LGBT activists too focused on marriage, coalition says Larry Buhl, PlanetOut Network
Friday, July 28, 2006 / 01:06 PM
SUMMARY: A controversial statement endorsed by nearly 250 gay leaders and straight allies says the LGBT movement is too narrowly focused on marriage.
Literally minutes after the Washington Supreme Court upheld a ban on same-sex marriage, some equality advocates were nonplussed by the release of a statement endorsed by nearly 250 gay leaders and straight allies that said the LGBT movement is too narrowly focused on gay marriage.
The statement -- "Beyond Same-Sex Marriage: A New Strategic Vision for All Our Families & Relationships" -- offers "a new vision for securing governmental and private institutional recognition of diverse kinds of partnerships, households, kinship relationships and families."
The 25-page document released Wednesday suggests that same-sex marriage is diverting too many resources that could be used to fight for equality for others who have no plans to marry.
"Marriage is not the only worthy form of family or relationship and it should not be legally and economically privileged above all others," says the statement, which outlines central principles such as separation of church and state, access to health care and housing and freedom from state regulation of sexual lives, gender choices and identities and expressions.
The statement's authors assert that focusing on marriage equality as a standalone issue has "left us isolated and vulnerable to a virulent backlash."
Signatories include current and former leaders of national gay rights organizations such as the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force and GLAAD, along with novelist Armistead Maupin and straight figures such as scholar Cornel West, Ms. Magazine founder Gloria Steinem and essayist Barbara Ehrenreich.
The timing of the statement's release, coming on the heels of the Washington defeat and a nationwide marriage ad campaign, was coincidental, said Joseph DeFilippis, executive director of Queers for Economic Justice and a co-author of the statement. But DeFilippis suggested that a split in the community over gay marriage has been widening for years.
"A lot of people have told us, 'It's about time,' " DeFilippis said. "We support gay marriage as a matter of fairness and need to fight anti-gay initiatives.
"But when the debate is framed in terms of gay couples' rights, it ignores the complexities of how many gay people live and it denigrates and diminishes other kind of relationships that serve people well," DeFilippis said.
The document cited the U.S. Census' findings that a majority of Americans, not just gays, do not live in traditional nuclear families. It went on to say that single-parent households, senior citizens, blended and extended families, adult children caring for their parents, close friends or siblings living together and caregivers for those living with extended illness will all "be helped by separating basic forms of legal and economic recognition from the requirement of marital and conjugal relationship."
The statement did not single out any organizations as too marriage-focused, but it seemed to place national LGBT groups advocating for marriage equality in a slightly defensive posture.
"I found (the statement) a little strange, especially the term 'new strategic vision'," said Jon Davidson, legal director at Lambda Legal.
"Even organizations that do focus mostly on marriage say that marriage is not the only important thing, so I don't know exactly who the statement is talking about," Davidson said.
Davidson added that Lambda Legal did not disagree with the principles of the statement, and that, although marriage should be an option, "it represents a minority of the work that we're doing."
The Human Rights Campaign had a similar reaction. "We advocate on behalf of a lot of protections for LGBT people, such as hate crimes laws, domestic partner benefits and electing fair minded lawmakers," said Brad Luna, a spokesman for HRC. "If the coalition wants a broad discussion of the many kinds of rights that are important to the lives of LGBT people, we don't have a disagreement with that."
DiFilippis expressed skepticism. "I'm glad to hear national organizations saying they agree with us, but speaking for myself, I think some have driven the marriage issue and spent resources that dwarfs what's spent on other important issues such as domestic partnership and universal health care, and it would be disingenuous to say otherwise."
Since Wednesday, the number of signatories to beyondmarriage.org has doubled, indicating a groundswell of support for the idea of minimizing marriage to part of a wide array of gay rights, DiFilippis said. He added that the document also upset a lot of people.
Davidson downplayed the idea that the coalition will create a rift over marriage in the LGBT community. "I think the press attention is definitely focused disproportionately on marriage," he said, "but most organizations and many members of our community are not."
MCO 2006