| The Advent of "Domestic Partnerships" |
|
Much has been made of the California Supreme Court’s decision permitting same-sex marriages. Some segments of society are offended by this idea. I thought it might be helpful to discuss the historical nature of the concept of "marriage."
The California opinion is a bit unique, because of the state’s existing law permitting "domestic partnership." A few years ago, a law was enacted granting same-sex partners the same civil rights and obligations as heterosexual marriages – the only difference is that the traditional union is called a "marriage" and same sex unions are called "domestic partnerships." Thus, the only issue was whether or not, given the laws on the books, there was an "equal protection" violation by giving same-sex unions a lesser designation than the more commonly one of "marriage." Some will express horror at the "destruction" of traditional notions of marriage, as being only a monogamous joining of a man and a woman. These folks will rest their argument on the idea that any other type of union violates Biblical notions and the traditions of our country. Well . . . not so much. The United States’ "tradition" of marriage is not as strong as some might say. While it absolutely true that the concept of same-sex marriage has no historical antecedent in the United States, it took a while for a consensus to be reached. Until 1862, polygamy was tolerated, at least on a certain level. Then Congress passed a law banning this practice in the Utah territories. It was not until 1890 that the United States Supreme Court definitively banned polygamy. And in the echo of slavery and "Jim Crow" laws, racially "mixed" marriages were still banned in some states as late as 1967.Moreover, it is actually historically inaccurate to argue that the "nuclear" family – comprising the father/husband, mother/wife, and their children – is an ancient one. If we look back to Classical times, we find a much different tradition. As we know, from the stories of the Old Testament, the tribal nature of ancient times lent itself to polygamy and an extremely fluid and ill-defined notion of a "family." This carried over to Greek and Roman society, where a "pater" (or household father) ruled over occupants in his home, which included slaves, many wives and "children," who might have been "adopted" (but, not formally) from dead relatives. There is even some evidence of "gay marriage" in Ancient Greece. These traditions spilled over into the Holy Roman Empire. As the Middle Ages approached, this "pater" concept morphed into a "feudal" system, where rights and responsibilities were tied up in the noble/vassal relationship. To ensure that the Lord maintained his right to tax and bequeath the gift of land to his vassals, the eldest son (if there was one) "inherited" the role of the "vassal" for the family. As the population’s health improved in Renaissance Europe, the concept of "inheritance" was expanded to include ALL children and, eventually, even the wife, and "wealth" would build up in generations of the family unit. Hence, the "modern" family did not really emerge until the late-16th or 17th Centuries. Civil law became more fixed and marriages were formalized and recognized by the State; similarly, canonical law began to formally sanction "holy matrimony" in religious ceremonies. As you can see, the historical definition of "family" has not been static. The idea of "family" has changed and evolved as society moved towards our current post-Industrial economy. Today, the civil rights conferred by marriage have become a core component in our economy; leading the gay community to push for civil (as opposed to religious) recognition of same-sex partnerships. |
