John Culhane: How DADT repeal will help the freedom to marry

June 04, 2010

As posted by John Culhane on 365gay.com:

"Depending on whom you read and rely on, the DADT ban is or is not about to be history. Many stories  have been written on the proposed law, but not much has been said about this point: If the repeal does go through, the case for marriage equality becomes rhetorically stronger. Why?

"First, unlike many of the laws that seek equality for the LGBT community, DADT and the ban on the freedom to marry are instances where the government itself is doing the discriminating.

"Thus, the rhetoric that’s used in one case applies to the other: Government should treat all of its citizens equally.

... "Second, the most-often heard argument against allowing gay and lesbian soldiers into the military is that they will disrupt “unit cohesion.” But if this argument is ultimately rejected in the one area in which it at least sounds plausible (if only because of a homophobic atmosphere that has too often come from higher-ranking military),  that rejection weakens a similar argument that’s advanced by many of those who oppose marriage equality: Allowing gays, lesbians, and transgendered people to marry will weaken heterosexual marriages – disrupt their “unit cohesion,” if you will.

"But if folks in the military can somehow learn to deal with gay and lesbian troops who live and fight alongside them every day, then surely straight couples can absorb the blow inflicted by living in the same society as same-sex couples.

"Sometimes the argument is pitched at a slightly more sophisticated level: While marriage equality won’t immediately affect heterosexual couples, in the long run it will change the message of marriage by suggesting that the biological connection between parents and children isn’t important.

... "Courts, though, are rarely impressed by such abstract arguments – especially when they carry more than a whiff of desperation. You’ll notice that the anti-equality forces haven’t been especially vocal about opposing adoption, surrogacy, or no-fault divorce laws, all of which of course sever the biological connections between parents and their children.

... "Are there other arguments against marriage equality?

"Not good ones.

"Even Justice Scalia admitted, in his dissent in Lawrence v. Texas, that the marriage-procreation link isn’t a reason (we don’t require proof of reproductive capacity), and the related arguments that opposite-sex couples “need” marriage because only they can procreate “accidentally” (Oops! I Procreated Again!) is just plain dumb (even though it was accepted by the highest courts in both Washington and New York).

"Religious arguments, of course, have no place in a public debate (for one thing: whose religion controls?)

"So we’re left with this kind of discomfort with marriage equality – that somehow it will affect opposite-sex marriages, however indirectly and over time. Once this “unit cohesion” argument falls in the military setting, its demise in civilian life should be briskly achieved. Let’s begin to press this argument."

Click to read the full post: [Link]