Target: Michigan state attorneys
Goal: Condemn Michigan state officials for saying that marriage inequality is necessary to regulate sexual relationships
Michigan lawmakers continue to endorse Michigan state’s laws that ban both same-sex marriage and same-sex adoption to stop a lesbian couple from getting joint legal custody and protections for their three children whom they have been raising together. In the most recent filing, state attorneys contend that keeping marriage between a man and a woman is vital for regulating the sexual relationships between women and men and for promoting the interests of the state.
The state attorneys stated that one of the primary reasons for marriage in the state of Michigan along with thirty-seven other states that define marriage as a union solely between a man and a woman is to regulate sexual relationships between women and men for their procreative abilities. It is the reproductive purpose of these sexual relationships that benefits rather than harms society. This acceptance of marriage as a union between a woman and a man for the purpose of raising children that resulted from their union is universal and age-old. This understanding of marriage is predicated on a vast amount of research conducted by social scientists that emphasizes how essential the nexus between marriage and procreation and child-rearing is.
Before Massachusetts became the first state to include same-sex relationships in its definition of marriage in 2004, the Michigan state attorneys assert that the institution of marriage persisted because of society’s investment in the idea that responsible reproduction and childbearing was essential. For that reason, the lawyers claim, the Supreme Court has long believed that marriage was fundamental to the existence and survival of American society and culture.
The lawyers’ argument that marriage inequality is necessary to ensure “responsible procreation” is flawed. It mimics the arguments proffered by those who defended anti-sodomy laws, all of which were struck down in a 2003 decision in Lawrence v. Texas. State laws that ban same-sex marriage do not provide any oversight over the sexual relationship between a same-sex couple. Michigan laws do not ban gay couples from having a sexual relationship or from raising children. However, they discriminate against same-sex couples from getting legal protections for their families.
There is no rational basis for the laws in Michigan. Michigan attorneys claims that same-sex couples do not further State interests and that allowing gay couples to marry would limit the benefits of heterosexual couples and children throughout the state are abhorrent, bigoted and untrue. Please sign this petition to condemn the efforts of Michigan state officials to maintain marriage inequality in order to keep members of the gay community as second-class citizens.
Dear Michigan state attorneys,
We condemn you for endorsing marriage inequality in order to regulate sexual relationships. Your arguments are irrational and based on false premises. Allowing same-sex couples to marry and have children does not strip or limit the benefits afforded to opposite-sex couples and their children.
Many lawmakers and attorneys who do not embrace same-sex marriage in the definition of marriage have used the argument that marriage is meant for “responsible procreation” and childrearing. Such efforts have has little success. The idea that marriage is solely a union between a man and a woman for reproductive purposes is antiquated and must be condemned. Please reconsider your decision to continue to deny same-sex couples the basic rights to marry and adopt children. Members of the gay community should not be treated as second-class citizens.
[Your Name Here]
Photo credit: ep_jhu via Flickr