The rite of marriage
For many, marriage is a life-long dream, a grand fairy tale packaged in a single ceremony, replete with fair maidens in dazzling dresses and dashing, chivalrous gentlemen sweeping them off their feet into the marvelous world that lies ahead. Instilled over many years by family, friends, society in general, and a multi-billion dollar wedding industry in specific, this meme (definition) permeates many a mind, exciting them about and driving them towards marriage.
We, however, approached marriage with a degree of trepidation.
Wrestling with injustice
Distilled to it's base, marriage is a contract between two people and, in most cases, third parties such as the community, God, or the state. By marrying we acquire certain rights and we submit ourselves to a myriad of laws, codified and unwritten, that govern the institution of marriage. Our property is automatically willed to each other, we gain hospital visitation rights, we receive social security benefits. These are good things.
Unfortunately, this right is denied to a segment of our population based upon their sexual orientation. These people are in committed partnerships the same as heterosexual couples, but they are disallowed the protections of marriage. Homosexuals have no right to visit a hospitalized partner. A lesbian is not entitled to her partner's social security benefits. In probate, a gay partner may receive nothing.
We believe this is a fundamental injustice. And we hope that, one day, the world is rid of this injustice. And just as history has witnessed the elimination of abject slavery, the introduction of democratic forms of government and the enfranchisement of many women, so too shall we move beyond this form of bigotry into a more just and enlightened age.
But until that day, we live in the present. In our time, a movement of conservative, often fundamentalist, religious folk is actively trying to "defend" the institution of marriage. Couching their discrimination in arguments against "special rights" and other fallacies, conservative leaders have enthused our church-going neighbors and the right of marriage remains denied to those unlike themselves.
For us, family is not defined by a particular spiritual doctrine. For most of human history this has been the case; only within the past few millennia have religious institutions attempted to control the familial definition. We strive to view the world holistically and thus, in our minds, an injustice to one is a setback to the entire human endeavor. As a matter of principle and to point out this injustice, we would prefer to forsake marriage, to reject that civil right, to quietly but powerfully stand behind our belief in tolerance and social justice.
However, our first responsibility is survival and to forsake marriage leaves us vulnerable in many ways. Ben has sub-par health insurance and thus rarely gets medical or ophthalmological checkups. Recently when he dislocated a toe he rejected a protective "boot" that the doctors requested he wear, for he can't afford such luxuries. Lisa, on the other hand, has comprehensive insurance through her employer. Were the two married, Ben would be covered under Lisa's insurance plan. So far, this has caused some minor financial crises, but in the future we could be gambling with our health and, more seriously, our lives. This is not a prudent risk to take.
Patriarchy versus partnership
Women have historically lived under forced subservience to men. Women were property to be owned and marriage was generally a transfer of property between men. A husband owned his wife, her property and the products of her labor, including her children. In 1765, legal scholar Sir William Blackstone wrote of marriage:
By marriage, the husband and wife are one person in law: that is, the very being or legal existence of the woman is suspended during the marriage, or at least incorporated and consolidated into that of the husband: under whose wing, protection, and cover, she performs every thing ..."
In the past few hundred years much of the earth's population has come to reject this misogynistic legal doctrine. We are fortunate to live in a more enlightened age and we pay respect to those who brought us this far, from Lucy Stone to Elizabeth Cady Stanton to Susan B. Anthony and thousands more. After his 1832 marriage to Mary Jane Robinson, Robert Dale Owen wrote:
Of the unjust rights which in virtue of this ceremony an iniquitous law gives me over the person and property of another, I cannot legally, but I can morally, divest myself. And I hereby distinctly and emphatically declare that I consider myself, and earnestly desire to be considered by others, as utterly divested, now and during the rest of my life, of any such rights, the barbarous relics of a feudal, despotic system.
Though we are thankful that the forced subservience of women is no longer codified in our country, social customs are harder to change than written words. We see this very clearly in the "traditional" wedding ceremony, which is rife with anachronistic rituals that go unconsidered or uncontested by most ceremony participants. The bride is "given away" by the father, her surname is replaced with that of her husband, even the color white -- a supposed symbol of bridal purity -- rarely changes.
Our decision to marry
The history of and current laws and customs regarding marriage are issues we will not ignore. But the rights we obtain through marriage are significant and necessary to build a lasting partnership and secure lives. We also believe it's difficult for our families to accept us as "life partners" or "basically married." And we want that acceptance, it's important to us. It's possible that we could gain a sense of acceptance after many years of partnership, but marriage instantaneously grants us that sense.
On top of those reasons, we want to publicly affirm our love for each other. We want to celebrate our commitment to one another, to make our partnership known. We find happiness in our relationship and we want to share that happiness, to "spread the love."
We understand this may not be the most romantic depiction of marriage. We write these words to explain ourselves, as this is likely the only chance we will ever have. In order to walk the path of marriage we must make it our own. And to do that we must recognize the injustices of marriage, past and present, and we must create a marriage and a wedding ceremony in line with our beliefs. We do this not on a whim; this was a difficult decision to make and remains difficult to implement. At times it may seem idealistic, non-traditional or just plain silly, but for us it is necessary as a foundation for a strong marriage.