Same-Sex Marriage is a Feminist Issue

In the battle for LGBT rights, the issue of equal marriage has taken center stage. With so many other issues affecting women, why are feminists advocating for same-sex marriage rights?

NOW's History on Lesbian Rights

NOW's mission is to promote equality for women—all women. The human and civil rights of all women are included in this effort. For more than 30 years, NOW has been a leader in the struggle for lesbian rights. In 1971 NOW issued its first policy statement recognizing lesbian rights as a feminist issue. The statement acknowledged that a woman's right to independence and self-determination includes the right to define and express her own sexuality and to choose her own lifestyle. This policy cited some of the more blatant forms of discrimination against lesbians—employment, education, child custody and marriage—emphasizing that lesbian couples are denied all the economic and legal benefits granted to married women, including tax deductions, insurance benefits, inheritance rights and more.

Throughout the next three decades, NOW's work on lesbian rights remained strong and decisive, covering such issues as discrimination in the military, anti-sodomy laws, electing lesbian and gay candidates to political office, hate crimes legislation, and expanding same-sex partners' rights. In 1995, NOW made official its support for same-sex marriage, stating that the choice of marriage is a fundamental constitutional right, protected under the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, and should not be denied because of a person's sexual orientation.

NOW continues to advocate for lesbian rights, including the right to share fully and equally in the rights and responsibilities of marriage. More information on NOW's stand on lesbian rights is available online.

Same-Sex Marriage Emerges as a Dominant Issue

For years, the Lesbian/Gay/Bisexual/Transgender and feminist communities have recognized that same-sex couples cannot participate fully in our society if they are denied the rights and responsibilities offered to heterosexual couples through marriage. This has led to cases in various states where same-sex couples have filed suit in order to secure their right to marry, and NOW has participated in amicus curiae (or "friend of the court") briefs in those cases.

The right wing immediately seized upon this issue to rally its ultra-conservative supporters. Like the issues of reproductive rights and affirmative action, same-sex marriage can be used to stir up feelings of fear, intolerance and hate. It is also used as a wedge issue, in order to split apart groups that might otherwise agree on issues and pit them against each other.

The issue of equal marriage began to emerge in the 1990s with a case in Hawaii that challenged the status quo. In 2000, then-Governor Howard Dean gave the issue a major boost by signing a law granting civil unions to same-sex couples in Vermont.

On Nov. 18, 2003, the Massachusetts Supreme Court made history by ruling that both same-sex and opposite-sex couples are entitled to equal marriage rights under the Massachusetts State Constitution. In a clarification of its ruling, the court stated that only access to civil marriage (not civil unions) would provide equal protection to same-sex couples under the state constitution.

Marriage equality is now a reality in five states: Massachusetts, Connecticut, Iowa, Vermont and New Hampshire. An additional nine states offer same-sex couples the equivalent of or some of the state-level benefits granted to married couples. New York and the District of Columbia recognize same-sex marriages performed in other states. More states are expected to move forward on the issue in the near future.

Unfortunately, voters in California (2008) and Maine (2009) approved ballot measures that repealed equal marriage rights granted in those states. The decision by the California State Supreme Court to uphold Proposition 8 and reinstate discrimination against same-sex couples was a devastating setback on the march to equality.

While state rights are critical, it is important to note that states cannot provide the many federal benefits available to married couples. The Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), passed in 1996 and signed by former President Bill Clinton, defined marriage as "the legal union between one man and one woman." DOMA denies same-sex couples access to the more than 1,000 federal programs and legal protections that opposite-sex couples enjoy, and it asserts that no state is required to recognize a same-sex marriage performed in another state.

For many conservatives, DOMA is not enough. Terrified that the fight will come to the U.S. Supreme Court, and that a slim majority of justices might find laws denying equal marriage rights unconstitutional, the radical right has attempted to amend the U.S. Constitution. The Federal Marriage Amendment, introduced into Congress several times now, would write discrimination and bigotry into the Constitution and overrule any state action on behalf of equal marriage. The amendment has thus far failed to gain the required number of votes in the House and Senate.

Activists across the countey will continue to be in the streets until every state and the federal government stop discriminating against same-sex couples and recognize full marriage equality for all.

Why Not Civil Unions or Partnerships?

While the practice of granting civil unions or partnerships to same-sex couples at the state level has been an important advance in the fight for equality, these options do not carry the full legal benefits or the cultural significance of marriage. The substitution of civil unions, in fact, assigns same-sex couples to second-class status—separate and unequal.

Same-sex couples across the country are denied more than 1,000 federal protections and rights. Most states deny committed lesbian and gay couples hundreds of additional benefits. These federal and state rights range from the ability to file joint tax returns to the crucial responsibility of making decisions on a partner's behalf in a medical emergency.

The inability to marry has both emotional and financial consequences. Same-sex couples are not allowed to share Social Security, Medicare, Family and Medical Leave, health care, disability, military and other benefits. They cannot inherit 401(k)s and other property from their life partner without a will. According to Lambda Legal, same-sex couples can lose more than $10,000 per year upon retirement due to a lack of Social Security benefits that would be bestowed upon opposite-sex married couples in identical situations.

This discrimination also affects the children of same-sex couples. Lesbian and gay parents are unable to assume parenting rights and responsibilities when children are brought into a family through birth, adoption, surrogacy or other means. In most states, there is no law guaranteeing a non-custodial, biological or adoptive parent's visitation rights or requiring child support from such a parent.

With an argument this strong on behalf of equal marriage rights, the right wing has had to resort to absurd claims. The charge, repeated over and over again, that allowing lesbian and gay couples to wed will somehow tarnish the institution of marriage makes little sense. When many people hear the phrase "the institution of marriage" they think of unions sanctified by the church. However, the struggle for same-sex marriage is about legal rights—it does not demand that churches perform same-sex marriage ceremonies.

This right-wing propaganda also ignores the fact that many same-sex couples, a large number of them with children, already exist, and will continue to exist regardless of a constitutional amendment. Won't giving these families the rights and benefits they deserve make them stronger? And if more families are flourishing, isn't that good for marriage in general and our society as a whole?

The struggle for equal marriage rights is a feminist issue, because women will not be equal until they can pursue their dreams free from discrimination.

More information about NOW's work on lesbian rights and equal marriage is available online.