Today is my anniversary of a lot of
years. Decades, even. (I don’t do numbers; just words. But trust me, we were united a long time ago.) And a happy union it is.
But milestones like this cause one to
reflect on what it means to have such a strong connection to another that you
seek public validation of the relationship, an acknowledgement of it’s value to
We lived together before we made any
formal commitment. Our first formal commitment was buying a house together.
That legal document bound us more than a marriage certificate. It’s a bunch
easier to dissolve a marriage than to get out from under a 30-year, jointly-signed
The second commitment we made, though
not legal, was adopting two dogs. The third, a decision to have a baby. Now my
mother wasn’t so wild about that order. But we were happy in our choices.
Only then, when we pieced our lives
together, did we realize we wanted the paper work that accompanied what had
accumulated into a formal commitment. We wanted to live our lives
together--forever. It was pretty easy to make that happen.
But what if you love another and the
world tells you you cannot formalize
that love? What if the power majority get to decide the definition of “union”?
It certainly was true with the
miscegenation laws. Quotes from past decades stated that mixed-race marriage
would tear at the very fabric of what marriage means and society would go down
the toilet in a big flush.
Well, that didn’t happen, now did it? I read that if “society” had waited
to do away with miscegenation laws until “society” agreed with mixed race
marriages, it would have been in 1991 before the majority tilted to that
That just shows that sometimes laws to
right injustices are needed before the public perception changes.
We are in the same predicament now with
same-sex marriages. Who really believes that MY marriage is threatened in any
way by the marriage of any other couple? I mean, really, can you claim with a
straight face that a marriage performed by an Elvis impersonator is a holy
affair. That the “sanctity” of the institution is upheld. [No offense meant to
those unions, by the way. I’m just trying to
make a point that not everyone goes the walk-down-the-traditional-aisle route.]
The majority of Americans accept the
idea of equality marriages but many legislators continue to try to block it
Having said that, believing that people
who love should be allowed to formalize their relationship, let me say that I
don’t believe the government should get involved in “marriage” at all--for me,
for anybody else.
I cede “marriage” to the religious
groups to control. Let them marry who they want. Or deny it if that is their
But UNION, ah, that the government does, can, and should control. I
needed a license to “marry”. The government recognized the formality of the
document. Same could happen with unions. Let the government grant “union” licenses; if couples want to layer on “marriage”, find a
religious group to do so. Matters me no mind.
But the government, apparently, has to
step in to make things legal. So do it, Feds!