Ellington

Thank G-d I live in the United States, where there’s a separation between church and state. I’m a religious person, and I believe that marriage, as a religious institution, should be between a man and a woman. As a matter of legality, however, I see no problem in a marriage between two parties of the same sex. I don’t see why this should offend anyone of any religion. People seeking a same-sex marriage are asking to be validated in the eyes of the state, not by a religion.

Just last week, the California Supreme Court overturned the existing limitation on same-sex marriages in a 4-3 majority ruling. This was done on the basis of the Equal Protection Clause of the California Constitution. And this court ruling, as all California court rulings, is likely to start a trend in more states around the country.

In reaction to the court’s decision, a movement has emerged to amend California’s state constitution so that it would reject any marriage that is not between a man and a woman. What I don’t understand is why people take this so personally. By no means does this violate the religious institution of marriage: it only grants state recognition of the bond between two people, a status that opposite-sex marriages already have.

What about civil unions and domestic partnerships, you may ask? A civil union may grant state benefits to same-sex couples, such as hospital visitation, inheritance and other rights. But there are many problems with civil unions. They are not portable from state to state, nor do they grant federal benefits such as federal tax benefits or Social Security survivor benefits.

It’s not fair to withhold these benefits from couples because of their sexual orientation. It’s also not fair to give same sex couples a lesser version of marriage. Same sex couples aren’t fighting for a title, they are fighting for equality.

To those who are pushing for a constitutional amendment in California, the fundamental issue at stake is not about marriage but about the separation of church and state. I believe that we are “one nation under G-d,” but belief in G-d does not connote belief in one religion or another, and for that I am thankful.

G-d willing, when I get married, I will have that ceremony conducted by my rabbi and will have a ketuba contract to validate it in the eyes of my religion. Additionally, I’ll have a license from the state so that my husband and I will enjoy the rights the government grants married people.

People seeking same-sex marriages are only asking for the latter, and it’s only fair that those rights should be entitled to them. It’s time for people to stop worrying about technicalities of language and move on to more important global issues.