Looking Forward, Looking Back
Kelly Thome (lay led)
UU Church of Wakefield
May 17, 2005

Do you remember where you were at the stroke of midnight that began May 17th, 2004?  It was a long time ago, I realize, and most of you probably were fast asleep.  On almost any other Sunday night I too would have gone to bed several hours earlier in preparation for a busy Monday morning.  However, I remember exactly where I was that night- glued to our television set watching the amazing scene unfolding in Cambridge, wishing I was there too.  Over ten thousand people gathered in joyous celebration as over 250 same-sex couples entered City Hall to apply for a marriage license.  There was a brass band playing, confetti and rice were tossed, champagne and cupcakes were served, and such an outpouring of love, happiness and excitement was in the air that even Mike and I, watching from home, could feel it.
 
I asked Jeff, someone I know via the internet blog dailyKos as a Massachusetts gay rights activist, what he remembered about that night.  He said: “That evening was easily one of the most significant events in my life.  I wish everyone could have been there.  It was in that evening that the connection we’re capable of- the love, joy and happiness- truly shined.  Whenever I feel down, I remember that night. The elderly father who came with his daughter and stood next to me cheering at the top of their lungs.  The straight married couples in front of me throwing rice at the couples as they left City Hall. The brass band playing over across the lawn, the singing.  I’m starting to get a little teary-eyed as I write this, it was so inspiring.”

May 17, as you by now remember, was the day that civil marriage equality became law in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.  For the first time in the United States, gay and lesbian couples were legally allowed to marry.  As we approach the first anniversary of that momentous day, it seems appropriate to look back: to celebrate the triumph of justice over fear and bigotry, to reflect on Unitarian Universalist contributions to the fight for marriage equality, and finally to remember that the battle is not yet over.

Quick now- do you remember the name of the court case?  I see heads nodding… Goodridge et al vs the Department of Public Health, that’s right.  Many of us are familiar with the names Hillary & Julie Goodridge. There are 6 other couples who also deserve recognition: Gary Chalmers & Richard Linnell. (you may remember Gary, he spoke at our church with Rep. Mike Festa last year). Ellen Wade & Maureen Brodoff. Linda Davies & Gloria Bailey. David Wilson & Robert Compton. Ed Balmelli & Michael Horgan. Heidi Norton & Gina Smith.  These are the 14 individuals [seven of whom are UU], the 7 couples who changed history.  Each tried to obtain a marriage license and was denied on the grounds that Massachusetts didn’t recognize a marriage between individuals of the same sex. Instead of saying “Oh well, we tried”, on April 11, 2001 they filed a lawsuit.  In their actions I am reminded of the Margaret Mead quote: “Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world; indeed it’s the only thing that ever has.”	

On November 18, 2003 the SJC ruled 4-3 that the state could not prohibit same-sex marriage.  I’d like to read the opening paragraph of the decision, it’s simple yet brilliant: 
Marriage is a vital social institution. The exclusive commitment of two individuals to each other nurtures love and mutual support; it brings stability to our society. For those who choose to marry, and for their children, marriage provides an abundance of legal, financial, and social benefits. In return it imposes weighty legal, financial, and social obligations. The question before us is whether, consistent with the Massachusetts Constitution, the Commonwealth may deny the protections, benefits, and obligations conferred by civil marriage to two individuals of the same sex who wish to marry. We conclude that it may not. The Massachusetts Constitution affirms the dignity and equality of all individuals. It forbids the creation of second-class citizens. In reaching our conclusion we have given full deference to the arguments made by the Commonwealth. But it has failed to identify any constitutionally adequate reason for denying civil marriage to same-sex couples.  

The SJC ruled that Massachusetts must begin issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples, and later clarified that Vermont-style civil unions would NOT satisfy their decision- only full equal marriage would.  Since this is a sermon and not a law school case history lecture I won’t detail the many emergency challenges to the ruling brought by a number of conservative Christian-affiliated groups between March and May.  Suffice it to say that each and every one failed.  Just as the US Supreme Court in 1967 (less than 40 years ago!) struck down the laws banning interracial marriage, the SJC upheld the right of two people to marry regardless of gender.  It’s important to note that the SJC ruling changed policy, not law- it merely clarified that the Constitution forbids discrimination. So much for activist judges, legislating from the bench.

Which brings us back to the marrying.  On May 17th, with much fanfare, the Goodridge’s were legally married at UUA headquarters- right next door to the MA State House- by the president of our denomination, the Rev. Bill Sinkford. 3 days later, the first day that couples who chose not to apply for a waiver of the waiting period could marry, 50 same-sex couples did just that at the Arlington Street Church- including the Senior Minister Rev. Kim Crawford Harvie.  The last words at each ceremony were “By the power invested in me by the UUA and the Commonwealth of Massachusetts I pronounce you legally married”.  Among us, John Bumstead and Peter Stickel, and Beth Toolan and Kathryn Baptista, were married.  Our current minister Rev. Holly Baylies officiated at the first church wedding on the north shore at the Saugus church on May 17. Press coverage of the first wave of marriages observed that nearly all performed in a religious setting were in UU churches.

Here’s where I’m supposed to relate to you my own marriage story.  A stirring tale of the atheist and the mostly lapsed Catholic who married in a Catholic ceremony so as not to give the mother of the bride a stroke.  But, the difficulties of this couple marrying Catholic is a story for another Sunday.  I’ve only been married once and plan on keeping it that way, to someone of the opposite sex. The kind of marriage the Religious and Political Right goes out of its way to protect.  More on that in a minute.  So I enlisted the help of others by asking them “what’s it been like to get married, or to perform weddings?  Has it been what you expected?  Any observations?”  I’d like to share with you some of what they said…

From Holly, our minister: 
Since May 17th I‘ve performed 5 gay/lesbian weddings with another one coming up in May. I’ve only done 1 hetero wedding since then.  I find the gay weddings so much more sincere and thought out, minus all the glitz and pomp. Most of the couples have been together for a long time and some have children. The longest was 18 years before the law allowed a true wedding, There is much less for me to do as they have been through all the ups and downs and are sure of their relationship by that time. There ceremonies are shorter and simpler and cut to chase of what is real and important to them. Sadly, though often only one set of parents are there if any. When both sets lend their blessing it is a real celebration, These couples really treasure the ceremony and take very seriously the vows as they know they are life partners. Their joy is so refreshing to experience. I must say that hetero couples, particularly young ones, are so caught up in all the pomp and ceremony that they tend to lose sight of why they’re really there!

From my work colleague Lou: 
Pat and I have been together for so long that in our day to day lives, nothing has changed.  We still mow the lawn, and take out the trash, and cook breakfast just like we did before. And we don’t have the kind of families that would cause problems, if either of us were to pass away.  But, it’s different mentally.  We are legally recognized as a couple no different from anyone else, equal.

My family was invited to the June 18 wedding of friends Karen and Sue, a date my daughter Ali still believes was chosen because it was her birthday. It was one of the most moving events I’ve ever been to. I cried when the JP pronounced them “legally married”, because I witnessed something that neither of them believed would ever be possible.  They are glad they got married, even though they still must carry a folder of paperwork every time they travel out of state, since their marriage is not recognized outside MA.

UUs have been important in the fight for marriage equality. For us, it’s spelled out in our Principles, most notably- to me at least- in the First: “We affirm and promote the inherent worth and dignity of every person.” For us, it is a moral affront that some relationships are treated as inferior or not as valid as other relationships.  It is as much a religious issue for us as the Religious Right says it is for them.  Our commitment to justice for all is not a modern development; no, it goes back the entire span of our history in the United States. Our 19th century Unitarian and Universalist forbears preached a belief of inclusiveness, not the harsh exclusiveness of other denominations at the time.  Gee, apparently we’ve been the Religious Left for a long time now.  This liberal, inclusive theology led Unitarians and Universalists to participate in and champion many of the great social justice movements of the last two centuries.  Among our ranks are abolitionists and women’s suffragists, crusaders for prison reform, public education, appropriate physical and mental health care, and most recently civil rights’ activists.

Official Unitarian Universalist advocacy for bisexual, gay, lesbian and transgender rights goes back nearly 35 years, to a 1970 General Assembly Resolution to end discrimination against homosexuals and bisexuals. At the 1977 GA UUs were encouraged to fight negative propaganda against gays.  In 1984- that’s 20 years ago- a Resolution passed affirming the practice of UU clergy performing Services of Union for same-sex couples and to develop materials to assist clergy in the process.  Think about it- if a resolution passed in 1984, then there must have been commitment ceremonies going on before then (you know how long it takes to get a Resolution passed!  In 1999, then President John Buehrens wrote to Vermont Governor Howard Dean after the Vermont Supreme Court ruled that same-sex couples must have access to the same benefits as opposite-sex couples.

One quote: “I know that it is now up to the Vermont legislature to decide how to implement the court's ruling, and I understand the discomfort you have expressed with the notion of same-sex marriages. Allow me to question, however, on spiritual grounds, whether a domestic partnership system would be sufficient to secure for gay couples real equality. As our nation learned during its long struggle to secure civil rights for its African-American citizens, separate but equal is never truly equal at all.”  As we know, VT implemented Civil Unions instead of full marriage equality, but it was a start, and more than many people had dared hope for.

On February 3 2003, Littleton UU minister Fred Small, inspired by the actions of several other UU ministers, announced to his congregation that as a matter of conscience, until he could sign marriage licenses for all couples he would sign them for none.  He would perform the wedding ceremonies, but a JP would be required to sign the legal paperwork.  Soon many other UU (and other) clergy, including Rev. Sinkford, declared that they would do the same.  In fact, the Goodridge marriage on May 17th was the first legal wedding President Sinkford had performed in over a year. I was inspired by such a public action from so many clergy. To me, it was a clear sign of faith in action, of not just talking the talk in a couple of sermons.  I also was moved by those individuals most affected by these boycotts- heterosexual couples with marriages scheduled to be performed by these clergy. In all my looking, I could not find a single account of a straight engaged couple not supporting their minister’s decision.

Now that same-sex marriage has been legal for a year, have any of the dire predictions made by the other side- you know, the folks who want to protect marriage by denying it to an entire group of people- come to pass?  Let’s take a moment and check:
“They are not simply working for same-sex marriages, but for a complete transformation of our society to include multiple partners and sex with children”. 

Yes, I actually read that on one of those “Traditional Values” websites. Actually, the children marriage equality supporters are concerned about are the ones whose family structure will be strengthened and legitimized.  The 2000 MA state census found 8000 children being raised by gay parents.  Allowing same-sex marriage will undermine traditional marriage. Now, all of you whose own marriage got shaky once Beth and Kathryn and John and Peter got married please raise your hands. Anyone? As a friend of mine said, “I think the fact that my B-I-L and his girlfriend can be domestic partners is a bigger threat to the institution of marriage than any loving same-sex couple could be”.  Don’t even get me started on Britney Spears. Next up: We have to protect the children”.  Ah yes, back with the children again.  Would denying parents the right to demonstrate a stable family structure to their children protect them? Must be like how they’re protecting the children in Texas, where recent legislation will prohibit gay and bisexual people from becoming foster parents, and give the state the right to investigate the background of current foster parents and remove children from non-straight households.

Face it- the Chicken Littles have been proven wrong- the sky did not fall and life continues just as it did on May 16 of last year.  Clergy have not been forced against their will to perform same-sex marriages.  Fire and brimstone have not rained down upon our state- although we did get lots of snow.  We weren’t decimated by hurricanes or locusts.  Heterosexual marriages have not fallen apart, no one’s been “turned gay” by the lesbians next door, and the dogs, turtles and sheep of the Commonwealth are safe. People unsure about the idea of same-sex couples are discovering that, like my friend Lou and her wife, we’re all the same.  Allowing others into the marriage party doesn’t ruin it for everyone, it makes it that much better instead.

However- the news isn’t all good. 11 states passed so-called “Marriage Protection Acts” last November, using Massachusetts as fuel for the fires of intolerance.  Children nationwide were denied the opportunity to learn how maple syrup is made because the episode of the PBS program “Postcards from Buster” featured a VT family with-GASP- two moms.  Just last week, a Lexington man was arrested for refusing to leave his child’s school.  He was upset that his child had been given books about foreign cultures and traditions, because included was a copy of ''Who's In a Family?" by Robert Skutch- which depicts different kinds of families, including same-sex couples raising children.  The father claims he doesn’t hate anyone, and isn’t intolerant, he just doesn’t want his child to learn about “adult themes”- apparently families different than his owwn are adult themes.  As Holly said to me recently, “Old prejudices die hard”. 

A 1913 law originally written to prevent out-of-state interracial couples from marrying here is still on books and being used to deny marriage licenses to out-of-state same-sex couples.  Hopefully, current judicial and legislative approaches to rescind this law will be successful.   This fall, another session of the state Constitutional Convention will convene to vote on whether to send a proposed DOMA to voters in 2006.  After the November elections and the departure of House Speaker Tom Finneran its passage is less certain, but we should expect a concerted propaganda effort by the other side. Even tomorrow, the SJC will consider a bid by the director of the Catholic Action League to halt same-sex marriages until “after residents vote on an amendment.”  He claims the ongoing marriages “stifle full debate”.  I think he’s got it backward, and I hope the SJC does too. 

There is still a lot of work for us to do. But some of the work can be fun, too!  I invite each and every one of you to join with me and hundreds of other area Unitarian Universalists on Saturday, June 11 to participate in the annual Boston Gay Pride Parade.  There will be a service beforehand at the Arlington Street Church- it’s always fantastic, one of the best and most moving services I’ve ever experienced.  This year promises to be even better.  Then we’ll march together in our new rainbow of T-shirts along the parade route, literally “walking the walk”.  This will be the 5th year that my family has participated in the Parade- Mike and Ali are even featured on the parade’s website.  Ali doesn’t remember ever NOT marching, and would love to have lots of friends there.

I’d like to end with a quote from my internet friend Jeff: “Look at what we have on our side versus what they have.  We have the power of love.”  May the power of love win out over the power of fear.