Dear Republican Party,
I am writing to you today in support for the equal rights of same-sex couples. As an American with an acute sense and appreciation for the tenets of individual rights, equality before the law, and liberty, I have come to understand that no free society – perpetuated as a representative republic – can stand so long as a minority remains deprived of those three tenets.
I write to you less in favor of extending marriage to same-sex couples, but more of eliminating government’s detrimental influence on the institution itself. I primarily seek to ensure all citizens are given the same fundamental rights, and that no majority may reign tyrannically over the minority. Such is the case today in marriage contracts. Currently, the law stipulates that only a man and a woman may be legally bound to enjoy a certain set of benefits which same-sex couples are not entitled to. Even with the advent of civil union contracts across the nation – and despite the inherent inequality in semantics – it falls very short of the same treatment opposite-sex couples receive.
Some fear allowing for the legal recognition and equality thereof of the rights of same-sex couples, our society would set a dangerous precedent; a slippery legal slope plunging into the allowance of other behavior such as polygamy. I contend however that such legal recognition and equality would set a radically different and much more positive legal precedent; one which allows greater freedom as opposed to one that disallows freedom. Moreover, polygamous marriage is a different debate at its core. Same-sex marriage is about removing a gender restriction. Polygamous marriage is about changing a two-person contract to include many people. Arguments in favor of same-sex marriage are incongruent with those of polygamous marriage.
Additionally, voices from the religious quarters of our society contend that homosexual behavior is a sin and thus should not be subsidized by the government. They attempt to bolster their argument by ordination of their line of thinking with those of the founding fathers, claiming that noble men such as Benjamin Franklin, and John Madison allowed their religious inclinations to help shape our country, and that by abandoning such spiritual jurisprudence we diverge from the intent of the framers. I contest this notion, arguing rather most importantly is the preservation of equal rights, than that of religious preservation. I argue vehemently – conscious of the idea that there ought to be a separation between church and state – that the spiritual obligations of some in society should not be enforced by secular law onto others.
I end by asking you, party leadership, and those skeptical of allowing for equal protection of the law for same-sex couples, to read the famous excerpt from the Declaration of Independence, which I’ve quoted below, and ask yourself if you are denying same-sex couples the basic human rights exemplified by Thomas Jefferson when he wrote this document.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.