I remember walking down the long corridor in O'Hare International Airport after returning from Paris. As soon as I stepped off the plane, I realized that I would need to reconstruct the way I acted to accommodate the puritanical threads that seem to strangle American society.
It took less than five minutes on American soil to hear something I hadn't heard for nine months in France. \Look at that guy,"" said a teenage boy to his buddy about a gentleman walking in front of us. ""What a fag!"" I took a deep breath and realized that I was truly back in the land of the free, the home of the brave.
On July 12, 2001, the Alliance for Marriage announced a proposal for a constitutional amendment that would permanently add these two sentences to our American Constitution: ""Marriage in the United States shall consist only of the union of a man and a woman,"" and, ""Neither this Constitution or the constitution of any state, nor state or federal law, shall be construed to require that marital status or the legal incidents thereof be conferred upon unmarried couples or groups.""
Not only would the Federal Marriage Amendment deprive gays and lesbians across the United States of their rights to equal recognition by the state in a civil union, but it would also preclude gay rights legislation in states like Vermont and Hawaii. How's that for the so-called ""world's greatest democracy""?
Adding insult to injury, the Federal Marriage Amendment is quickly and quietly gaining steam in Washington, D.C., right now in the midst of one of the most frenzied times in American history. By focusing on the war, proponents of the amendment are diverting attention away from this legislation that will effectively destroy the self-worth of millions of Americans. At a time when America is yearning for unity, respect and understanding, some of our representatives are shamefully trying to asphyxiate a significant group of our society.
Once again, we seem to be trailing behind the true leader of human rights recognition: Europe. Countries like Sweden, Denmark, the Netherlands and Germany have recognized that homosexuals should receive equal treatment under the law with regard to civil union. Furthermore, several countries have granted adoption rights to gay couples after concluding it is in the best interest of the child to be in a loving, nurturing environment'be it with parents of the opposite sex or parents of the same sex. In these countries, the nature of the marriage is of secondary importance, as it should be.
Why do we Americans always seem to lag behind our European counterparts when it comes to recognizing and appreciating the differences among human beings? Could Americans be more hypocritical in proclaiming that the United States is the archetype of freedom when we won't even recognize the union of two people who happen to be the same sex?
This is not 1950. Homosexuality is not a psychological disorder. I did not choose to be gay. It's about time we Americans break through our narrow-mindedness to realize that homosexuals are people who have feelings, the ability to love and to be faithful, and the right to celebrate their love in a state-recognized civil union.
Unfortunately, if the Alliance for Marriage has its way, we as a society will be thrust years behind our European counterparts when it comes to this crucial issue.
I have always been conscious of my sexual orientation. I recognized that it made me different, but so did the fact that I was Jewish, overweight and wore glasses. Being gay has never been a big deal to me. Like the majority of the gay people I know, my sexual orientation does not occupy a large part of my identity. In fact, I would argue that those whose homosexuality dominates their personality are just responding to issues of their own self-worth that constantly clash with the dominant, heterosexual society. I recognize every day how lucky I am that I do not need to express myself as a sexual being, that I do not need to sleep with the gay population of Madison to prove that I have self-worth and that I can realize being gay is not a fault.
It is hard for me to accept the fact that I cannot marry a man with whom I fall in love in the United States. As much as I want to stay here and contribute to a country I truly love, I know I might have to leave the States to realize my right to marry. I think this is repugnant and I am embarrassed for our country. We state and restate the fact that our country is supreme; that we are a leader of the free world. Who are we trying to convince? How can we be taken seriously?
Fortunately, the Federal Marriage Amendment has not yet been passed. There is a Web site that allows you to sign a petition to stop this detrimental legislation. You can sign the petition here.
I urge you to look inside yourself and question whether you really think homosexuals should never have the right to marry in the United States. At least, I ask everyone to understand that homosexuals experience the same types of feelings as heterosexuals when it comes to relationships, be it jealousy, betrayal or love. We may also want to get married some day.
