[Dialogue] 3/12/09, Spong: New Jersey Will Be the Third State in America to Legalize Gay Marriage

Fri Mar 13 15:21:16 EDT 2009

Print this Article 

Not a member?Subscribe now! 

Thursday March 12, 2009 

New Jersey Will Be the Third State in America to Legalize Gay Marriage

It surprises me only that it was not first. New Jersey has a long history of supporting civil rights and equal rights of all its citizens, as well as opposing discrimination in any form. This state has, however, been a little slow in confronting its cultural homophobia. That is now about to end. One of the reasons for this uncharacteristic slowness is that the largest religious group in the state, the Roman Catholic Church, has been vigorously opposed to gay rights at all levels. The decline in its influence in recent years has, however, caused its opposition to be generally discounted today. An institution guilty of such blatant public acts as priestly child abuse is in no position to be convincing in other arenas of sexual discrimination. This state has traveled the normal route of first passing laws against hate crimes, then making discrimination in the work place illegal and finally listing sexual orientation along with race, gender, religion and national origin as aspects of our common humanity that cannot be used to penalize anyone in the public arena. Domestic benefits began to be offered by state agencies to partners of gay and lesbian employees in 2004. On January 12, 2006, New Jersey20passed legislation establishing the legality of civil unions, stating its intention to include in this law all the benefits of marriage for gay couples. The initiative for this law came from a mandate from the State Supreme Court, and it was signed into law enthusiastically by Governor Jon Corzine. That act looked quite impressive, even forward looking, in 2006. Aside from a few loud cries of some traditional groups claiming to be defending "traditional marriage and family values," the citizens of the state took little notice of the act and none of "the moral chaos" that had been predicted came to pass. The gay community, while pl eased at this sign of progress, recognized that this did little more than to provide them with "separate but equal" status. So almost immediately they began to mount a campaign for full marriage equality. That campaign should succeed in 2009. 
Why am I so certain? Because near the end of February my wife and I, along with more than 800 other citizens of the State of New Jersey, gathered at a black tie dinner held in Bound Brook, New Jersey, sponsored by an organization called "Garden State Equality." This event was designed to do two things. First, it honored those individuals, organizations and businesses that were leading this state to a new place. Second, it was clearly a political rally designed to initiate the final push for equality in marriage. 

A remarkable air of confidence was present in this gathering for many reasons. The political establishment of the state was20present. "Equality in Marriage" has become the majority consensus in New Jersey. Governor Corzine was himself one of the speakers who not only urged the legislature to pass the equality in marriage law, but also promised to sign it with joy and conviction as soon as they did. He predicted that this passage would occur in 2009. Former Governor Jim McGreevy was also present, an emotional hero to many in the audience who recalled his "I am a gay American" speech, when he resigned the governor's office a few years ago. A significant number of State Senators and Assembly members attended, including Senator Loretta Weinberg, who has for years been a driving force for lesbian, gay, transgender and bisexual issues in the state. Representatives of the New Jersey Congressional delegation were present either in person or through advertisements in the program. The business community of New Jersey was present, including major New Jersey employers like Prudential, Schering Plough, Chubb, PSE&G and Hilton Hotels. New Jersey's most prestigious and influential law firm, McCarter & English in Newark, was a sponsor of the event. The president of Rutgers, the state university, and representatives from William Paterson College were also present. Members of New Jersey's religious leadership were in attendance, including four bishops from three Christian traditions as well as many supportive clergy. The Episcopal Diocese of Newark was listed as one of the event's major sponsors and its bishop, the Rt. Rev. Mark Beckwith, was a featured speaker. His=2
0grounding of gay marriage in human freedom was a moving moment in the evening. 

The artistic community of the metropolitan area was present both to perform and to speak, including Andrea McArdle, the first star of the Broadway play "Annie;" Marc Shaiman, who wrote the score for Broadway hits "Hairspray" and "Catch Me if You Can;" Fran Drescher, the star of "The Nanny;" and Judith Light, the winner of two Emmys, who is now playing in "Ugly Betty" and who was formerly in "Who's the Boss." Other trailblazers present included the openly lesbian Christine Quinn, the Speaker of the New York City Council and a clear candidate for Mayor of New York City in the post-Bloomberg era, whenever that day arrives. 

The presence of these various groups and individuals made it obvious that this issue was now mainstream, not marginal. Equality in marriage for all citizens in New Jersey is an idea whose moment has come. The time for debate is over. The time for decisive action has arrived. No one there doubted that this would happen in 2009. 

Speaker after speaker bore witness to the fact that "civil unions" and marriage are not equal and can never be made equal. Episodes from real life were recounted over and over to demonstrate that the public does not treat civil unions as being equal to marriage. Anomalies were cited that revealed the irrationalities that are enshrined in the current legal situation. Murderers, rapists, convicted criminals of all sorts, as well as children with parental consent are allowed to20get married in New Jersey, yet this privilege, along with all of its legal protections, is still withheld from gay and lesbian citizens whose lives are exemplary. 

The negativity of organized religion against gay marriage was noted more than once. That is why the presence of so many ecclesiastical figures in the audience was celebrated. The way the sacred scriptures of the Judeo-Christian world have been used in defense of prejudice is appalling. The Bible has been quoted to oppress women, to support slavery and segregation, to impede the rise of democracy and even to justify war. Yet despite this shameful record of history, religious people continue to discredit their faith by quoting the Bible to justify both their hatred of and their discrimination against gay and lesbian people. There is little credibility left in this kind of religious abuse. Occasionally on this evening a speaker would refer to the fact that the Bible also calls for love and inclusion, even suggesting that the essence of the Jesus message was that all life was to be enhanced, not diminished. "I have come that they may have life and have it abundantly," Jesus is quoted as having said. 

It was noted with both hurt and incredulity that in California's battle over Proposition 8, designed to overturn that state's Supreme Court ruling legalizing gay marriage, the Mormon Church across America sent money and personnel to support "family values" as expressed in that Proposition. Many commentators gave credit for the victory of Proposition 8 to20this Mormon effort. As a direct consequence, Mormon churches across the nation were subsequently picketed by gay demonstrators. A picture was shown of a clever sign carried by a young picketer at the New York City Mormon Church. He was being raised by a lesbian couple and his sign read, "My two moms can beat your 14 wives." "Family values?" The irony was powerful. The irrationality of prejudice was exposed once again. 

Another highlight of the evening was an award given to the Robbinsville High School gay-straight alliance for their courage and willingness to challenge publicly the anti-gay statements made by a member of their school board. This protest continued until these students had forced the resignation of the offending board member. This was but one more telling sign that the prejudices of yesterday will not bind the generations of tomorrow. A recent poll in the New York Times revealed that today 30% of evangelical Christians under 30 years of age no longer oppose equality for gay and lesbian people in all areas of life, including marriage. All of these are signs that the battle is over. Equality before the law for homosexual people is being established everywhere. New Jersey will act and marriage will be equal in the Garden State in the year 2009. It will then spread, as such movements always do, until it has encompassed South Carolina and Mississippi, Louisiana, Texas and even Alaska. As George Wallace learned in an earlier conflict when he cried "segregation forever," forever turns out to be a20very short time when prejudices are dying. No one can finally hold back the tide of an idea whose time has come. 

The consciousness of the world is shifting. No one has ever reversed the rising tide of a new consciousness that always sweeps over the landscape with an inexorable power. People do not seem to understand that once a prejudice is debated publicly, it has already begun to die. Prejudices are all built on definitions that have ceased to be operative: "Unbaptized babies go to hell." "People who commit suicide are condemned by God." "Women are by their nature inferior." "Left-handed people are sinister and evil." "Blacks have not evolved into full humanity." "Gay and lesbian people are mentally ill or they choose to act in depraved ways." All of these are definitions of the past that we have, thank God, finally abandoned. When they were discarded none of the predicted dire consequences happened. Sean Penn said it well when he accepted the Oscar for his starring role in the motion picture "Milk:" "If we don't act today, our grandchildren will be ashamed of us tomorrow." 

New Jersey will act in 2009. I will be enormously proud of my adopted state when that day comes. 

– John Shelby Spong

Log in to the JohnShelbySpong.com archive now to re-read Three Cheers for the New Jersey Supreme Court, Bishop Spong's 2006 column celebrating the court victory.  

Question and Answer 
With John Shelby Spong

Jeff Jones, from Duval, Saskatchewan, Canada, writes: 0AI moved from being an atheist to a believer. I would never have been an atheist if I had paid more attention to the church I was raised in, the United Church of Canada. I saw Christianity negatively because of the bad example and message of the conservative churches. To be fair, though, my church should have presented its views better. When I investigated, I found that it was not just secularism applied compassionately, but there were theological roots to Liberal Christian beliefs contrary to what fundamentalists claim. I have since found that there are good and bad wings in the Lutheran, Catholic and Anglican churches. I wonder if it is fair to say that God does not ever intervene. I have heard of some things that defy logical explanation. On a modest point, my Dad almost died in February of 2005. Perhaps it was just the power of positive thinking, but after the United Church Hospital chaplain led a prayer, he improved and three weeks later I brought him home. He has since passed away but he got 17 more months of life. I saw in your records that you wrote an essay, "Why I am not a Unitarian." I tried unsuccessfully to retrieve that essay. Could you repeat it please?

Dear Jeff ,

I share your enthusiasm for the United Church of Canada. It was born in the 1920's as a merger among Protestant bodies in Canada, but primarily between the English Methodists and the Scottish Presbyterians in the Canadian Prairies. Just the fact that these bodies had to be able to see more strength20in the things that united them than weakness in the things that divided them created a consciousness within that church that in successive generations would help them to be open to other changing possibilities.

In the 1930's, they affirmed that their ministry was open to women long before any woman sought ordination. Canadian Anglicans did not do that until the 1980's. In 1988 the United Church of Canada declared that no one was to be precluded from their life or ministry because of sexual orientation. At that time, the Canadian Anglicans were putting a priest named James Ferry on trial in a medieval institution called Bishopscourt and found him guilty of "disobeying his bishop" and removed from him the license to officiate as an Anglican priest. His crime? He had confessed his homosexuality to his bishop because he was being blackmailed in his congregation. His bishop responded by outing him publicly and demanding that he leave his partner of some years. When James Ferry refused to obey this command of his bishop he was found "guilty of disobeying his bishop."

Under the leadership of a moderator named Bill Phipps, the United Church of Canada inaugurated theological discussions that moved parts of this church into a contemporary conversation with the modern world.

It was the United Church of Canada that decided to build an experimental church in a Toronto suburb that would lease space in a shopping mall for worship on Sunday and do everything else in the homes of its members. Its life would allow litu
rgical experimentation and was designed to pursue theological learning even when it challenged conventional Christian understanding. They wanted to meet the alienated former church members more than halfway.

It was the United Church of Canada that produced and nurtured the Rev. Gretta Vosper, pastor at a Toronto suburban church, who became one of Canada's most exciting and, yes, controversial Christian voices. She leads the Progressive Christian Movement in Canada and is the author of a recent Canadian bestseller, With or Without God, a book that seeks a new way of understanding Christianity in the 21st century. While conservatives called for her expulsion, both her congregation and the United Church of Canada have been very supportive. 

It is the United Church of Canada that has poured resources into conference centers across that vast nation, from Tatamagouche in Nova Scotia to Naramata in British Columbia, with Five Oaks in Ontario and Prairie Christian Training Center in Fort Qu'ppelle in Saskatchewan.

It is a church that encourages growth, contemporary music, theological and cultural diversity, environmental concerns, Christian education and social activism. I am devoted to it and have been deeply enriched by it.

To your question of whether God intervenes and the anecdotal data that you offer in support of that idea: I am suspicious of most claims but I would never say that God was limited by my knowledge. The theological problem comes when those who support intervention have to explain why God did not intervene to
 end slavery, to stop the Holocaust, to divert a tsunami or a hurricane. It is not easy or accurate to be theologically simplistic.

– John Shelby Spong

Send your questions to support at johnshelbyspong.com 

Print this Article 

Not a member? Subscribe now! 

Thanks for joining our mailing list, elliestock at aol.com, for A New Christianity For A New World on 11/09/2008 
REMOVE me from this list | Add me to this list | Manage my e-mail settings | Contact Customer Service 

4 Marshall Street, North Adams, MA 01247

Subject to our terms of service and privacy policy 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://wedgeblade.net/pipermail/dialogue_wedgeblade.net/attachments/20090313/63cbf51b/attachment-0001.html>