from an email to MSU Gay and Lesbian Faculty Staff Association, April 17, 2000
 

"...  By the way, I was struck, again, by the silliness of one of the 'con' arguments at this website: that marriage is a "sacred union," bla bla bla.  To me, that's the most important point.  As soon as you say that, you've admitted that you are referring to a PRIVATE religious doctrine, which it would be UNDEMOCRATIC to legislate, to make binding on the rest of the country.  The Sabbath day is sacred to some people too--should we make a law that lets the police enforce that?

No one is asking backward religions to perform gay marriages if they don't want to.  But what about religions that DO recognize gay marriages as sacred unions?  What about their freedom to exercise their religion?  And what about those of us who just want to enjoy some freedom FROM religion?

The issue on the table is CIVIL marriage, i.e. whether or not the State Government will sell us a marraige license that we can take to shop around for a private church that will marry us, and if we don't find one or don't want our marriage to have any religious meaning, whether or not the justice of the peace--a CIVIL servant, a secular, tax-supported public employee--will do it.

When I think of prohibition and blue laws and sodomy laws and civil marriage, it seems that religious supremacy is often as much of a threat as white supremacy (supremacy = the belief that civil rights should be reserved for a certain elite)."

Maughn