Tomorrow is Voting Day and THANK GOD because if I have to
hear that giggly, husky “I’m Michele Bachmann and I approved this message” one
more time, I’m going to start smearing my shit on the walls. How is it possible
that the sound of Mary Hart’s voice made some woman have seizures and the sound
of Michele Bachmann’s voice hasn’t made the head every man, woman, and child
explode? I ask you.
One of the things we’re voting on in Minnesota is whether or
not to amend our state constitution to define marriage as between one man and
one woman. By defining it as such, we arm ourselves for the day that gays and
lesbians (and presumably polygamists) will undoubtedly rise up from the pits of
hell, move like a horde of zombies to the state of Minnesota, and try to fucking get married. “Oh no,” we’ll
say. “Our constitution says you can’t do that!” The power of our constitution
shall strike down those who attempt to poo all over the sanctity of marriage
and we will be forever safe. Or something.
Rather than leave you in suspense, I’ll come right out and
say that I plan to vote no on this ridiculousness. I’m not scared of the idea
that my state might someday legalize gay marriage and, in fact, I’m surprised
that we’re even having this goddamn conversation. It’s 2012. It’s almost 2013.
I don’t care who you are or who you marry and I believe it’s fundamentally
wrong to try and limit anyone’s freedom to marry whomever they choose. But
beyond that, I’d like to remind everyone that we’re repeating history.
My parents were married on May 27, 1972. My mother wore a
black wedding dress. She also had an afro (for crying out loud…). They look happy in their wedding pictures.
They also look like they’re in high school, which they practically were. Some
hippie played “Morning Has Broken” on her guitar while my mother walked down
the aisle. There was a cake. My grandparents were there. It was a legal
marriage between a black man and a white woman. Believe it or not, this celebration of hairstyles and love used to be against the law in many states.
Anti-miscegenation laws (laws which prohibit marriages and,
in some cases even co-habitation, between a white person and a person of a
different race) go way back. In 1776, seven of the 13 colonies forbade marriage
between whites and people of other races. Most states declared interracial
marriage illegal between the 18th and 20th centuries. Guess what
they used for their argument? The Bible (some things never change). The
argument was that God separated the races geographically and, therefore,
obviously didn’t want them to marry or (God forbid) have children.
In 1948, California declared that anti-miscegenation laws
violated the 14th amendment. After that, many states began repealing
their laws banning interracial marriage. That’s not to say that everyone was
suddenly on board with interracial marriage. Most people were still very much
against it. But some very brave women and men refused to back down – like
Mildred and Richard Loving. They were married in Washington DC in 1958. After
their marriage, they returned to their home state of Virginia where they were
promptly arrested because, in the super progressive state of Virginia,
interracial marriage was punishable by law. The judge told them they wouldn’t
go to jail as long as they left Virginia and didn’t return for 25 years. So
they left. But then in 1963, they were both like, “This is bullshit. We should
be able to live wherever we want.” So they took their case all the way to the
US Supreme Court, which ruled unanimously:
"Marriage is one of the 'basic civil rights of man,' fundamental to our very existence and survival.... To deny this fundamental freedom on so unsupportable a basis as the racial classifications embodied in these statutes, classifications so directly subversive of the principle of equality at the heart of the Fourteenth Amendment, is surely to deprive all the State's citizens of liberty without due process of law. The Fourteenth Amendment requires that the freedom of choice to marry not be restricted by invidious racial discriminations. Under our Constitution, the freedom to marry, or not to marry, a person of another race resides with the individual and cannot be infringed by the State."
You see, the US Supreme Court recognized that anti-miscegenation laws were only there to uphold this idea of white supremacy. So now, let’s bring it home. Minnesota never had an anti-miscegenation law. Yes, this is your moment to bask in the glow of how amazingly liberal we are here in the frozen north. Minnesotans take every chance they can get to point out how far removed we are from the south. But then here we are, proposing a law that would limit the freedom to marry in our really progressive state. You can tell me until you’re blue in the face that this law is to “uphold the sanctity of marriage” but truly, it is crystal clear to me that the sole purpose of this law is to continue to perpetuate homophobia.
I believe it is fundamentally wrong to limit an individual’s right to marry. It is a decision that is completely motivated by fear and utterly devoid of basic humanity. The question is: who are we? Who do we want to be?
In 2007, Mildred Loving issued a public statement to commemorate the 40th anniversary of Loving v. Virginia. She had this to say regarding same-sex marriage:
"Surrounded as I am now by wonderful children and grandchildren, not a day goes by that I don't think of Richard and our love, our right to marry, and how much it meant to me to have that freedom to marry the person precious to me, even if others thought he was the "wrong kind of person" for me to marry. I believe all Americans, no matter their race, no matter their sex, no matter their sexual orientation, should have that same freedom to marry. Government has no business imposing some people's religious beliefs over others. Especially if it denies people's civil rights.
I am still not a political person, but I am proud that Richard's and my name is on a court case that can help reinforce the love, the commitment, the fairness, and the family that so many people, black or white, young or old, gay or straight seek in life. I support the freedom to marry for all. That's what Loving, and loving, are all about."
