Phonetics Discussion - Gay Marriage

The Wednesday after break, the subject of choice in Phonetics was gay marriage and adoption. Though we were all aware that it had become quite the issue in the States, none of us really knew what was going on back home. The presenters first explained that in France they have PACS which essentially allows gay couples to have a civil union, but not marriage. The class then opened up to a discussion of our personal views on the topic.

There's a girl in the class who seems to have been quite sheltered growing up and even still. She grew up in a rural area and attends a commuter school in IL. It's a big deal for her to take the suburban train to Northwestern to visit her best friend from high school and she said she only made it to France because her uncle bought the plane ticket and got her on the plane. It came as no surprise to me that she was against gay marriage. However, when she said she thought it was selfish for couples to adopt, nearly every one seemed ready with a response.

I turned to the girl and asked her to clarify - did she think it was selfish for anyone to adopt, or just gay couples? Just gay couples, she said. I asked her how it was any different. "Because that child should have a mother and a father and it didn't get to choose that it doesn't have both. And gay couples can't have kids naturally so they shouldn't get to adopt them."

Oh boy... I find all sorts of faults with that logic, but I bit my tongue and hoped someone else was going to respond because I didn't think she could handle much contradiction the way I was ready to give it. A guy chimed in, pointing out that the child will likely have other role models from both sexes besides the parents and that he believed that it was more important for the child to be in a stable, loving environment. And since it's probably much harder for gay couples to adopt, if they had already gone through the difficulty of the adoption process, they clearly wanted to raise a child for the right reasons and provide a loving home. And what about single mothers? Should they not be able to adopt? Would she rather all those kids be shuttled between orphanages and foster homes?

Our professor agreed and said that to say a child needs a mother and a father also says to some degree that you have a preconceived idea of the role each should fill. He believed that was almost saying that a mother should fill the traditional role of being at home raising the child while the father works and plays ball with the kids. He then asked the girl if she realized that almost everyone in the room disagreed with what she had said. She didn't understand the question, unfortunately - her French isn't great.

The discussion continued on with much more agreement among the rest of the class and when I turned around a few minutes later, the girl was working on homework - clearly tuning the rest of us out. I got the impression that she was really bothered by everything being said which I've noticed with her about a lot of things.

Though I agreed with most of what was said during the rest of the class, I was saddened by the start of the discussion as I am any time I encounter homophobia. I've got a lot to say in response to articles and journal entries I've been reading lately about homosexuality in general, but in the interest of keeping this short(er), I'll just stick with the topic at hand - gay marriage.

Regardless of your views on homosexuality or gay marriage, I have yet to encounter anyone who can give me a reason as to why it should be banned that is not based in religion. In my mind, any sort of ban would therefore be a serious violation of separation of church and state and unconstitutional.

Why shouldn't gays have the same marital rights that heterosexuals do? What purpose would it serve to ban gay marriages? I don't believe it would harm anyone or threaten the safety or civility of the American community. Why would you want to say that two people who are in love and committed to one another shouldn't enter into a consensual, contractual relationship with one another - that's what civil marriage is as defined by Webster - and for the record the dictionary includes both opposite and same sex unions.

Now, for all of you who would like to explain the opposition to me, don't worry - my questions above are rhetorical. I know what those who are against gay marriage are saying. I know the Bible has passages that say homosexuality is a sin according to some peoples' interpretation. I know some people say it's just not natural and therefore shouldn't be allowed. I know there are many other reasons people give, but I have yet to hear one that I think is constitutional. Furthermore, I disagree and I particularly enjoy this poster from the U of FL Gay Students Association and this article from the San Francisco Gate in response. (Thanks to Terri for sending me the article!) That said, I'm always up for a good intellectual discussion so if you have thoughts about it (whether you agree with me or not), I'd love to hear them.

On a final, general note... when it all comes down to it, I see homosexuality as another expression of love - and wouldn't we all be better off with more love in this world?