To celebrate, I offer this sage quote on our national divide in "moral" values, which was the closer of my recent Times feature on Jordan but was cut (presumably) for length.
“I think what happened in this election is that we as gay people got caught up in that culture war,” Jordan says. “I really wish, if we had it all do over, that we would just drop the word ‘marriage.’ Marriage is not what we want, you know? We can sanction our unions in our churches in front of our gay-friendly gods. We don’t need their church. I don’t want to get married in the Baptist church, anyway--please!”
My only quibble with this sane-sounding, cut-your-losses approach is that it buys into the backwards notion--a favorite of conservative pundits who aren't bigots themselves, they assure us, even as they defend the views of bigots--that gays or Democrats or blue-staters in general somehow foisted the gay-marriage issue on this election. Last I checked it was the other side that drew up ballot measures and a constitutional amendment on the topic.
But Jordan is probably right, on practical grounds: As long as gay couples can secure equivalent legal rights, and there are churches willing to consecrate their unions, what's the diff? Some may call that separate but equal, but with something as personal as marriage, sexuality, and the inevitable religious or spiritual baggage none of us, on either side of the divide, can help but bring to these topics--well, there are some clubs who don't want you as a member and the feeling is mutual. As long as all our various self-selecting clubs can stay open for business, so to speak, I've got no problem with them being mutually exclusive. At least, it's better than the alternative.
No comments:
Post a Comment