First Unitarian Church, Louisville KY-Sermon: Freedom to Marry

First Unitarian Church Louisville	Freedom to Marry Sermon February 14, 2010 Rev. Dawn Cooley Full service Selected sermons Home It is past time. It is past time that this country recognizes that civil marriage is a civil right. It is past time that we honored loving, respectful, committed relationships without regard to the sex of the partners. It is past time for us to move through our fear of change and realize that this is good for our citizens, for our children. In 1996, before some of you here today were born, we Unitarian Universalists voted to support the right to marry for same sex couples. Almost 14 years ago. It is past time. This week is Freedom to Marry week, and today, in honor of valentines day, I want to discuss three reasons why it is important that we continue this struggle. Though our understanding of marriage has changed throughout the years, the institution endures because it means something. Denied the freedom to marry, same-sex couples and their children are deprived the emotional, social and spiritual meaning that marriage has for many, in addition to literally thousands of legal and economic protections and responsibilities. Freedom to Marry is the future. It is past time, but it will happen. First, our understanding of marriage has changed throughout the years, but the institution endures because it means something. Over the past few millenia of human existence, our understanding of marriage has changed dramatically. As E.J. Graff documents in her book What is Marriage For? “Marriage and the family have been in violent flux throughout history, the rules constantly shifting to fit each culture and class, each era and economy.” For much of history, marriage was contractual in one way or another: A family alliance was made; there was an exchange of goods; and the expected outcome were children (preferably sons) to carry on the lineage. In the nineteenth century, in Western culture, the institution of marriage began to change drastically. Rather than having their spouse chosen for them, many people were now free to choose their own spouse (provided, of course, that it was someone of the same race and a different sex). Where simple toleration between spouses had been the goal, the ideal of romantic love began to emerge. The institution of marriage started to become more like the covenantal institution that Americans now recognize, rather than a purely contractual one. But even in the last 50 years, we have seen the institution change. Interracial marriage was illegal until the late 60s in much of this country. Gender roles are nowhere near as rigid as they used to be. Each generation remakes marriage to fit it's unique imprint. The marriage I have with my spouse would not have been possible in this country hundreds of years ago, and still would not be possible in much of the world. We chose each other freely, we respect each other as equals, and we share the responsibilities of raising our children. Two hundred years ago, this is not what a marriage looked like, yet in the United States today our marriage does not stand out in a crowd. Our cultural understanding of marriage has changed. And yet the institution has endured. Through all these changes, big and small, many people still want to get married. It means something to stand before your family and friends and proclaim your love and commitment to another person. It means something for two people to share their lives in a permanent covenant. Marriage is the outward token of an inward union of minds and hearts, it is a union created by a living purpose and kept by abiding will, which becomes what the partners make of it, day by day. Marriage requires a commitment to care for another person, to show concern for the life and growth of our partner. It requires a commitment to respond to another person, to help meet their needs, to respect the unique individuality of that person, to help them grow and unfold for their own sake. Marriage requires a commitment to transcend our own egos, to use reason and humility to understand another person; and by doing this, we discover ourselves. All these commitments require that we give ourselves to another person; by this giving we experience our strength, our vitality. We experience ourselves as overflowing and alive. Of course some people want to get married!! The institution of marriage has changed throughout the millenia. It will continue to change. And many people will continue to want to participate in it, to find a partner who they deeply love, and tie the knot. The sex of their partner should not matter. On that note, I invite our middle-schoolers to come and share a story in which two people fall in love, get married and live happily ever after. [Middle Schoolers perform a skit] Thank you Middle Schoolers!! That was a wonderful illustration of my first point – that though our understanding of marriage has changed throughout the years, the institution endures because it means something. Onto the second point. Denied the freedom to marry, same-sex couples and their children are deprived of the emotional, social and spiritual meaning that marriage has for many, in addition to literally thousands of legal and economic protections and responsibilities. What a wonderful thing it can be for two people to feel that they are joined together to strengthen each other in all labor, to minister to each other in all sorrow, to share with each other in all gladness, to be one with each other in silent, unspeakable memories? It means something, emotionally, socially and spiritually, for people to get married. Some religious conservatives have complained that freedom to marry would go against their religion – as if they would be forced to officiate at weddings even when they don't approve of the relationships. This is an outrageous claim, as no one is forcing clergy of any stripe to solemnize marriages that go against their beliefs – now, or in the future. Indeed, I get many couples who come to me, as a liberal religious clergy person, when others have turned them down because they are of different faiths, or because gasp they are living together. But there is a flip side to this argument as well. A flip side that is being made in an interfaith amicus brief filed by many religious leaders and organizations in opposition to Proposition 8 passed in California. In this brief, the participants declare: Surely, Unitarian Universalists, members of the United Church of Christ and the Metropolitan Community Churches, Reform Jews, Reconstructionist Jews, and others whose faith traditions bless marital unions without regard to the contracting parties’ race or sex, are entitled to the same religious liberty as the Catholics. Proposition 8 deprives them of that liberty. No one would tell a religious conservative member of the clergy that they would be bound and obligated to marry any couple, and yet this brief turns that on its head and points out that liberal religious clergy are being denied our religious freedom by not being allowed to solemnize such unions! I love it! Beyond the issue of religious freedom, there are practical reasons to recognize that civil marriage is a civil right. For those of you lucky enough to be married, take a moment and imagine what it would be like to not be able to visit the person you love in the hospital, make medical decisions for them, or use family leave to take care of your loved one? In 2004, the General Accounting Office of the United States government (the GAO), “identified a total of 1,138 federal statutory provisions [in] the United States Code in which marital status is a factor in determining or receiving benefits, rights, and privileges.” 1,138!! These include hospital visitation and decision making, but extend beyond into other areas as well, such as the ability to obtain "family" health coverage, taxation and inheritance rights, or even protection in case the relationship ends. And then there are the parental rights issues. There have been several cases in the news recently about what happens to children when same-sex parents separate but only one parent is considered their legal parent – it is not pretty, or fair. Denied the freedom to marry, same-sex couples and their children are deprived of the emotional, social and spiritual meaning that marriage has for many, in addition to literally thousands of legal and economic protections and responsibilities. Finally, marriage equality is the future. It is past time, but it will happen. There have been bumps in the road, and unfortunately there will probably continue to be bumps in the road. But it will happen. Take a look at this footage from the floor of the Iowa Senate this past April. After the marriage equality amendment passed Iowa, Senator Majority Leader Mike Gronstal was asked to cosponsor a bill that would seek to reverse the amendment. This is his response. [Video of Senator Gronstal plays for two minutes] One of my daughters was in the workplace one day, and her particular workplace at that moment in time, there were a whole bunch of conservative, older men. And those guys were talking about gay marriage. They were talking about discussions going on across the country. Anyway my daughter Kate, after listening for about 20 minutes, said to them: You guys don't understand. You've already lost. My generation doesn't care. I think I learned something from my daughter that day, when she said that. And I've talked with other people about it and that's what I see, Senator McKinley. I see a bunch of people that merely want to profess their love for each other, and want state law to recognize that. Is that so wrong? I don't think that's so wrong. As a matter of fact, last Friday night, I hugged my wife. You know I've been married for 37 years. I hugged my wife. I felt like our love was just a little more meaningful last Friday night because thousands of other Iowa citizens could hug each other and have the state recognize their love for each other. No, Senator McKinley, I will not co-sponsor a leadership bill with you. This is the future. Senator Gronstal recognized this and did not want history to look back upon him as someone who impeded the inevitable progress. It will happen. As the quote from the Reverend William Sinkford, former president of the Unitarian Universalist Association, says at the top of your order of service, "This is a matter of justice. And in the long run, I know justice will prevail.” Sinkford's words echo those from another Unitarian Minister from long ago. Of course, he was not speaking of marriage equality, but his words give us fortitude to continue. Theodore Parker observed: "I do not pretend to understand the moral universe; the arc is a long one...but from what I see I am sure it bends towards justice." It will happen. But we must continue to help bend the arc. Though we may mourn the set backs, we can not give in to defeat. If we feel that civil marriage is a civil right, we must continue to work for marriage equality. How do we help the arc of the moral universe to bend? We talk to our children about it and tell stories that have same-sex couples getting married to each other and living happily ever after. We educate ourselves – learn how to talk about these issues in a way that plucks peoples heartstrings rather than in ways that cause their defenses to rise. We also can help bend the arc by participating in the training that is occurring here at First Unitarian Church next week. The Statewide Fairness Alliance will train participants on how to talk to legislators about LGBT issues. This is particularly important, because this year in Kentucky, advocates are supporting two important bills. First, a statewide anti-discrimination bill similar to the Fairness Law we already have in Louisville that bans housing and employment discrimination. And second, a hospital visitation bill which would allow partners to visit each other when hospitals restrict visitation to family. Advocates are also fighting any attempt to revive last year's bill that would ban adoptions or foster care by LGBT couples. Adults and youth alike are encouraged to attend this free training next week after church. And, of course, as we work to bend that arc towards justice, we can claim our values, loud and proud, as we continue to stand on the side of love. Towards these ends, I am so proud that we will be hanging this banner for all to see. Before we close our celebration of life this morning, we will take a few minutes to bless this visible representation of our hope, our faith, that marriage equality will, eventually be a reality. It is past time. No doubt about it. But let us remember that though our understanding of marriage has changed throughout the years, the institution endures because it means something. Let us remember that denying marriage equality to same-sex couples and their children deprives them of the emotional, social and spiritual meaning that marriage has for many, in addition to literally thousands of legal and economic protections and responsibilities. And finally, let us remember that thought it is past time, and there will continue to be setbacks, Freedom to Marry is the future. It will become reality. May it be sooner, rather than later. Full service Selected sermons Return to top Home First Unitarian Church * Unitarian Universalist * UU * Louisville * Kentucky * KY www.firstulou.org/scryingsarchive/sermontexts/20100214-FrdmMarry-sermon.html

First
Unitarian
Church
Louisville

Freedom to Marry
Sermon

February 14, 2010
Rev. Dawn Cooley

Full service
Selected sermons
Home

It is past time.

It is past time that this country recognizes that civil marriage is a civil right.

It is past time that we honored loving, respectful, committed relationships without regard to the sex of the partners.

It is past time for us to move through our fear of change and realize that this is good for our citizens, for our children. In 1996, before some of you here today were born, we Unitarian Universalists voted to support the right to marry for same sex couples. Almost 14 years ago. It is past time.

This week is Freedom to Marry week, and today, in honor of valentines day, I want to discuss three reasons why it is important that we continue this struggle.

Though our understanding of marriage has changed throughout the years, the institution endures because it means something.

Denied the freedom to marry, same-sex couples and their children are deprived the emotional, social and spiritual meaning that marriage has for many, in addition to literally thousands of legal and economic protections and responsibilities.

Freedom to Marry is the future. It is past time, but it will happen.

First, our understanding of marriage has changed throughout the years, but the institution endures because it means something. Over the past few millenia of human existence, our understanding of marriage has changed dramatically. As E.J. Graff documents in her book What is Marriage For? “Marriage and the family have been in violent flux throughout history, the rules constantly shifting to fit each culture and class, each era and economy.”

For much of history, marriage was contractual in one way or another: A family alliance was made; there was an exchange of goods; and the expected outcome were children (preferably sons) to carry on the lineage. In the nineteenth century, in Western culture, the institution of marriage began to change drastically. Rather than having their spouse chosen for them, many people were now free to choose their own spouse (provided, of course, that it was someone of the same race and a different sex).

Where simple toleration between spouses had been the goal, the ideal of romantic love began to emerge. The institution of marriage started to become more like the covenantal institution that Americans now recognize, rather than a purely contractual one.

But even in the last 50 years, we have seen the institution change. Interracial marriage was illegal until the late 60s in much of this country. Gender roles are nowhere near as rigid as they used to be. Each generation remakes marriage to fit it's unique imprint. The marriage I have with my spouse would not have been possible in this country hundreds of years ago, and still would not be possible in much of the world. We chose each other freely, we respect each other as equals, and we share the responsibilities of raising our children. Two hundred years ago, this is not what a marriage looked like, yet in the United States today our marriage does not stand out in a crowd. Our cultural understanding of marriage has changed.

And yet the institution has endured. Through all these changes, big and small, many people still want to get married.

It means something to stand before your family and friends and proclaim your love and commitment to another person. It means something for two people to share their lives in a permanent covenant. Marriage is the outward token of an inward union of minds and hearts, it is a union created by a living purpose and kept by abiding will, which becomes what the partners make of it, day by day. Marriage requires a commitment to care for another person, to show concern for the life and growth of our partner. It requires a commitment to respond to another person, to help meet their needs, to respect the unique individuality of that person, to help them grow and unfold for their own sake. Marriage requires a commitment to transcend our own egos, to use reason and humility to understand another person; and by doing this, we discover ourselves. All these commitments require that we give ourselves to another person; by this giving we experience our strength, our vitality. We experience ourselves as overflowing and alive. Of course some people want to get married!!

The institution of marriage has changed throughout the millenia. It will continue to change. And many people will continue to want to participate in it, to find a partner who they deeply love, and tie the knot. The sex of their partner should not matter.

On that note, I invite our middle-schoolers to come and share a story in which two people fall in love, get married and live happily ever after.

[Middle Schoolers perform a skit]

Thank you Middle Schoolers!! That was a wonderful illustration of my first point – that though our understanding of marriage has changed throughout the years, the institution endures because it means something.

Onto the second point. Denied the freedom to marry, same-sex couples and their children are deprived of the emotional, social and spiritual meaning that marriage has for many, in addition to literally thousands of legal and economic protections and responsibilities.

What a wonderful thing it can be for two people to feel that they are joined together to strengthen each other in all labor, to minister to each other in all sorrow, to share with each other in all gladness, to be one with each other in silent, unspeakable memories? It means something, emotionally, socially and spiritually, for people to get married.

Some religious conservatives have complained that freedom to marry would go against their religion – as if they would be forced to officiate at weddings even when they don't approve of the relationships. This is an outrageous claim, as no one is forcing clergy of any stripe to solemnize marriages that go against their beliefs – now, or in the future. Indeed, I get many couples who come to me, as a liberal religious clergy person, when others have turned them down because they are of different faiths, or because *gasp* they are living together.

But there is a flip side to this argument as well. A flip side that is being made in an interfaith amicus brief filed by many religious leaders and organizations in opposition to Proposition 8 passed in California. In this brief, the participants declare:

Surely, Unitarian Universalists, members of the United Church of Christ and the Metropolitan Community Churches, Reform Jews, Reconstructionist Jews, and others whose faith traditions bless marital unions without regard to the contracting parties’ race or sex, are entitled to the same religious liberty as the Catholics. Proposition 8 deprives them of that liberty.

No one would tell a religious conservative member of the clergy that they would be bound and obligated to marry any couple, and yet this brief turns that on its head and points out that liberal religious clergy are being denied our religious freedom by not being allowed to solemnize such unions! I love it!

Beyond the issue of religious freedom, there are practical reasons to recognize that civil marriage is a civil right. For those of you lucky enough to be married, take a moment and imagine what it would be like to not be able to visit the person you love in the hospital, make medical decisions for them, or use family leave to take care of your loved one? In 2004, the General Accounting Office of the United States government (the GAO), “identified a total of 1,138 federal statutory provisions [in] the United States Code in which marital status is a factor in determining or receiving benefits, rights, and privileges.” 1,138!! These include hospital visitation and decision making, but extend beyond into other areas as well, such as the ability to obtain "family" health coverage, taxation and inheritance rights, or even protection in case the relationship ends. And then there are the parental rights issues. There have been several cases in the news recently about what happens to children when same-sex parents separate but only one parent is considered their legal parent – it is not pretty, or fair. Denied the freedom to marry, same-sex couples and their children are deprived of the emotional, social and spiritual meaning that marriage has for many, in addition to literally thousands of legal and economic protections and responsibilities.

Finally, marriage equality is the future. It is past time, but it will happen. There have been bumps in the road, and unfortunately there will probably continue to be bumps in the road. But it will happen. Take a look at this footage from the floor of the Iowa Senate this past April. After the marriage equality amendment passed Iowa, Senator Majority Leader Mike Gronstal was asked to cosponsor a bill that would seek to reverse the amendment. This is his response.

[Video of Senator Gronstal plays for two minutes]

One of my daughters was in the workplace one day, and her particular workplace at that moment in time, there were a whole bunch of conservative, older men. And those guys were talking about gay marriage. They were talking about discussions going on across the country. Anyway my daughter Kate, after listening for about 20 minutes, said to them: You guys don't understand. You've already lost. My generation doesn't care. I think I learned something from my daughter that day, when she said that. And I've talked with other people about it and that's what I see, Senator McKinley. I see a bunch of people that merely want to profess their love for each other, and want state law to recognize that. Is that so wrong? I don't think that's so wrong. As a matter of fact, last Friday night, I hugged my wife. You know I've been married for 37 years. I hugged my wife. I felt like our love was just a little more meaningful last Friday night because thousands of other Iowa citizens could hug each other and have the state recognize their love for each other. No, Senator McKinley, I will not co-sponsor a leadership bill with you.

This is the future. Senator Gronstal recognized this and did not want history to look back upon him as someone who impeded the inevitable progress. It will happen. As the quote from the Reverend William Sinkford, former president of the Unitarian Universalist Association, says at the top of your order of service, "This is a matter of justice. And in the long run, I know justice will prevail.”

Sinkford's words echo those from another Unitarian Minister from long ago. Of course, he was not speaking of marriage equality, but his words give us fortitude to continue. Theodore Parker observed: "I do not pretend to understand the moral universe; the arc is a long one...but from what I see I am sure it bends towards justice."

It will happen. But we must continue to help bend the arc. Though we may mourn the set backs, we can not give in to defeat. If we feel that civil marriage is a civil right, we must continue to work for marriage equality. How do we help the arc of the moral universe to bend? We talk to our children about it and tell stories that have same-sex couples getting married to each other and living happily ever after. We educate ourselves – learn how to talk about these issues in a way that plucks peoples heartstrings rather than in ways that cause their defenses to rise.

We also can help bend the arc by participating in the training that is occurring here at First Unitarian Church next week. The Statewide Fairness Alliance will train participants on how to talk to legislators about LGBT issues. This is particularly important, because this year in Kentucky, advocates are supporting two important bills. First, a statewide anti-discrimination bill similar to the Fairness Law we already have in Louisville that bans housing and employment discrimination. And second, a hospital visitation bill which would allow partners to visit each other when hospitals restrict visitation to family. Advocates are also fighting any attempt to revive last year's bill that would ban adoptions or foster care by LGBT couples. Adults and youth alike are encouraged to attend this free training next week after church.

And, of course, as we work to bend that arc towards justice, we can claim our values, loud and proud, as we continue to stand on the side of love. Towards these ends, I am so proud that we will be hanging this banner for all to see. Before we close our celebration of life this morning, we will take a few minutes to bless this visible representation of our hope, our faith, that marriage equality will, eventually be a reality.

It is past time. No doubt about it. But let us remember that though our understanding of marriage has changed throughout the years, the institution endures because it means something. Let us remember that denying marriage equality to same-sex couples and their children deprives them of the emotional, social and spiritual meaning that marriage has for many, in addition to literally thousands of legal and economic protections and responsibilities. And finally, let us remember that thought it is past time, and there will continue to be setbacks, Freedom to Marry is the future. It will become reality. May it be sooner, rather than later.

Full service
Selected sermons
Return to top
Home

First Unitarian Church * Unitarian Universalist * UU * Louisville * Kentucky * KY

www.firstulou.org/scryingsarchive/sermontexts/20100214-FrdmMarry-sermon.html

Freedom to Marry Sermon

February 14, 2010 Rev. Dawn Cooley

Freedom to Marry
Sermon

February 14, 2010
Rev. Dawn Cooley