Gay marriage
IU experts can discuss constitutional issues, history and public opinion
EDITORS: The following Indiana University Bloomington faculty experts can provide insights into various aspects of gay marriage and the current debate surrounding the issue. These insights are based on their research and interests in constitutional law, religion, gay and lesbian political history, and family structure and sociology.
State constitutions may offer a more likely route to the establishment of same-sex marriage, although the road is fraught with legal and religious complexities, said Daniel O. Conkle, the Robert H. McKinney Professor of Law at IU Bloomington and an adjunct professor in the Department of Religious Studies. Conkle's research addresses constitutional law and theory, religious liberty and the role of religion in American law, politics and public life. One could argue, he said, that the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which provides for equal protection under federal laws, should offer protection to same-sex couples who wish to marry. While the U.S. Supreme Court has shown no inclination to interpret the 14th Amendment as requiring that same-sex marriages be allowed, a few state courts have done so when interpreting their own state constitutions, which include provisions analogous to the 14th amendment. Conkle said states have the final say when it comes to state constitutional law, but they cannot change federal law, which defines marriage as being between one man and one woman. The marriage benefits involved would be state benefits, such as inheritance rights and spousal benefits, not federal benefits, such as Social Security or joint income tax filings. An issue likely to arise is whether same-sex marriages performed in one state will be recognized in another state. The debate also raises interesting religious issues, Conkle said. The United States traditionally has placed great importance on the separation of church and state. Yet clergy have been given the authority to marry people, essentially performing a governmental role. There has been significant debate about whether traditional marriage is a product of religious understanding and whether this, on its own, is enough to reject same-sex marriage. Conkle said he has seen traces of a political argument along this line claiming that the religious grounds are not enough, that the argument should be based on secular grounds and that this secular basis does not exist. Conkle can be reached at 812-855-4331 and conkle@indiana.edu.
Gay marriage has not always been a high priority for gay men and lesbians. Interest in gay marriage can be seen as a "feminization" of the gay rights movement, said Elizabeth Armstrong, an assistant professor in the Department of Sociology at IU Bloomington. In the 1970s, young gay men driving the movement cared about issues such as freedom of sexual expression and had little interest in family-related concerns, Armstrong said. Lesbians, who frequently lost custody of children when they "came out," cared about family issues but lacked the power to set the agenda of the nascent gay rights movement. She said a variety of factors have combined to shift the gay movement's priorities. The AIDS epidemic proved to be a harsh introduction to the need for rights provided by marriage. Women gained power within the movement. Lesbians and gay men have aged, and their priorities have turned from sexual exploration to family building. Armstrong described the gay movement as a collection of numerous groups with numerous interests. Gay marriage is not equally attractive to all lesbians and gay men, she said. While some see marriage as the culmination of a lifetime of hopes and dreams, for others it flies in the face of their advocacy of sexual freedom. Armstrong is the author of Forging Gay Identities: Organizing Sexuality in San Francisco, 1950-1994 (University of Chicago Press, 2003), which examines the emergence of lesbians and gays as a cultural and political force in the United States. Armstrong can be reached at 812-856-2063 or elarmstr@indiana.edu.
Gay marriage is inevitable in the United States, said Brian Powell, the Allen D. and Polly S. Grimshaw Professor of Sociology at IU Bloomington, noting that demographic patterns clearly point to this. Powell's expertise includes the sociology of the family and issues regarding family structure. The current discussion and prospects for gay marriage and civil unions, he said, were unthinkable even just a few years ago. Last year Powell and his research team surveyed more than 700 people from around the country about gay marriage. The detailed survey revealed some demographic trends that bode well for supporters of same-sex marriage. The younger survey respondents were much more positive about gay and lesbian unions, Powell said. These young people may become more conservative as they age, thus changing their views of same-sex unions, but Powell said he doubts that this will happen. Young people are coming of age while these issues are being widely discussed, so the issues are less intimidating, he said. Another telling survey result involved the percentage of people who said they had a close friend or relative who was gay. Around 40 percent of respondents said this was the case, and Powell thinks this number would have been around 20 percent 10 years ago. He said this survey result is important because a person is more likely to support gay and lesbian unions if they have a close friend or relative who is gay or lesbian. "Not openly discussing these issues is much worse than having a candid discussion," he said. Powell's survey included questions that probed opinions about heterosexual and same-sex relationships and related benefits, such as hospital visitation rights and inheritance. Powell can be reached at 812-855-7624 and powell@indiana.edu.
