Coming Around: Parenting Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Kids (22 page)

The interpretation of a value—what it means and how it translates into behavior—is complex. Religious beliefs, personal experience, culture and exposure to differing points of view are just a few of the variables that assert themselves upon a person’s value system. Some political and religious groups talk about “Christian” values and “family” values, but these terms aren’t clarifying. Two people who promote Christian values can differ dramatically on what they think it means to be a Christian. Is the overriding Christian value mercy or accountability, humility or righteousness? Some Christians believe in
pacifism while others believe in the death penalty. Similarly, nowhere is there a list of family values to which we all agree. What one person views as a desirable value another may view with neutrality or disdain.

There are some shared, culture-based values. For instance, most United States citizens admire the ideas promoted in the Declaration of Independence, but ask them to apply those ideas to everyday life and they’ll give a variety of responses.

Freedom, perhaps American citizens’ most cherished value, has been a source of debate since the Declaration was written. Though Americans love freedom, it didn’t come easy to them. It took the Civil War to end slavery. The right to vote, the defining freedom of a democracy, was denied to women until 1920. Why are some people so slow to stand up for freedom? The familiar is comfortable. Usually it takes a band of visionaries to help the majority see the ideal. The abolitionists and the suffragists saw the truth and they wouldn’t stop fighting for these rights until everyone accepted them. Some people say that freedom isn’t free. That is true. Freedom never stops growing and as it grows, it breaks boundaries. For those who value tradition and are discomforted by change, freedom comes at a cost.

Hanna’s Story

Hanna, a high school student, found a mentor in Mrs. Brown, her biology teacher. Though not gay herself, Mrs. Brown supported Hanna throughout her coming out process. Hanna is now out and very happy. She started a Gay-Straight Alliance at her school and it experienced great success.

Soon Hanna began noticing that things were changing between her and her mentor. Hanna was becoming a more vocal advocate of LGBT students and pushing for change in her school. Mrs. Brown seemed increasingly weary of her efforts and had taken to telling Hanna to “slow down; these things take time.” Mrs. Brown once warned Hanna that not everyone would understand or like what Hanna was doing and that she should take that into consideration.

One day, Jon, a transgender student, told Hanna that the health teacher, Mrs. Thomas, didn’t say a thing about gender identity when she taught her class about sexuality. Jon said that Mrs. Thomas was unyielding when he suggested that transgender issues should be addressed when discussing LGBT issues. Hanna relayed the story to Mrs. Brown and asked her to intervene
with the health teacher. Mrs. Brown refused, saying that Mrs. Thomas knew what she was doing and had the right to set her own curriculum.

In this situation, the student has surpassed the teacher. Hanna is establishing herself as a credible leader among her peers. Her confidence and leadership bode well for healthy social-emotional development. Hanna’s mentor may not have the courage or the will to challenge the system. She may be a more careful person or someone who is uncomfortable with conflict. To her credit, Mrs. Brown has contributed significantly to Hanna’s self-esteem, but she has taken Hanna as far as she can. Hanna now needs to look for mentors among those who have experience in leadership. It would be ideal if she could connect with people at the state level of student organizations. This would give her a chance see how gay rights are achieved in schools in other locales, schools both more and less progressive than her own. Hanna will meet obstacles and she will upset some people. Many people in addition to Mrs. Brown will tell her, “Slow down. You can’t expect people to understand. You can’t expect people to accept this!” Hanna must persevere for what she perceives as right.

In the gay community it is often said, “Silence will not protect you.” While the converse of this is not always true at the individual level, it is wholly true for the gay community at large: “Speaking out will make you safe.”

How you react to your gay child and how your family as a whole reacts is irrevocably tied to values. Ask yourself:
What does freedom mean to me
? Now that you have a gay child, you’re likely to find yourself thinking about freedom in new ways or at least from a new perspective. This may prompt you to examine other values, such as those associated with heterosexuality, parenting and social behaviors. To maintain and strengthen your relationship with your child, you have to be open to discussing values, especially when values conflict.

Conflict is not always a bad thing; it is the natural result of applying values to real-life situations. When dearly held values conflict, which they will, it tests a person’s convictions and deepens his or her insight. Perhaps you find yourself facing conflicting values. For instance, you may have thought of yourself as committed to family values. Your working definition of family values included both putting family first and maintaining a stance against homosexuality. Maybe you cherish your faith but now find its stance against your child’s
sexual orientation untenable. Now your son or daughter has come out as gay and you have to decide which of those ideas, family first or anti-gay, is the priority. You may find yourself reflecting and examining all your assumptions about family values.

I am not suggesting that you adopt a new set of values for the sake of smoothing out a potential conflict with your gay child. Rather, I am encouraging you to take advantage of the opportunity engendered by your child’s coming out. If you have never seriously discussed your views on homosexuality with LGBTQs, do so now. If you’ve never thought about gay rights, read and think about them now. Some say faith is not faith unless it is tested. The same can be said for values. Building a bridge between yourself and your child may result in surprising personal growth.

T
he right to love, to declare that love and to have that declaration acknowledged is the epitome of what it means when we talk about
inalienable
human rights. Marriage holds the family together. It transforms the hope of a lasting love into the promise of a lasting family. It is a piece of evidence of a couple’s commitment. Without legalized marriage, gay rights will always fall short of human rights. Calling gay unions “civil unions” and not marriage opens the door to challenges regarding every aspect of gay rights. Civil unions are no substitute for marriage. Separate rights are never equal rights.

There is another reason why parents of gay children need to think about marriage. It will be impossible to understand your child’s experience growing up gay without appreciating the relevance of the culture war over marriage. Never before have gays been so visible, let alone the object of constant political rhetoric. This exposes your child to a great deal of stimuli, some of which are heart wrenching and some of which are heart lifting. The debate and the outcome will impact your child’s life. If your state is considering legislation for or against gay marriage, talk about it with your child. Ask her what she’s heard. Ask him how he feels. Your child will need your support if the marriage war comes to your state and puts him or her on the front lines.

THE STATE OF GAY MARRIAGE TODAY

There has been an increase of about 52 percent in the number of same-sex households since 2001.
¹
Between 2004, when Massachusetts became the first state to legalize gay marriage, and 2010, about fifty thousand gay couples have married.
²
The available data from the United States Census in 2010 indicates that there were 594,000 same-sex couple households, about 1 percent of the US population. In states that had legalized gay marriage, about 42 percent of same-sex couple households identified as married compared with about 28 percent for states with domestic partnerships or civil unions and about 23 percent for all other states.
³

Attitudes are changing. According to the Pew Research Center, the American public is moving steadily toward a growing acceptance of gay marriage; Pew reports that 46 percent of Americans favor gay marriage, 44 percent are against it and the remainder are unsure. The number of those in favor of gay marriage is steadily rising. Though younger Americans are most inclined to favor gay marriage, older minds are being swayed as well, albeit at a lower incline. Attitudes toward gay marriage also vary by race and religion. About 50 percent of whites support gay marriage, compared to 39 percent of non-whites. Among religions, the greatest opposition comes from white Evangelical Protestants, followed by black Protestants.
⁴

CURRENT STATUS OF MARRIAGE LAW

A number of countries have recognized the need for equality in marriage. Same-sex marriage has been legalized in the Netherlands, Belgium, Spain, Canada, South Africa, Norway, Sweden, Portugal, Denmark, Iceland and Argentina. Legislation to allow same-sex marriage is pending in the United Kingdom, Nepal, Luxembourg, Finland and Uruguay.

Here in the United States, only eight states—Massachusetts, Vermont, Connecticut, Iowa, New Hampshire, New York, Maryland and Washington state—and the District of Columbia have legalized same-sex marriage. In June of 2008, the California Supreme Court ruled in favor of same-sex marriage, but the right was rescinded just months later when voters passed Proposition 8, amending the state
constitution to restrict marriage to a man and a woman. While Rhode Island does not convey marriage licenses to same-sex couples, it does honor the marriage licenses of same-sex couples legally obtained in other states.

Civil unions appear to be more acceptable to many Americans. Seven states offer civil unions that are legally equivalent to marriage: California, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, New Jersey, Nevada and Oregon. Three additional states, Colorado, Maine and Wisconsin, have passed laws that provide same-sex couples with some, but not all, of the entitlements of marriage.

Thirty states have amended their constitutions to limit marriage to a man and a woman. These states, along with the year that the amendment was passed, are: Alabama (2006), Alaska (1998), Arizona (2008), Arkansas (2004), California (2008), Colorado (2006), Florida (2008), Georgia (2004), Idaho (2006), Kansas (2005), Kentucky (2004), Louisiana (2004), Michigan (2004), Mississippi (2004), Missouri (2004), Montana (2004), Nebraska (2000), Nevada (2002), North Carolina (2012), North Dakota (2004), Ohio (2004), Oklahoma (2004), Oregon (2004), South Carolina (2006), South Dakota (2006), Tennessee (2006), Texas (2005), Utah (2004), Virginia (2006) and Wisconsin (2006).

A small group of states, including the state where I live, took the attack on gay marriage one step further. These states enacted laws or amendments that could be interpreted (and, in some cases, have been interpreted) to restrict the recognition of same-sex unions beyond that of denying marriage. The states are: Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Idaho, Louisiana, Michigan, Nebraska, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas, Utah, Virginia and Wisconsin.

For instance, the state I live in, Michigan, passed a constitutional amendment in 2004 that restricts marriage to a man and a woman. Beyond that, the amendment bans the recognition of any same-sex union for “any purpose.” Since its passage, city governments that had been offering partner benefits to their employees are now prohibited from continuing to do so. After threatening to sue the state, the University of Michigan was exempted from having to comply. The University successfully argued that losing partner benefits made it less attractive to prospective faculty.

Another impact of the amendment was to restrict second parent adoption to married couples. My wife is the biological parent of our child. Though I am emotionally and fiscally his parent and have been since his birth, I am denied the right to adopt him. This hurts our son as much as it does us. He cannot benefit from my health insurance or from any other benefit tied to adoption. In addition, I have no rights related to his health care. For example, if our son has a medical emergency and my spouse is not present, I would need to produce a signed consent statement from her that has been updated within the past six months in order to make medical decisions on our son’s behalf. In some states, I could even be denied the right to visit him in the hospital. Laws like these fly in the face of truth and rationality, revealing themselves to be what they are: perversions of justice and assaults on freedom.

LEGAL BENEFITS OF MARRIAGE

The Human Rights Campaign (HRC) is the largest LGBTQ advocacy organization in the United States and an excellent resource for state and national data on all legal issues that affect LGBTQs. According to the HRC, there are more than one thousand legal rights associated with marriage that are denied to gay couples. Access to health care is just the beginning. For example, gay individuals cannot leave their pensions or social security benefits to their partners. They have to hire lawyers to establish protections related to finances and home ownership that married couples enjoy without hassle. Gay couples are not entitled to the benefits of the Family Leave Act. If a partner is hospitalized, the other can be denied visitation. Gays can be left out of decision-making regarding partners’ medical care. They are denied many tax benefits. They are not entitled to the same work-related visa opportunities as married couples.