All of the people I know of in relationship-type minority groups who oppose marriage for their group do so because they think marriage itself is flawed – either that it is an active evil, that having state recognition of relationships is wrong, the whole thing should be abolished, or some such. (Personally, I find most of these just among the variety of positions that people can hold, aside from “it’s a religious thing”, which, as it is based on a false premise, is ignorance to be fought.)
It’s similar to the fact that atheist libertarians are against taxing churches. They don’t support churches, they just oppose taxes.
Uncommon Sense’s GD Thread from 7/2004: Are there any members of the gay community that are opposed to legalizing marriage?
It sounds as if he believes in gay marriage, but doesn’t believe it is politically feasable at this time, which is why he would rather push for civil unions at this time(as you said at the end of your post). Would there be a reason for a gay person to object to gay marriage if it were politically possible to pass such a measure?
Might be, as other posters have said. I was merely reporting the position of the one gay person I know who isn’t for gay marriage right now.
It sounds like he IS for gay marriage, he just isn’t for pushing for it.
Most gay people would take Civil Unions in a heartbeat, by the way, but many states are scrambling as fast as they can to take even that off the table.
I have myself heard arguments from some (few) gays, and some ostensibly gender-issues-liberal non-gays, along the lines of those reported by SolGrundy.
Sol’s first bullet I’ve heard from a few people espousing some sort of “gay culture” separatism not unlike ethnoracial “identity politics” in which there is concern that an integrationist approach vis-a-vis social acceptance would lead to assimilation on the area of core values (and an eventual situation of married, “respectable” gays siding with straights in making life tough on the “demimonde” – but that’s gonna happen anyway IMO).
The second and fourth one I’ve also heard, being really variations-on-a-theme (that monogamous marriage is no longer the answer in our “more enlightened” age) – I actually did hear on the radio a couple of years ago a prominent local gadfly-type loudly bemoaning how gays can be seeking marriage, thus perpetuating this bourgeouis institution, and wondering where had the ideals of Free Love gone (My question: wait a minute, hon, are you saying that in Lovetopia, I will NOT be free to choose to enter a contract?).
And there are of course those who, as mentioned, are of the school of “You fools! You’re going too fast! You’re gonna bring down the backlash on all of us!”. But every movement has had that component, it’s not the same as being opposed to it on principle.
There are heterosexuals opposed to marriage. Why wouldn’t there be homosexuals as well? There are people who don’t see pair bonding as the best way to structure realationships…or society. So I would imagine they would be against homosexuals going down the same misguided path as heterosexuals before them. Makes sense to me.
(Although I would hope advocating for their particualr political position would not cause them to actively oppose the decisions of pair-bonding minded homosexuals being free to live as they want. I have the same hope for people opposed to homosexual marriage for other reasons, usually to no avail.)
I think that the issue here is that the battle has been taken to the gay community, by and large.
Previously, while gay folks had been battling for civil unions for quite some time, it was a backburner issue on the national consciousness, just like any issue that directly impacts only 5-10% of the population.
Then the Massachusetts Supreme Court cranked up the gas on this particular burner, with their decision to legalize it in 2003. (Note to self: metaphors lately have not been sufficiently tortured. Work on it.)
And conservative religious demagogues seized upon “gay marriage” as the latest Threat To The Republic, and hammered the electorate with it up to Election Day 2004 and beyond.
So I submit that like any issue, opinions on gay marriage within the gay community probably run a wide spectrum, from vehemently oppose to vehemently support. (See Mr Moto’s coworker.)
However, the current political climate cannot support any shading, any nuance, any well-reasoned opposition; it only allows for a binary FOR/AGAINST sentiment. All subtlety must be tossed aside, lest the battle be lost. Hence the OP’s confusion–the phenomenon of gay people opposed to gay marriage has to be viewed in the current political context, lest your head explode from the seeming contradictions.
Is this the part where I say I’m not gay? I couldn’t figure out where else I could insert that little factoid, although I’m not sure why I feel compelled to do so in the first place.