This
week, the Supreme Court will hear arguments for Gay Marriage. I admit that I
have waffled back and forth continuously and at times have been ambivalent. As
a heterosexual, it is outside of my radar; a non-issue. I am a firm believer
that everyone deserves to be respected. The decision to marry is a personal
one.
Philosophically,
I wonder about our current state of affairs. Heterosexual couples often avoid
marriage as if it was a plague. Most believe that it is socially acceptable to
bear children without a commitment; the divorce rate amongst heterosexuals is
approximately 60% which includes both Christians and people who declare no
religious affiliation; single parent homes are the norm, lack of financial and
social responsibility goes with the territory. On the other hand, Homosexual
Americans are adamant that they should have the right to marry; gays (a/k/a
same sex couples) want to commit to each other and family, and are willing to
take their fight for this basic right to the Supreme Court.
This
makes one wonder, what is wrong with us? Some would argue that if we allow
people of the same sex to marry, it will somehow degrade our civilization.
Really? If you have ever watched an episode of Jerry Springer or the Maury Show,
than you would beg to differ!
There are
many arguments, namely the Constitutional one. By not allowing Gay marriage,
are we denying a basic civil right to citizens? Is this a denial of equal
protection under the law? Denial of basic liberties? Pursuit of justice, and
happiness? This issue has many “moving
parts”.
The 14th Amendment provides some clarity, “No
State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or
immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any
person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to
any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."
Certainly the proponents of Gay Marriage will argue that they are being denied
equal protection as US Citizens. This is a very valid point.
As a
financial planner, I am aware of financial and estate planning considerations
for gay couples. The constitution extends many rights and protections to
heterosexual couples within the "marriage law". These same
protections do not extend to gay couples. A married couple is legally
considered to be one person. So if one spouse dies, the remaining spouse has
the right to inherit that spouse’s estate tax free. If they have
children, the remaining spouse has the right to custody. Your spouse is
considered next of kin. That means, upon death the surviving spouse has a legal
right to the remains, can make end of life decisions, visit a loved one in the
hospital, and not have to worry about their final wishes (The Will) being
contested by relatives. Further, a spouse can share health insurance, and is
assumed to have an insurable interest in a life insurance policy which is a
criterion for purchase.
These fundamental rights are often taken for granted by heterosexuals.
Gay couples live in fear of having their children and property taken away upon
death; not being allowed in the hospital room to attend to a dying partner; and
not having a say in the burial because you are not considered the next of kin.
If a gay partner bequest a qualified retirement plan to his/her surviving
partner, it often must be liquidated within five years if not immediately then taxed.
Gay couples often have to buy insurance policies to cover the anticipated gift
tax. If a gay couple served in the military, and or received a pension from an
employer, it might not surprise you to learn that his/her surviving partner
will not receive it once he/she dies. Married couples do not experience this
sort on inequity. So, what if basic financial rights were extended without the
need to marry, would it end the debate? Or will it mushroom into a new debate? What rights then would heterosexual couples have if they choose
to “live together” and never marry?
As a
practicing Christian, I wonder what Jesus would have to say. The Bible teaches
that we should procreate however, it is clear that gay couples actually do manage to have children naturally.
Women become pregnant, and Men father children. There are heterosexual couples
who can not conceive and bear children. So what is the issue? Many would argue
that God intended for marriage to be between a man and a woman and therefore
that sole fact settles the issue. Others firmly believe that God only extends
his grace and mercy to “perfect” Christians. Religion is a guide, but may not
completely settle the argument for opponents who based their arguments solely
on religion.
Conservatives
argue that the marriage issue is the result of liberalism. How so? The gay
family is the epitome of conservatism. They seek commitment in their
relationship, intact family, and shared financial responsibility. So what is
the problem? Isn’t this the conservative platform anyway? It is very easy to
hate groups especially when you can not relate or do not have any affiliation.
It is very difficult to hate individuals. Case in point, a republican
congressman from Ohio, who once was a strong opponent of gay marriage recently
declared support for banning the Defense of Marriage Act legislation (DOMA)
after learning that his son was gay. Interestingly enough, everyone either has
a family member or a friend that is gay.
Regardless
of the Supreme Court outcome, it will be a historical one. Because it is a
civil rights issue similar to the right to: citizenship, vote, equal education,
housing, women’s rights, and basic civil rights protections from
discrimination.
The right
to marry will be viewed in the future with the same criticism as slavery
itself. If you have watched the movie, Lincoln,
you know that slavery was once an emotionally charged contentious debate in the
Supreme Court, much like this one. As an African-American woman, I watched with
great interest. It is difficult to imagine living life as a slave. My blood boils
every time I watch its depiction. Today, it is almost silly to think that one
would believe that the color of your skin once dictated citizenship and whether
you were deserving of the protections of the basic human rights declared in the
United States constitution intended for all citizens. Martin Luther King said
it best, “As long as one of us is oppressed, none of us are free”.
I will be
watching closely along with the rest of the nation. What about you?
© Carmen Coleman, President and CEO
Lifetime Financial Group, LLC
30 W. Broad Street, Suite 300
30 W. Broad Street, Suite 300
Rochester, NY 14614
(585)325-2525
Carmen
Coleman, MBA, CRPC™ is the owner of Lifetime
Financial Group. She is a financial planner and insurance consultant. http://www.lifetimefinancialnews.com Like us on FB.
