In 1896 the United States Supreme Court heard the case of Plessy v. Ferguson and upheld, by all but one vote, the constitutionality of a state law requiring racial segregation in public facilities under the principle of “separate but equal.” For a country only decades removed from the abolition of slavery, the catalyst for the bloodiest war in our nation’s history, “separate but equal” seemed like a logical, safe, and conservative step in the right direction after slavery, even if it was a retreat from full equality. The Supreme Court made clear with its decisive ruling, that the country was not ready to embrace people with a different skin color as equal citizens. However, with the hindsight of history, it is clear that “separate but equal” prolonged discrimination by providing a supporting rationale, rather than aiding progress toward full equality.
This week, our nation had its eyes and ears fixed on the Supreme Court as it was once again faced with determining whether full equality should be granted to a particular segment of our population. The legality of gay men and women to marry their respective partners was up for debate, as the court heard arguments about Proposition 8 banning gay marriage in California, and the Defense of Marriage Act, which bars Federal recognition of these unions. As I followed these events, I kept thinking to myself about how hypocritical the entire debate seems.
Part of American identity is to serve as a beacon of light for equality in a world constrained by many inequitable societies. We are the land of opportunity, where it does not matter who you are or what your background is in order to belong. You will always get an equal shot so long as you play by the rules. It is the American dream that makes America unique and great. However, the more I watched the coverage from this week, read the transcripts from the court hearings and listened to countless people’s opinions, this idea that America is blessed with unconditional egalitarianism seems more like a talking point than the truth.
Gay people in our country are not treated as equal as their straight counterparts. In order for them to have the exact same rights as everyone else in this country and to be able to realize the same American dream everyone else has access to, they must be allowed to marry one another. The excuse that a civil union should be “good enough,” or is at least a step in the right direction is analogous to the idea of the “separate but equal” decision of Plessy v. Ferguson from over a century ago.
Congressman Rob Portman, R-Ohio, changed his views on same-sex marriage after learning his son is gay. Once Portman realized that gay rights were basic human rights, he could not longer justify the inequality in a separate-but-equal approach.
The value placed on equality is reflected in the growing diversity of the Supreme
Court, on which justices who are African American, female, Catholic, Jewish, Hispanic, Italian and Irish now serve. The justices who come from ethnicities or genders previously underrepresented have benefitted from court decisions aimed at making a more equal society. In addition, they face no discrimination in their personal lives from being married, being married to someone of a different race, being single, childless, or being adoptive parents. While gay Americans may, in theory, face no legal discrimination in their achievements as individuals, they are still denied the dream of equality in their personal relationships.
My favorite protest sign for same-sex marriage held up outside the Supreme Court from this past week read, “Let me have the right to be miserable with my husband as
well!” After all, gay people seeking to marry one another are not trying to upset the fabric of traditional marriage, take our country down a satanic path or indoctrinate the youth. At the end of the day, they just want the equal opportunity to be allowed to marry the person they love, for better or for worse.
Please send all feedback to opinion@dailycardinal.com.
