Gay Marriage

The proponents of same-sex marriage should learn from the decades-long abortion fight and change tactics.

During the early 1970s, legalized abortion was gaining acceptance. New York and Florida had already legalized it. Other states were considering it. It was well accepted that a teen-age girl who suddenly visited an "aunt in New York" had an abortion. Abortion clinics actually had billboards on other states. There was no organized opposition to this (at least none that I was aware of as a teenager). Then the Supreme Court declared that abortion was legal everywhere. After that the abortion protesters organized and this has become one of the most divisive issues in American politics since slavery. For at least 30 years the primary consideration for Supreme Court nominees was how they would vote if the court ever reheard the case. Bork was "Borked" out of fear that he would intellectually bully the rest of the court into rejecting Roe v Wade.

In the 1990s, the same-sex marriage movement resembled the pro-abortion movement of the 1960s. The movement was making gains based on issues of fundamental fairness. The most common tactic was a compromise - civil partnerships which had all of the legal benefits of marriage. Few people objected to this and the ones who did looked mean.

Then the leaders of the movement made two decisions. The first was that civil partnerships were second-class and unacceptable. They would accept full marriage or nothing. The second decision was to start going around the electorate through the courts, essentially forcing gay marriage on the populous.

There were some initial victories but this new tactic caused opposition to form. It was no longer an issue of fairness, it was an alteration of a fundamental institution. This battle continues with the court decision striking down Proposition 8 which banned same-sex marriage.

For a contrast, look at the UK which has allowed civil partnerships for some time. Society did not fall. People got used to the idea. Earlier this year the UK began allowing full marriages. Even granting that England is a more liberal country, the contrast is enormous.

Had the activists in the 1990s gone for the incremental approach, there is a good chance that the US would be ready for full gay marriage by now. Instead the movement is mired in a state-by-state fight with the majority of nearly every state against it.

There have been casualties along the way. Ohio passed a constitutional amendment that not only outlawed same sex marriage, it also outlawed civil partnerships. Unless the Supreme Court does another Roe v Wade and overrides the states, it will be exceedingly difficult to recognize any legal gay partnerships in Ohio.

All of this is a shame. The activists need to back off and return to an incremental approach. It may be frustrating to them but it is more likely to produce results. Had they stuck to that strategy in the 1990s then their cause would be much further alone today. So far the all-or-nothing approach they have pursued has produced nothing (or short victories followed by defeats).