Winning Equality Through Language
Back when I was publishing Portland Communique, the one thing during the debate over same-sex marriage that drove me more batshit crazy than anything else was the fact that the root of the controversy was little more than semantics. A vocal cadre of mostly-Christian bigots managed to convince a majority of Oregonians that the state contract of marriage was inseparable from a self-righteous ownership of the religious instutition of the same name. Bigots leading sheep rarely is the way to make public policy, and never is the way to equality.
Outright and obvious bigotry is one thing. Unspeakably frustrating was the ease with which average Oregonians who didn’t necessarily object to the “separate but equal” solution of civil unions could be swayed into complete irrationality over the religious ownership of a word.
As a matter of public policy, I despise civil unions or (as Oregon now calls them) domestic partnerships. Not merely because “separate but equal” is not equal, but because, as mentioned, it’s a completely irrational position. And I’m rather unfond of irrationality as the basis for public policy, too.
Back when the most vocal and obvious bigots were leading the charge for Measure 36, they made sure to claim that they didn’t oppose a “separate but equal” solution.
It should have been to absolutely no one’s surprise that they were lying when they said that, and went on to oppose civil unions and domestic partnerships as well. They had no choice, because despite my hatred of “separate but equal”, despite the lack of Federal law to go along with our new state law, and despite the fact that irrationality should not be the basis of public policy, one thing finally became clear to me last week.
The bigots should be afraid of civil unions and domestic partnrships of the type now the law of the land in Oregon. Because it means that they’ve lost. They’ve lost their hold on marriage.
What dawned on me, finally, last week was that the very fact that the entire controversy was over a word, was a matter of semantics or linguistics… well, it’s actually that very fact which means that the bigots now have lost.
It turned out to be pretty simple, once I realized it.
If you should run into a gay or lesbian couple you know on the street, you’re not going to run up and congratulate them on getting domestically partnered.
You’re going to congratulate them on getting married.
They won’t be called “the happily-domestically-partnered couple”. They’ll be called “the happily-married couple”.
In terms of everyday language, gays and lesbians will be married. Period. And a generation from now, one of the states with a “separate but equal” solution will finish the job.
A generation from now, with marriage equality firmly entrenched in our everyday language, someone will look up and ask why we have two entirely separate sections of the law for two different kinds of married people. And they will repeal the irrationality of “separate but equal” and bring the state’s marriage law into equal balance.
In some sense, it’s an extraordinarily stupid way in which to have won. Separate but equal isn’t right. Irrationality as a basis for public policy under the law isn’t right.
But this always was just a stupid, self-righteous, and bigoted war over a word. And that war’s been won, even if we won’t get to see its official end for awhile yet.
So, in advance: Congratulations to all the soon-to-be happily-married couples across the state of Oregon.