He is an unlikely hero. A 36 year old newly married man – a good Jesuit
educated Irish-Catholic: the son of a state judge who grew up, left home
and made his own way as a restauranteur. Then, 2 months ago this man took
office as San Francisco's newly elected mayor and 6 weeks later Gavin Newsom
made national headlines. On February 12, after returning from President
Bush's State of the Union address, he ordered the city clerk to start issuing
marriage licenses to same-sex couples.
What set Gavin Newsom on a path toward civil disobedience? Something in him shifted in the aftermath of our President's State of the Union Address. He says hearing the President talk about preserving the sanctity of marriage, possibly with a constitutional amendment that would limit marriage to include only a man and a woman sickened him: "I had just taken an oath of office not to allow discrimination. And it was pretty clear what my obligations were." Somehow Bush's words reached into Newsom's soul and touched his understanding of justice. This sense of justice shook him so deeply that he mustered tremendous political courage – choosing not to fight the issue through the courts as had been done in Massachusetts, but rather to start issuing marriage licenses to all couples immediately. He wanted to end the discrimination taking place in his city right now. Before the chance was lost, he took his opportunity.
People were shocked. Amazed . . . as couples in relationships, some spanning more than 50 years finally had their commitment to each other made public, legal and binding with the civil contract of marriage. Some were disgusted and angry. Randy Thomasson of the Campaign for California Families said, "There are millions of Americans angry and disgusted by what they are seeing on TV, two brides, two grooms, but not a man and a woman. . . . This is the new civil war in America." Others were inspired. County Clerks in New Mexico, New York and Oregon followed San Francisco and began issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples.
These actions to end injustice, this call for equality, the display of love and commitment, frightens our President – the leader of the "free" world. His notions of the sacred covenant of marriage are limited to marriages that look like his: a man and a woman. What is he afraid of? What changes about his marriage if P.D. and Rick are allowed to be legally married in this country? If the former minister of this congregation, Lynn and her partner Kelsey, are allowed to marry? What is so scary about that?
It is different from the majority of marriages, to be sure: but only because the people involved have the same sexual equipment. So I wonder what changes in society if lifelong commitments to love, honor and cherish each other are made public for same-gendered people? One thing that changes - there is more love. Personally I think that is a good thing.
But the fear around this issue is real. It is alive even in this church.
The call for same sex marriage forces us to realize that marriage is a changing
institution. Marriage in the Bible meant something different for those societies
than for ours. I suspect over the course of each generation the meaning
of marriage changes. In the last generation, pregnancy became something
we could pretty accurately control, and so marriage became not the commencement
of a sexual life, but rather a narrowing of choices to one single person
with which to commit and build a life. This has dramatically shifted the
meaning of marriage – transforming it from a relationship about bearing
children to a relationship of personal commitment. We are still synthesizing
what this means for the nature of marriage. In many ways this change is
what fuels the confusion some feel when they encounter the question: should
same sex couples be able to marry? But the answer to that question also
has a lot to do with how some folks feel about homosexuality.
Some people feel unsettled about same sex marriage, "I want people to have the same access to the rights I have, but I don't know if I'd call it marriage." "Maybe there is another name." Let me confess something to you – these are thoughts I've had. Of course I wanted everyone to be able to have the same rights, but it gave me an unsettled feeling to call it marriage, I wanted to call it something else. The name of that unsettled feeling is prejudice. Prejudice that was taught to me and to all of you for generations by a society that was afraid of people who were different from the "majority." And so society has sought to control people by denying rights and access to privileges.
Some people I know think that a separate set of laws is required for same-sex couples. That we should establish civil unions in order to offer "equitable civil rights" to same sex couples. I thought about it. Creating a separate legal code and form of relationship just for same sex couples smack of segregation: you can ride in the bus, just be sure you get in the back. Or, we don't want them in our school, but we'll build the same thing two streets over and "they" can use that. You know: separate but equal.
Separate but equal does not stand. Such ideas and laws are only just if they apply to each kind of couple: throw open the doors to marriage for same sex couples and offer both opposite sex and same sex couples the chance for civil union. Sure. But what a waste of legislative energy. Civil Unions are not being created for heterosexual people. These laws are being developed with the specific intent to deny equal access to marriage to a particular group of people. This is wrong and immoral.
Yet, if you feel this way or have felt this way you are not alone. According to polls 77% of people in this nation think that same-sex marriage is wrong. This is the result of traditional assumptions and deeply held prejudices. To comfort us in our prejudice some say they base their ideas on the word of God, their faith and the teachings of the church.
Many in our nation turn to the Bible to support their ideas about same-sex
marriage. They base their entire argument on 2 short bible verses found
in Leviticus: which is the book that contains the Old Testament Holiness
Code – a religious code not a moral one.
Chapter 18:22 You shall not lie with a male as with a woman, it is an abomination.
Chapter 20:13 If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have
committed an abomination; they shall be put to death. That is it. Hundreds
of pages of text and 2 short verses on the subject. Jesus does not mention
homosexuality. The problem with picking and choosing texts in the Bible
is that it depends on where you look.
In First and Second Samuel there are these passages. First Samuel 18:1-4
The soul of Jonathan was knit with the soul of David, and Jonathan loved
him as his own soul. Jonathan and David made a covenant because he (Jonathan)
loved him as his own soul. And Jonathan stripped himself of the robe that
was upon him, and gave it to David, and his garments, even his sword, and
to his bow and to his girdle.
1 Samuel 19:2 Jonathan Saul's son, delighted much in David. 1 Samuel 20:4
Then said Jonathan unto David, Whatsoever thy soul desireth, I will even
do for thee. Then in 2 Samuel 1:26 Thy love to me was wonderful, passing
the love of women. 1Samuel 20:41. . . they kissed one another, and wept
with one another, until David exceeded.
If you want to sexualize the Bible there is plenty of opportunity.
The point of the Leviticus chapter was to stop Baal worship and turn the people toward a new, monotheistic faith. One of the aspects of Baal worship was same-gender sex. So there you have it. But all that was a long time ago. And here we are today, not overly concerned about Baal worship – I'll bet most of our same-sex couples don't even know about this ancient faith. My point is that the Bible is a wonderful document. But it is mined for things that affirm the way we believe and how our society is at this point in time.
With the Bible being used as a weapon by some, this is no time for us, as people of faith, to be timid or meek. It is no time for us to speak quietly – gently trying to influence people to see the light. We need to speak boldly so that the leaders we have who are risking much to lead this charge to change our society know that people of faith stand with them. So they know loving God and country can mean wanting same-gendered people to be able to marry.
What the Massachusetts Supreme Court and Mayor Newsom have opened up for us as a nation is a moment in time. Such a moment might not come again for a very long while. This is a moment when it might be possible to right a long-standing wrong: for public officials to bear witness to this injustice and take action to end this institutional discrimination against a group of people whose only crime is that they love each other, whose only desire is to have the same rights as straight people.
What are people afraid of? Are they afraid their marriage will mean less if 2 men or 2 women are able to marry. Somehow their relationship might become less valuable or sacred? I submit to you that it is straight people like me whose relationships are made less in the sight of God because we are living with a privilege not extended to every citizen of our nation. It is like eating at a banquet while some unjustly go hungry, though there is plenty of food to share.
So this is a moment in time to put our faith into action – to set aside the chains of our fears if we have them, and look with courage toward justice. Civil marriage is a civil right. The laws of our land should not deny consenting adults access to marriage.
The sacrament of marriage is a ritual of the church, and as such it is up to the church to sanctify only unions that reflect their religious understanding. In this church, for some 30 years we have been sanctifying same-sex partnerships in holy union. I am denied the right to officiate over a marriage ceremony for same-sex couples because it is a felony in this state to officiate at a marriage ceremony without a legal license. Whenever I declare a same-sex couple married I always have to do so with the caveat that this marriage is not legal in the eyes of the state, but remind the couple that this church community welcomes them into their midst. Why should a sacrament of the church have to be politicized in such a way? These are citizens of our nation who supposedly have equal standing. They pay taxes, teach in our schools, serve in our military, protect our communities, heal our sick. They also fall in love and want to commit their lives to one another just like I do.
All it takes to get married is a photo ID, a birth certificate and some cash. Unless the person you love is the same sex as you. Then your rights to civil marriage are denied. Your love crumbles to dust at the doors of the County Clerk's office and you are denied your license, the ability to legitimize your relationship with a legal covenant. Denied the rights afforded to spouses in our society.
Our President says, "After more that 2 centuries of American jurisprudence, and millennia of human experience, a few judges and local authorities are presuming to change the most fundamental institution of civilization. . . . the union of a man and a woman is the most enduring human institution, honoring – honored and encouraged in all cultures and by every religious faith."
Yes, Mr. President, but our faith has something more to say. This religious faith calls us to celebrate the equitable, respectful, reverent and honest human love that can rise up between 2 adult people. Our Universalist tradition teaches us that God's love is so large that all are saved. Our Universalist tradition points us toward a response to same-sex love: we affirm that love.
Discriminating against same gender couples shows contempt for human love. It is destructive of love, limiting of love, not affirming of it.
Our President has called upon our congress "to promptly pass, and to send to the states for ratification, an amendment to our Constitution defining and protecting marriage as a union of a man and a woman as husband and wife."
To this we say no!
As Unitarian Universalists it is clear that this is wrong. Our principles call us to affirm the inherent worth and dignity of each person, and to call for justice, equity and compassion in human relations. And therefore, one of the ways we live out our faith is by supporting the rights of lesbian, gay, bisexual and trans-gendered people. To live out this commitment, ministers of this church have been joining couples in holy union for over 30 years. Beyond that, this church has led the charge within our denomination on these issues. And we have committed to transform our own church community and be active around issues of Lesbian, Gay Bisexual and Trans-gendered rights.
At a congregational meeting in May of 1997, after a year of conversation and congregational study, reflection, work and transformation, we completed a church-wide program sponsored by our denomination, to become a Welcoming Congregation. To complete this program we had to commit to many actions, two of which were: to celebrate and affirm gay, lesbian, bisexual, and trans-gendered issues and history during the church year and secondly, to participate in and/or support efforts to create justice, freedom and equality for lesbian, gay, bisexual, and trans-gendered people in the larger society.
As an Association, Unitarian Universalism was one of the first denominations to ordain gay and lesbian clergy, and to condemn discrimination of ministers based on sexual orientation. In 1984 our Association, in a vote by our General Assembly, made public its support of gay and lesbian unions. Then again, in 1987, the delegates voted to support legal equity for gays and lesbians. And finally, in 1996, the General Assembly voted overwhelmingly to call for the legalization of same sex marriage. Second Unitarian Church, our church, has been a leader in all of these efforts of our national body. We have unity where all other denominations have fracture and divisiveness.
I must confess, I used to think the public witness of our General Assembly was a waste of time. So what if 4000 religious liberals vote on some justice issue? What does it matter? It matters because that action helps our churches be able to speak in a timely manner when the issues we have deliberated and approved at the General Assembly become current in civic affairs. I am grateful for the Assembly, and our congregation's work there, to be able to speak not just for our church but for the whole of Unitarian Universalism when I speak to our leaders and to the media on this issue.
It is acts of courage by Unitarian Universalists that began to create this opportunity to see justice done. On April 11, 2001 7 gay and lesbian couples in Massachusetts – half of whom were Unitarian Universalist – brought suit in Suffolk, MA. This is the case that prompted the Massachusetts Supreme Court to rule in favor of the constitutional right to same-sex marriage. This is the case that created Mayor Newson's opportunity to witness to equality under the law. This is the case that created a moment in time to act to seize the right to marry for all Americans.
We Unitarian Universalists have done the work, and we here in our church have done the work and made clear our intentions. In a congregational vote 6 years ago we claimed our voice, and now we are called to speak out. We have searched our hearts, and though we might feel anxious, we are called to lead.
Someone asked me what was the rush? Why do we need this banner right now? Because time is of the essence. Our elected officials need to hear our cry for equal access to the law. Our County Clerk, our Governor and our legislature need to know that people of faith do in fact support civil marriage for same sex couples.
With great political courage some of our elected and government officials are acting to bring justice to light on this issue. Our mayor supports this call. Alderman Mell supports this call. And here with us today, our own representatives: State Representative Sara Feigenholtz and County Commissioner Mike Quigley support our call – indeed have already made this call to their colleagues. We need to let them know that people of faith stand with them. We need them to feel our support in a public way.
As people of faith we must offer our witness and support that they might renew their courage and continue to fight for change in our society. These brave officials need to know we support them, because I can assure you they are hearing from the other side.
When I approached the Board to fund the banner we are unfurling this morning
some people wanted the language to not be as strong – perhaps if we
veiled our message in poetic language people might not know exactly what
we mean, exactly where we stand. I understand the impulse. How many times
have you been in a conversation and someone said something you profoundly
disagreed with – perhaps it was a racial slur, or a joke about gay
men, or some derogatory statement about fundamentalist believers –
and you said
nothing. It takes courage to speak boldly what you believe.
There is a long proud history of this congregation's commitment to equal rights for gay, lesbian, bisexual and trans-gendered people. And it is this history that allows is to act decisively. Our position in this community and as a denomination calls is to take up the lead – to gather together other people of faith to support our civic leaders as they fight for equal rights to marriage for all adults in this nation.
For 30 years the minister of our church has been joining same sex couples
and 6 years ago this congregation voted to become a Welcoming Congregation
– a religious home intentionally welcoming and equally affirming of
all people regardless of sexual orientation. That designation is reflected
in the sign in front of our building: "Second Unitarian Church: a Welcoming
Congregation." This proclaims to the world that this place is a place
of welcome and action around issues of sexual orientation. Our commitment
to this designation is spoken each week from this pulpit:
"Here at 2U we strive to be a warm and welcoming community where all
who come with open minds and kind hearts are embraced. People of all ages
worship together here, and we honor the richness that diversity brings to
our community including differences of theology, race, and sexual orientation."
We say it each week to one another. Now we are called to say it to the world. Recent events call us to this action. Our religious values are not merely warm words of welcome, meant to make people who come here feel good. Our values are gritty and demanding. They call us to witness – not just to each other, in the safety of this holy sanctuary in some feel-good navel-gazing endeavor of self-satisfaction. To bear witness to our faith, the city needs to know where we stand.
And so today, we unfurl a banner proclaiming the shared values of our faith
for all to see:
Second Unitarian Church Affirms Same Sex Marriage.
It has been 12 days since the President made his stand. Today we make ours.