken into account, younger people remain the most open to the idea of gay adoption  most people under age 30 favor allowing gay adoption (by a margin of 58% to 38%) while most people 65 and older are opposed (by a 62% to 32% margin). Those between 30 and 64 are divided almost evenly.

 

And while a majority of Americans still oppose same-sex marriage, a majority of Americans support civil unions for same-sex couples.

I trust that those who point to current polling data on same-sex marriage will become supporters of same-sex marriage once polls shift, as they inevitably will, in favor of marriage rights for same-sex couples. And I trust that opponents of same-sex marriage that point to poll numbers will turn against mixed-race marriage, if the polls show a majority oppose it. (Indeed a majority once opposed mixed-race marriages--did that justify their illegality prior to Loving v. Virginia?)

From your post, Ed:

Dan, if I may address you directly: You say that the Christian view of marriage is scaring young couples away. That viewpoint has been in place for a very, very long time (and, again, not exclusively in the Christian community!); why is it scaring them away now? To say that we need to make marriage less sacred and less meaningful to help save it doesn’t make sense. I could just as easily say that “gay activists” are scaring young couples away from marriage by trying to redefine it. And because of that, from both a religious and civil perspective, marriage as we have known is rapidly losing its meaning.

You could say that gay activists are scaring people away from marriage, but I don't think you could back that assertion up. We've been treated to an orgy of anti-gay marriage electioneering over the last five years in the United States. It's been hammered home, again and again, that marriage in America, one state excluded, is for straights only. The efforts of gay people--not activists, Ed, but gay people--to secure the rights and protections of marriage in the United States have been largely unsuccessful. So if anything, young straight people should feel more ownership over marriage now than they did before same-sex couples began pressing for the right to marry. But young straight people are not, and so we have to ask "why not?"

I have a theory, and I unpacked it in that previous post. And when I say that the marriage discrimination movement--which is lead by Christians, not Jews or Buddhists or atheists--is turning off young people, Ed, that assertion is in part informed by the thousands of letters I receive every week at "Savage Love," my sex-advice column. Young straight people tell me as much every day--and, yeah, my sample is skewed. These are young straight people reading a sex-advice column by a gay man. But still. I'm not just pulling it out of the air.

And finally... and this will the my last post on the same-sex marriage subject to, Ed, I promise...

Gay people are not seeking to redefine marriage. Straight people redefined marriage early in the last century. And there is no logical, non-supernatural reason to exclude same-sex couples from the modern institution of marriage as redefined and currently practiced by straight people. Marriage today, as straight people practice it, is no longer the property transaction it once was--it is not Man A, a father, giving his property, his daughter, to Man B, transforming Man A's daughter into the wife and property of Man B. Straight people rejected that definition of marriage--and thank God, as it was little more than slavery. Today marriage--in the West, at least--is a commitment two legally equal individuals make to love and care for each other. And each individual couple gets to decide for themselves what their committing to by marrying.

Kids? No kids? Religious ceremony? Civil ceremony? Monogamous? Non-monogamous? A lifetime commitment? A starter marriage? Each couple, on its own, gets to make those decisions--because straight people, not gay people, looked at the constantly-evolving institution of marriage and decided that love matches were better than arranged marriages; legal equality was better than gendered slavery; and that allowing couples to make their own choices was better than imposing them on couples.

This modern definition of marriage is not gendered--roles are not determined by the genitals each partner brings to the table, altar, courthouse, bedroom, etc. And this modern definition of marriage is expansive enough, strong enough, and just enough to encompass all couples, gay and straight.

And nothing about opening marriage to same-sex couples--a tiny, stable percentage of the population--prevents religious Americans from marrying and shaping their marriages how they see fit. Married gay couples do not oppress married straight couples in any way. But married straight couples who insist that gay couples must be denied the right to marry because they believe same-sex marriage somehow diminishes their marriages and/or offends their God? That does oppress same-sex couples.

Okay, I've had my say. I've been trying to drop the marriage issue myself... heck, I had another post ready to go this morning but when I saw that you were calling me out, Ed, I had to respond. In future I will use "marriage" to mean not just legal marriage but also marriages of the heart, the only kind of marriage most gay Americans can enjoy. And if I gave you the impression that I hate all Christians, or if I was less than respectful and diplomatic, I apologize--again, my mom's a Christian, and I wouldn't want her to think I hate her. As for my comments about hell and Jerry Falwell, well, someone that says despicable, hateful things about other Americans--remember, Ed, Falwell blamed me for the attacks of 9/11--can't expect gentle treatment from the people he's abused. It doesn't matter--maybe it does, but it shouldn't--that Falwell's bigotry was motivated by his frankly un-Christian reading of the Bible. He was bigoted, period.

Finally, I am an atheist, and I'm not going to be shy about dropping that into the debate here--just as you're not shy about dropping your faith into the debate.

Respectfully,
Dan

Comments

[Donna]

Another thing to consider when evaluating the impact of same sex marriages and redefinition of family, is that finally we might get past the discrimination felt by gay individuals and the pressure for them to marry a heterosexual spouse in order to be accepted or living what society has defined as a "normal family union". This would save heartache from the heterosexual spouses who try for years to understand why their marriage is dysfunctional, only to find out they don't have the right anatomy. There are approximately, 2 million spouses living these deceitful marriages -- and hiding their true sexual preference. For more information you can refer to www.gayhusbands.com

[risa]

i adore this post.

i think that most straight people are jealous of the fact that most same-sex couples *last longer* than they do. most of the same-sex couples i know who make a commitment have been together for 5 years or longer... many straight committed relationships do not last that long. it's near embarrassing how straights view commitment, honestly.

keep in mind, this comment comes from a quasi-bi woman who has been mostly in straight relationships her entire life and who has refrained from marrying despite deeply wanting it... because i knew that most of the people i dated wouldn't make suitable long-term mates. at almost 40, i'm far happier and more stable now in a same-sex relationship than i would have been had i married those men who had asked me.

i agree with your assessment, Dan, that younger people are being scared away. they're seeing married straight people destroying themselves for the sake of an institution yet still hanging on to the idea that it is sacred, ideologically sound. i know far too many young people who truly don't care - the only purpose in their mind for marriage might be for children, but since gay couples are raising children just fine, why bother?

it's all about perspective, and the young don't understand what the fuss is about. let them be who they want to be; in the end, they'll do it anyway, sanctioned or not.

[The J]

Dan,
Normally, when I read your columns I want to scream, "YES, GIVE ME MORE!!!" ;-)
When I read your statement that you were wanting to drop the marriage issue, however, I wanted to shout, "NOOOOOOOO!!!!!" Even after reading your qualification about referring to all marriages including marriages of the heart, I wanted to shout, "NOOOOO!!!!"

This is "The Great Mate Debate" and whatever that means, it should include all types of mate debates. Make the straight guys beg for mercy!

[Elisha A.]

I grew up with a mom who is gay. She never sheilded me from her gay friends, or the gay parties and I witness the comings & goings of her partners. This started for me at the age of 8. When I hit my teens, I started wondering if I were gay. I seemed to be attracted to other men yet, it felt wrong to act on it. Sometimes though I found myself doing it anyway because how could it be wrong if I felt strongly about it.

I battled my gay feelings & 'actions' back & forth until I got so sick of the confusion I dropped to my knees in tears. This at the age of 16. I will admit I was a Christian (I had a true & personal relationship with God & Jesus) by then and I just wanted the truth once & for all. I made the choice to allow it (God's Word) to be the final opinon on the subject.

I believe the Bible makes it clear what God's intent for mankind is. I believe there's no doubt one man - one woman was very much his plan. AND... most importantly, I trusted that God loved me as his own son. With those things in mind, I gave up the pursuit of a gay lifestyle. As I kept my life & love focused on God, the feelings of wanting to be gay left. I'm still tempted - but, that doesn't mean I'm gay... it means I'm naturally human.

In my case, is being gay a genetic anomaly that is beyond my control or do I have the right to choose it or not choose it? If we can resolve this question, maybe the question of gay marriage won't be so tough to resolve. But, I believe marriage was defined by God (just as being gay was) long before it was embraced by human law.

[Posterwolf]

Elisha,

To answer your last point, I strongly believe homosexuality is genetic, or at least biological in origin. And I don't consider it an anomaly given that it exists in so many species. Check out the wikipedia article on homosexuality, particularly the sections on non-human animals and biological explanations. It's an eye-opener.

Best,

Mike

[Zack]

Personally I beleive I am not an animal, and do not identify with their behaviour. I strongly beleive that among humans who have a conscious abilty to make decisions and think, that homosexuality is a choice. Wether they choose to believe they were born that way or not is their decision. More and more people are being brought into thinking this is natural, and unavoidable and then people will beleive they have no choice to accept it.

[Posterwolf]

Zack,

I agree that there are significant differences between humans and other animals, but there is no doubt that we are part of the animal kingdom with inherent behaviors and instincts. I also agree that humans have a great capacity for decision making and conscious thought. However, it doesn't necessarily follow that homosexuality is a choice. Whether to engage in homosexual acts (or enter into a gay relationship, to be less clinical about it), is indeed a choice. But "being" homosexual or having the basic desire to seek out same-sex relationships is not something one chooses. I can attest to that first hand. Why would you not believe me? What would I have to gain from choosing to be gay? Certainly, my life would be much easier if I were straight, but that's not how I'm wired.

Biological arguments aside, by your reasoning it must be possible for you to choose to be gay. Could you really do this? I'm guessing you could certainly go through the motions but you wouldn't be motivated to do so. Similarly, I could choose to behave heterosexually but my heart would not be in it (nor other body parts).

Homosexuality in humans has been around since ancient times, probably longer, and exists in tons of other species. It's part of nature, part of human nature, and is not a choice.

[The J]

Elisha,
I am sorry your mother had gay parties in your house while you were present, and did not do a better job to present a more stable household. Most mothers wait before letting their children meet new partners.

You say that your mother had gay parties, meaning you saw women-on-women sex? I only bring that up because you stated that you had same-sex attraction to men, not women. I think that you are confused, and I am glad that you have found a way to stabilize yourself. I disagree that homosexuality is a choice. I don't choose to think that the guys in the Australian Football League, and the UFC are hot.

For Elisha (which addresses Zack in a roundabout way)
Since you're stating your support for monogamous heterosexual marriage is biblically supported: If G-d intended for marriage to be between one man and one woman, why did Jacob-who became-Israel, the father of the 12 houses of Israel, have two wives, Leah and Rachel, and children with two other women? Why did his grandfather Abraham have children with both his wife, Sarah, and her slave, Hagar?

Don't take this to think that I endorse polygamy, but note that in polygamous societies, men are normally not allowed to marry more women than they can support, so it is possible that polygamy is a survival strategy for the human species. (Zack) That it lends itself to the oppression of women is another issue.

Likewise, polyandry exists in societies (very few) where the availability of women compared to men is limited.

So why can't people of the same sex marry? If two people of the same sex can start a business and own assets jointly, why can't they marry?

As for preserving the sanctity of marriage; humans can make acts sacred. We pray when we eat, when we get on airplanes, when we wake up, go to bed, etc. It is up to us to put the divine into our lives.

Then there are the people who state that marriage is for having children. There are more than 6 billion humans on this planet. I can safely say that if the human race is threatened with extinction, it has nothing to do with our ability to perpetuate ourselves as a species. Likewise, letting gays marry is not going to cause the population to plunge drastically, if at all. No offense, but you straight people are having kids out the ying-yang.

[dianne hayter]

i am a 56 year old preachers kid, am disabled with 8 labels, i suffer in pain and exhaustion every day for 20 years, and fear i will die. my parents just wrote a book on their pentecostal spiritual journey..saints!, but to me, God was my competitor for their attention and love, an i came up short all the time.
are there any confused or dysfunctional pks here, or is it just a debate about gay rights..
sincerely pinkrainbow