You are here: Home » Featured » Rhode Island Marriage Debate Gets Heated

Rhode Island Marriage Debate Gets Heated

03/11/11-by Bridgette P. LaVictoire
“Marriage between one man and one woman is more sacred than anything. We’re being bullied into this by states like Massachusetts. Rhode Island should stand up and say we’re not going to do it.” That is the problem, is it not. The word ‘sacred’. It is probably something that Roy Gustafson, the Warwick auto body technician who uttered those words, had not thought about. If marriage between one man and one woman is more sacred than anything, than that means that his life is not sacred, nor is God, nor the Bible, nor a church.

Gustafson, like far too many people, hold sacred a view of marriage that dates back to 1969, when the Supreme Court of the United States redefined marriage as being between one man and one woman. Prior to that point, marriage was between one man and one woman of the same race. If you go further back, people of different religions were not suppose to marry either. If you go even further back than that, you find out that marriage was never actually defined as being between one man and one woman.

Of course, who determines what is sacred and what is not. That is why America has a First Amendment and a guarantee of Freedom of and from Religion.

Gustafson stated this as Rhode Island begins moving towards legalizing marriage between two people of the same sex. It should be noted that many lesbians and gays can get church sanctioned weddings, but not have those legally recognized. Opponents of legalizing these already church sanctioned marriages flooded the Rhode Island Senate hearing room to loudly drown out any debate by chanting “one man, one woman.”

According to Mercury News:

Patricia Baker told senators she hopes to see gay marriage in Rhode Island before she dies. The 54-year-old corrections officer from Johnston has terminal lung cancer and requires an oxygen tank to breathe.

Baker married her wife, Deborah Tevyaw, in Massachusetts five years ago, but because they’re lesbians, Tevyaw isn’t eligible to receive Baker’s social security benefits. As Baker told her story to lawmakers, Tevyaw wiped away tears.

“I worked all my life for those benefits,” Baker said. “We own a house. We pay taxes. But they told me my Social Security benefits would go back into the system when I die. How is she going to keep the house?”

Openly gay state Representative Frank Ferri of Warwick got into a slightly heated exchange as he stood up after finishing his remarks. He confronted a marriage opponent sitting nearby who held a sign saying “Keep Marriage Holy.” Ferri then stated “Why do you care who I love? Shame on you. Shame on you that your God is the God that’s right and mine isn’t. Shame on you for thinking you’re more perfect than I am.”

The religious sentiment was also seen in the mouth of Democratic Senator Harold Metts who stated “We cannot marginalize sin. That’s the danger. . .I don’t hate anyone, but I do believe that marriage is between one man and one woman.” Of course he does not hate anyone- he just thinks that what they are doing is sinful and they should stop being gay in any way shape or form because, as far as he is concerned, being gay is sinful. One does not have to hate to be a bigot.

The Senate is the big obstacle since Senate President Teresa Paiva Weed opposes the bill.

Opponents want the bill to go to the voters because they want to force their religious based bigotry on others. They are more than willing to lie, fear monger, and do what ever it takes to ensure that bigotry is enshrined in the law. Chris Plante, state director of the hate-group National Organization for Marriage stated “We voted on casinos. How much more fundamental is marriage?”

When he is willing to have his marriage rights put to the vote, then he can talk.

According to Mercury News:

The fate of the bill could turn on a provision giving clergy the right to refuse to perform same-sex weddings if they object to gay marriage. Opponents say that doesn’t go far enough, and they worry that churches could be forced to host gay weddings, or that religious colleges would be forced to place gay couples in housing for married students.

Supporters are working on amendments designed to win over undecided lawmakers.

“I think it’s really, really close,” said Sen. Rhoda Perry, D-Providence, one of the sponsors of the Senate’s bill. “A lot of people are going to be working hard to change people’s minds.”