Same-sex marriage bill marked by desperation, not equality

Despite what many, including the editorial of this paper, may tell you, Illinois’ same-sex marriage bill is not about equality, but desperation. 

There was no interest in pursuing equality with this redefinition. That may seem absurd to common viewers of media, especially social media, because equality is the theme of same-sex marriage proponents. 

Whatever claimed “inequalities” exist currently can either be resolved by other measures, such as hospitals voluntarily changing their visitation policies, or should not exist, such as not requiring spouses to testify against a spouse, which is in conflict with criminal law’s goals and usefulness to society.

If equality were the goal, homosexual couples could have achieved all these “rights” of marriage the same way heterosexual couples did — over a long period of time, not less than one century, through judicial holdings and legislative decrees. 

However the “rights” were not the issue at stake. Equality was not the issue. Recognition was. 

Homosexual couples could invent their own religion or even just hold their own ceremony and call themselves “married.” After all, they claim it’s just a word and not an occupation. 

But who would know? Who would accept them? Who would hold them to the vows they were taking? 

A faith-based heterosexual couple, no matter what major religion the faith is in, can take solace in knowing that their marriage is recognized by the religion they serve, granted it follows that religion’s requirements. An atheistic heterosexual couple or a heterosexual couple of a less popular religion can take solace in knowing that society recognizes their marriage. 

Who recognizes homosexual marriages? 

My knowledge of the world’s religions is limited, but even if one recognizes homosexual marriages in a limited sense by not condemning them, it cannot be a proponent of homosexual marriages. 

Doing so would kill off the religion because homosexual couples produce no children and, if everyone were to convert, kill off humanity. Society, likewise, cannot recognize them because of religious reasons and society’s self-interest in survival. 

Homosexual couples became desperate for recognition. But whom could they turn to?

The State. 

The State has long recognized heterosexual marriages, despite the religious nature of them, because of the benefits to the society that the State serves. The State has advantaged heterosexual marriages because of those benefits. The State was a prime candidate for homosexual couples to turn to. 

So here today, Illinois stands at the corner of jealousy and desperation for something they can never have: recognizing homosexual marriages.

Brad Barber,

First-year in Law