Same-sex couples not treated fairly
When are those homosexual couples just going to give up? Marriage is between a man and a woman. Can’t they see that Americans aren’t about to redefine marriage. And they sure as heck don’t want to hand over special rights — you know, like parental rights, custody rights and hospital visitation rights.
An uncomfortable number of people agree with that sentiment. Eighteen states have adopted constitutional bans on same-sex marriage. Oregon voters adopted a ban in 2004, and it was upheld Friday by a judge. The ban reads: “It is the policy of Oregon, and its political subdivisions, that only a marriage between one man and one woman shall be valid or legally recognized as a marriage.”
That simple statement obscures the complicated issues that arise in modern relationships. Same-sex couples are denied basic rights because those rights are tied to a marriage certificate.
It’s clear that there is no urgency among most Americans to lift gay and lesbian citizens from their second-class status. Many don’t even realize rights are being withheld.
That’s precisely why the Founding Fathers established the Bill of Rights. They were concerned about the tyranny and apathy of the majority. Throughout the nation’s history, the courts have been the bulwark against majority rule. They have struck down institutional discrimination based on color, creed and gender. They are now the best hope for those who face discrimination based on sexual orientation.
Our nation’s laws have traditionally treated two gay people in a relationship as if they were strangers. The levels of intimacy, involvement and support have been ignored. A perfect example is the case featured in Thursday’s ruling by the Washington state Supreme Court. The court established a new category of parenthood, a de-facto parent, because there’s a whole new world of relationships out there.
Ten years ago, Sue Ellen Carvin and Page Brittain decided they wanted a child. Using a sperm donor, Brittain had a baby girl. For six years, the couple raised the child, with Carvin staying home and Brittain going to work. Then they separated and Brittain stopped allowing Carvin to see the girl. Carvin filed a lawsuit.
Brittain is the biological mother, but Carvin says that in every other sense she was an equal parent. The girl refers to Carvin as “Mama” and Brittain as “Mommy.” Nevertheless, a King County judge made a winner-takes-all ruling in favor of Brittain.
An appeals court overturned that ruling and the state Supreme Court upheld that decision. Critics of the ruling say that anyone who helps with a child’s upbringing can now be considered a parent. It’s not that simple. Carvin must return to the King County court and prove she helped raise the girl without pay, formed an emotional bond with her and was encouraged by Brittain.
None of this would’ve been necessary if gay and lesbian couples were allowed to marry and thus fall under the same laws as everyone else. Most Americans would appear to be indifferent to this inequity. They have their own problems. But the courts have a higher responsibility to equality and justice.