# Should the NY Times publish accounts of same-sex unions? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [August 20, 2002, 11:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-ny-times-publish-accounts-of-same-sex-unions/124724 "2002-08-20T11:56:34Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![december](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/838e76/32.png) [@december](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/december)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2002, 11:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-ny-times-publish-accounts-of-same-sex-unions/124724/1 "2002-08-20T11:56:34Z")
Argumant in favor: > [@](#): > > heralded as historic, courageous and a “watershed moment” by Joan M. Garry of the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD), a media monitoring group that has already begun a yearlong “Equality Project” to promote the idea elsewhere in the press. > “It’s simply a matter of fairness and accurate representation of important events,” Ms. Garry said, noting that 71 newspapers — including the Washington Post, the Chicago Tribune and the Miami Herald — already publish same-sex announcements. The group posts the complete list at its Web site ( [ww.glaad.org](http://ww.glaad.org) ). Argument against > [@](#): > > We disagree with the New York Times because it is serving a radical social political agenda," said Peter Sprigg of the Family Research Council. “And I don’t think they consulted any pro-family group in the process.” > Mr. Sprigg said that although marriage is a fundamental, trans-cultural institution, “no culture has ever treated same sex marriage as the equal of traditional marriage. The New York Times has neither the right or power to redefine marriage on these terms.” There’s even a third point of view > [@](#): > > “The Times wedding pages are built on the false assumption that the weddings of wealthy non-celebrities constitute news. They’re an anachronistic holdover,” wrote Slate’s Timothy Noah yesterday on the Internet news site ( [www.slate.com](http://www.slate.com) ). All quotes from [http://www.washtimes.com/national/20020820-70607072.htm](http://www.washtimes.com/national/20020820-70607072.htm) I agree with the decision to publish these announcements. ---
**Author:** ![London\_Calling](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/49beb7/32.png) [@London\_Calling](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/London_Calling)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2002, 11:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-ny-times-publish-accounts-of-same-sex-unions/124724/2 "2002-08-20T11:59:33Z")
Resolved: **december** _can_ write a decent GD OP - when it suits. ---
**Author:** ![Sparc](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/65b543/32.png) [@Sparc](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sparc)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2002, 12:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-ny-times-publish-accounts-of-same-sex-unions/124724/3 "2002-08-20T12:15:24Z")
\*\*Good job december.\*\*That’s the standard you should always strive to. Balanced and even handed, but still favorable to your OP position. Also glad to see that you are vindicating all the people that defended you in the Pit. Sparc ---
**Author:** ![jjimm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/ba8739/32.png) [@jjimm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jjimm)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2002, 12:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-ny-times-publish-accounts-of-same-sex-unions/124724/4 "2002-08-20T12:25:31Z")
Hell, yeah they should. Excellent. Not much of a debate though, is it…? 😃 How about: would spotlighting same-sex unions have any impact on the reported high incidence of AIDS amongst young gay men? ---
**Author:** ![Honey](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/honey/32/5074_2.png) [@Honey](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Honey)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2002, 1:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-ny-times-publish-accounts-of-same-sex-unions/124724/5 "2002-08-20T13:25:42Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by december \* > \*\*I agree with the decision to publish these announcements. \*\* **december** I apologize for the nasty things I said to you in the pit thread. I misread your OP there, I was wrong. Honey ---
**Author:** ![JRDelirious](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jrdelirious/32/9531_2.png) [@JRDelirious](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JRDelirious)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2002, 1:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-ny-times-publish-accounts-of-same-sex-unions/124724/6 "2002-08-20T13:31:12Z")
If the owners of The NYT consider it “fit to print”, yes by all means they should go ahead, _it’s their paper._ That small detail seems to have eluded Mr. Sprigg of the FRC (as in, why should a private media corporation “consult” _anyone_ to make an editorial decision?). OTOH, it does not mean that any _other_ media outlet need feel – or be held by any group to be – obligated to follow suit if they don’t want to. However, Mr. Sprigg contradicts himself, as his statement seems to indicate a fear that the Times DOES HAVE “power” to redefine the public’s understanding of the legal/social/religious construct known as “marriage” by printing gay union announcements. If this newspaper had THAT much power to redirect public opinion, wouldn’t the national ideology and mood in general be a whole lot more liberal by now? **jjimm** : Not being inside the community, I can only speculate if raising the “social” stature of committed monofidelity could help a segment of the gay population be more resolved to avoid high risk conduct (a translation of the hetero “saving myself for The One” cliché?) – however, the high social status of committed monogamy among heteros has not particularly helped us avoid problems of teen pregnancy, infidelity and heterosexual STD, so it’s really iffy as to how significant that would be. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Ace\_of\_Swords](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/e495f1/32.png) [@The\_Ace\_of\_Swords](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Ace_of_Swords)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2002, 1:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-ny-times-publish-accounts-of-same-sex-unions/124724/7 "2002-08-20T13:32:31Z")
I’m with Noah – who even reads the Society pages anymore? I’m all for the publishment and approval of same-sex unions, but lets not pretend wedding notices get any more notice than those asbestos abatement ones. ---
**Author:** ![Duck\_Duck\_Goose](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/50afbb/32.png) [@Duck\_Duck\_Goose](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Duck_Duck_Goose)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2002, 1:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-ny-times-publish-accounts-of-same-sex-unions/124724/8 "2002-08-20T13:33:29Z")
I don’t see why not. It’s just a kind of contractual arrangement, after all, and the Times publishes other notices of contractual arrangements, such as business mergers. It’s a social announcement, too, and the Times publishes other notices of social announcements, like golden wedding anniversaries and college graduations. And I think arguing that “we can’t do it because no other culture has ever done it” is a deeply silly argument. No other culture has ever done a lot of the things that American Culture is currently doing, like _in utero_ fetal surgery, or sending people into orbit and to the Moon. People like Sprigg think that if they ignore the issue, it will go away. Yeah, right. Look how well that’s been working with issues like teen pregnancy. All through the Eisenhower Era, the issue of teen pregnancy was ignored. If you got pregnant while you were in high school, you had to drop out of school, and you basically dropped off society’s radar. So look how well that reduced the incidence of teen pregnancy. :rolleyes: Ditto with issues like battered wives, and alcoholism. But I feel for Sprigg’s manifest sense of hurt at not being consulted by the Times. 😃 > [@](#): > > And I don’t think they consulted any pro-family group in the process. Um, no, Peter, I doubt whether the New York Times is in the habit of checking with Donald Wildmon and Jerry Falwell before they make major editorial decisions. 😃 ---
**Author:** ![Revtim](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/revtim/32/1042_2.png) [@Revtim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Revtim)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2002, 2:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-ny-times-publish-accounts-of-same-sex-unions/124724/9 "2002-08-20T14:08:58Z")
Heh heh, that “I don’t think they consulted any pro-family group” made me laugh too. They accuse the NYT of serving a “radical social agenda”, and then deride them for not consulting them about _their_ social agenda. If you don’t like it, turn the fucking page Sprigg. ---
**Author:** ![pldennison](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/9fc29f/32.png) [@pldennison](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pldennison)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2002, 2:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-ny-times-publish-accounts-of-same-sex-unions/124724/10 "2002-08-20T14:13:58Z")
Here’s another vote for Timothy Noah’s comment in _Slate_. I don’t care whose notices they publish, because I don’t read them. It isn’t news. That said, though, the NYT is free to publish whatever they want. ---
**Author:** ![Dangerosa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/22d042/32.png) [@Dangerosa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dangerosa)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2002, 2:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-ny-times-publish-accounts-of-same-sex-unions/124724/11 "2002-08-20T14:35:57Z")
I’m with Noah, too. Wedding announcements aren’t news. Even of the rich and famous. If I don’t know them well enough for them to mail me an announcement, I don’t care. (People Magazine is an appropriate place to publish this). However, if you are going to publish wedding announcements, you should publish everyone’s wedding announcement - including those of same sex unions - which is why the local paper here only published PAID wedding announcements. Besides, as everyone who has ever had a $40,000 wedding and a six month marriage knows - a wedding does not a marriage make. What makes a marriage is committment (and I don’t care what gender or species the committed parties are). ---
**Author:** ![Sparc](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/65b543/32.png) [@Sparc](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sparc)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2002, 3:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-ny-times-publish-accounts-of-same-sex-unions/124724/12 "2002-08-20T15:12:30Z")
Somehow I don’t think the point is the actual publishing of announcements, but the announcement they just made. The NYT takes a pro Gay Rights stand here, that’s the good news. ---
**Author:** ![UrbanChic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/9dc877/32.png) [@UrbanChic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UrbanChic)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2002, 3:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-ny-times-publish-accounts-of-same-sex-unions/124724/13 "2002-08-20T15:56:00Z")
I, too, agree with Timothy Noah. I couldn’t care any less about these announcements. That being said, if the _New York Times_ is going to publish heterosexual unions, they should also publish homosexual unions. ---
**Author:** ![Fred](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/db5fbb/32.png) [@Fred](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fred)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2002, 4:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-ny-times-publish-accounts-of-same-sex-unions/124724/14 "2002-08-20T16:25:15Z")
That pro-family comment made me chuckle, too. In fact, the phrase “pro-family” seems a bit silly to me. It strikes me as sort of like “The League for a Seven Day Week”. ---
**Author:** ![Guinastasia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guinastasia/32/5751_2.png) [@Guinastasia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Guinastasia)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2002, 4:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-ny-times-publish-accounts-of-same-sex-unions/124724/15 "2002-08-20T16:35:57Z")
I don’t see why they shouldn’t. And I’m sorry I got snarky with you before. ---
**Author:** ![december](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/838e76/32.png) [@december](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/december)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2002, 4:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-ny-times-publish-accounts-of-same-sex-unions/124724/16 "2002-08-20T16:39:54Z")
I appreciate the apology, **Guin**. I’m sorry you’re having a rough time right now. ---
**Author:** ![Apos](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/838e76/32.png) [@Apos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Apos)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2002, 5:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-ny-times-publish-accounts-of-same-sex-unions/124724/17 "2002-08-20T17:46:34Z")
Srtange that no one has commented on the “pro-family” label, which seems downright silly. On that scale, you might do just as well call such organizations “anti-family” because their purpose is restrict the sorts of familes that societies allow to legally exist. ---
**Author:** ![Revtim](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/revtim/32/1042_2.png) [@Revtim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Revtim)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2002, 6:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-ny-times-publish-accounts-of-same-sex-unions/124724/18 "2002-08-20T18:36:30Z")
Good point Apos. They complain that “The New York Times has neither the right or power to redefine marriage” but fail to show why they feel _they_ have the right or power to define marriage. ---
**Author:** ![tracer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tracer/32/20578_2.png) [@tracer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tracer)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2002, 6:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-ny-times-publish-accounts-of-same-sex-unions/124724/19 "2002-08-20T18:50:16Z")
If the NY Times’ society pages is now printing announcements of same-sex unions, which are not legally recognized as marriages in this country, does that mean they will also now print announcements of non-marital opposite-sex unions? ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2002, 7:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-ny-times-publish-accounts-of-same-sex-unions/124724/20 "2002-08-20T19:25:21Z")
**december** , **Honey** , et al - The ability gracefully to offer, and graciously to receive, an apology, reflects credit on those involved and gives pleasure to those who observe. Well done. Regards, Shodan [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-ny-times-publish-accounts-of-same-sex-unions/124724.md?page=2)