Editorial: Gays, marriage and inalienable rights

We’ve wondered at times about the newspaper editorial board deliberations of old. Did they equivocate in the 1850s on the horror of slavery? Did they anguish a century ago when women demanded the right to vote? Did they falter in the 1960s when the great debate over racial equality took place?

“To sin by silence when they should protest,” Abraham Lincoln said, “makes cowards of men.”

All of those movements had at their base the cause of human dignity. No one questions any more which side in those debates was right. No one questions that. The side of human dignity was right. The side of full citizenship was right. In every case.

Much like the gay rights debate of today.

Oh, how we have wondered about those deliberations. Particularly as recent lawsuits against gay marriage bans have stoked the issue, how we have wondered. And perhaps, if we are honest with ourselves, how we have equivocated, anguished, faltered, how we have remained silent for too long.

We believe that if a committed gay couple wants to marry, they should be allowed to marry. And that marriage should be recognized by the state.

The treatment of gays, by society and by law, has improved markedly in recent years. There has been much progress. And many, although not all, protections for gay couples have been provided by Illinois’ civil union legislation.

But the reality is, civil union status is unequal status. Unless gay couples are allowed to marry, they always will be relegated to second-class citizenship, and that is not right. That is not just.

In saying that, we recognize the strong feelings on this subject by people of good will. We respect religious views on the matter and some intellectual arguments on behalf of what is called the traditional family. We do not necessarily diminish or discount many of the counter perspectives.

In the final analysis, however, we are not persuaded that gay marriage somehow undermines traditional marriage. It seems to us that committed and loving relationships create the foundations for successful marriages and families that stay together through good times and bad.

We could talk about all of that and more, and much of it is worth talking about, but fundamentally, it is beside the point.

That fundamental point is this: It’s not government’s job to decide whether gay marriage is a good or bad institution. No more, say, than it is government’s job to legislate a family dinner hour on the wise advice that it strengthens the bonds of family.

Government’s job is to get out of the home on these matters, to allow people their freedom, to worry about other things.

This week, we mark the 236th anniversary of the signing of the Declaration of Independence, an eloquent document that proclaimed, “We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”

We believe that loving freedom means respecting the freedom of others to decide for themselves how best to pursue that happiness.

Fifty years from now, people will look back at today’s debate over gay marriage and agree.

(That’s our view. We encourage you to add your voice and your reaction by clicking on the Comments widget and providing your response to this editorial. If you care to have comments published in our Letters columns, write a response of no more than 300 words, include your full name, phone number (not for publication) and hometown, then send it to fencepost@dailyherald.com. In all forums, let’s have a provocative discussion but one that also abides by general rules of respect and civility.)