 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Excerpted from Affinity, January 1994, pp. 1, 10. Longtime Affirmation member Don Harryman was among those to testify recently before the Hawaii Senate Judiciary Committee in favor of same-sex marriages in that state. (See the full text of Don's testimony in the related article below.) The committee hearings, which were held on each of the Hawaiian islands, follow a landmark ruling last year by the State Supreme Court, declaring the state's current ban on same-sex marriages unconstitutional, because it discriminates based solely on gender. Gender is a "suspect" class under the Hawaiian constitution and the court ruling requires the state to show a "compelling" reason that such discrimination is in the state's best interest. Failing this, the ban will fall and gay marriages will become legal in Hawaii. Legal experts expect this to occur within the next two years. The religious right however, has mounted a campaign in the state legislature to either write the ban into law or amend the state constitution to circumvent the prohibition against gender-based bias. Hearings on the topic have been described as "contentious" and according to one observer, "the fundamentalists [are] out in force." Unsubstantiated rumors are circulating that the Mormon Church is quietly encouraging its members in Hawaii to get involved in the fight to perpetuate the ban. One church official there, who wished to remain anonymous, admitted, "The Church learned its lesson with the ERA [Equal Rights Amendment]—it should never have gotten publicly involved." Experts agree however, that the Supreme Court ruling already set forth will make the goal of the right wing very difficult to achieve. In all likelihood, same-sex marriages will be a reality in Hawaii when all the smoke clears. Without changes to the current reciprocity agreement between the states, such marriages effected in Hawaii, would be recognized as valid in all 50 states. The U.S. Constitution has no bearing in the current Hawaiian debate, as the U.S. Supreme Court has continually ruled that marriage relations are a state issue. Don Harryman's Judiciary Committee Testimony Thank you for this opportunity to address briefly the emotional topic of same-sex marriage. It is clear from my perspective that allowing same-sex persons to establish committed, legally binding relationships is positive and beneficial both for [the] persons [involved] and for our larger society. The truth is obvious to me that for anyone, [whether] hetero- or homosexual, commitment to another human being provides the greatest opportunity to love and be loved, and to experience the emotional and spiritual growth that only comes from the trials and triumphs of a committed relationship. Having made that statement, I would like to address some of the criticism raised by opponents of same-sex marriage. Much has been said about so-called "Christian" standard of marriage. I find it interesting that Biblical standards are quoted to support a one-man/one-woman model of marriage; interesting because Father Abraham and King David are only two of many Old Testament patriarchs who were polygamous. The Apostle Paul was not married--on the contrary--for he said in I Corinthians, "...I would that all men were even as myself. But every man hath his proper gift of God, one after this manner and another after that. I say therefore to the unmarried and widows, it is good for them if they abide, even as I, but if they cannot contain, let them marry, for it is better to marry than to burn." It has also been suggested that allowing homosexuals to marry would threaten traditional marriage and family life. One might ask why so-called Christians have not expended as much energy as they have in these hearings in dealing with the real crises that threaten families. As we speak, there are 30 billion dollars of court-mandated child support unpaid by heterosexual parents in this country. Every fifteen seconds in the United States, a woman is assaulted in her home by a husband or boyfriend and an average of 1,000 women yearly are murdered by husbands or boyfriends. Furthermore, one might ask why the guardians of traditional marriage do not also condemn the millions of heterosexual couples who could many but choose to live together without marriage. Surely any one of these is more of a "threat" to the traditional family than are homosexuals wanting to establish committed relationships, especially if, as the so-called Christians claim, homosexual comprise only one percent of the population. Those who claim to oppose same-sex marriage based on a belief in Christian values seem to have a lot of difficulty with some of those values. No where has that been more troublesome for so-called Christians than in the issue of child molestation. Over and over we have heard that molestation of children is a homosexual phenomenon. While it is certainly true that some homosexuals, like some heterosexuals, molest children, it is a fact that, in terms of numbers, child molestation is overwhelmingly perpetrated by heterosexual men against young girls, often in a "traditional" family setting. In the chorus of voices raised in opposition to same-sex marriage are some voices that I have heard before. They were heard in the dark winter night, shouting obscenities at my Mormon ancestors as they were driven from Nauvoo, Illinois. Those ugly voices also claimed to speak for God as they murdered and persecuted my ancestors because they were not in the Christian mainstream. To those who claim to believe in Christian values, I would say that nothing would be more welcome than for you to practice them. Speaking the truth and not telling lies about people you don't even know would be a start. Maybe at some point we can look forward to a manifestation of the love that Jesus said was the center of His teaching. Thank you.
|
www.affirmation.org