Letters to the Editor: 464

Dear Lavender,

About Brett Stevens’ conversation with Rep. Andrea Kieffer… it was a well-written, expressive piece, and I was right there with him up until he wrote this: “There is a romanticization of the idea of marriage in the GLBT community. The community tends to talk in terms of “rights” and “benefits,” but is less vocal when it comes to “obligations” and “responsibilities” assumed by marriage.”

I’m not sure exactly what GLBT community Mr. Stevens is talking about, or who he’s been talking to, but myself and my GLBT friends — married and non — are serious and vocal when it comes to the obligations and responsibilities of marriage. We don’t romanticize it. We’re not confused by it.

It’s a dangerous statement Mr. Stevens has written there, because it seems to suggest that the GLBT community simply wants Marriage because they want the stuff that goes with it — without taking into full consideration what the institution of Marriage means. Or worse, it suggests that because we’re too enraptured by the idea of Marriage to really “get” it, we might actually be willing to settle for something less, like civil unions. But we won’t settle, and here’s why: when it comes to the issue of Marriage, the GLBT community that I know is not just talking solely in simple terms of rights and benefits, obligations and responsibilities. We’re talking about something bigger. Something that uplifts every community. We are talking about one thing and one thing only: EQUALITY.

Michael Cohen-Elyanow