I thought I'd kick off the New Year with some good news, for a change. Many of you may not be aware that on December 20, the Vermont Supreme Court decided that gay couples must be granted the same benefits and protections given to married couples. Here's an excerpt from the ruling: "We hold that the state is constitutionally required to extend to same-sex couples the common benefits and protections that flow from marriage under Vermont law."
I have to admit, I'm stunned. Happily stunned, but still stunned. In a country seemingly on a rapid slide toward theocracy, a bright beacon of freethought has been lit. I suppose it should be no surprise that Vermont made such a decision. It was the first state to outlaw slavery. Its Constitution, which predates the federal Constitution, was arguably the most radical such document in those days, strongly in favor of civil rights. And now, Vermont is posed on the brink of new legislation that could remove the stigma of second-class citizenship for many couples in the state.
Now, it's unlikely that such benefits will come as a result of same-sex marriages being legal. That would take an amendment to the state Constitution. More likely, they'll impose a system of domestic partnerships. Sadly, this isn't an optimal result. It's akin to the old "separate but equal" double-talk of decades past. But at least Vermont's legislators have finally realized what millions of Americans have been saying for years: there's no sensible reason whatsoever to deny such benefits to gay couples.
Of course, even if Vermont does permit same-sex marriages, it'll only be of benefit to people in Vermont. This is due to the blatantly unconstitutional Defense of Marriage Act, approved back in September of '96 by the Clinton Administration. For those unfamiliar with it, DOMA says (among other things) that individual states are not required to recognize any marriage paradigm other than male-female monogamous unions that might be "legal" in some other state. DOMA was enacted just in case something like Vermont's ruling ever came to pass.
Now, as everyone knows, if you marry in one state, you're married in every state. If you move from Florida to Oklahoma, the Oklahoma government is required to recognize you as married, too. But DOMA makes an exception for gay couples. Now, if Vermont allows gays to marry, and a gay couple moves from there to any other state in the country, they're effectively not married anymore. The Defense of Marriage Act is blatantly contrary to the rights guaranteed in the Constitution, which says that other states are obliged to recognize such unions that take place in other states.
Technically, DOMA shouldn't even be legal. If the government wants to change the Constitution, there has to be an Amendment, not just a pithy little law with a clever name that seems like a good thing. Most people in America are utterly ignorant of this law, beyond the name. They'll have heard of it, maybe, and say, "Defense of marriage? Sure, that sounds like a good thing." But they'll be unable to state anything at all that the law actually says, let alone realize that it violates the Constitution.
So why am I going on about a gay rights issue in an atheism page? Well, that's simple, and if you've read all the other articles here, you'll know where I stand on it.
The bigotry against gays is predominantly a religious bigotry. No other anti-gay argument can stand up under scrutiny. Only the "it's against God's will" argument can't be refuted with evidence. (Of course, it can't be supported with evidence, either, but that's beside the point.)
Standing up to this religious bigotry is the first step in ending the acceptance of said bigotry. Oh, it'll never go away, of course. But at least we can stop our government from making it justifiable by having anti-gay laws on the books.
Eventually, if there's any justice in the world, the government will at some point make a stand and say, "We don't care if your religious beliefs make you against homosexuality. The government can't take a religious stand, so we have to give gays the same rights as straights." And we'll be one step closer to true equality in the land of the free.
I don't know at what point during that process it'll become easier for atheists to be "out," and open about their beliefs. But I do know that Vermont is making the road to that time a little easier to tread.
