placing a sacred institution entirely in the hands of the church while placing a secular institution

4.2.12 WC: 191694 placing a sacred institution entirely in the hands of the church while placing a secular institution under state control. Roger Williams and Thomas Jefferson would surely have approved. Although this proposal may sound radical, it does not differ fundamentally -- except for labels -- from the situation that exists in many states today. Throughout the United States, couples have the option of being married civilly by going to town halls or to a justice of the peace and simply signing a marriage certificate. They also have the option of going to a church, synagogue or mosque and being married in a religious ceremony. So most Americans already have the choice between a sacrament and a secular agreement ratified by the state. All that would be different would be the name we give the secular agreement. The word "marriage" would be reserved for those who chose the religious sacrament. Though some traditionalists would be certain to balk at an explicit division between marriage and civil union, a majority of Americans already agree that gay couples should be allowed to join in secular unions with the rights and responsibilities that generally accompany marriage. I concluded my op ed as follows: So let each couple decide whether they want to receive the sacrament of marriage or the secular status of civil union. And let the state get out of the business of determining who should receive holy sacraments. My column was widely circulated and generated an enormous debate. I was invited to appear on television and radio shows, where extremists on both sides pilloried me: gay activists for not going far enough; religious anti-gay activists for going too far. Shortly after my column appeared, I received a phone call from the then Governor of Massachusetts, Mitt Romney, who told me that he found my idea interesting and asked me to draft legislation that he might consider proposing in order to break the deadlock. I drafted the legislation, but never heard back from the governor, who by the time I submitted it, had announced his candidacy for President of the United States. He was almost certainly fearful of the pushback he would get from the religious right—whose votes he needed to be nominated—if he were seen as favoring anything that even resembled gay marriage. Since that time, several states have adopted gay marriage or civil unions and the trend is clearly in the direction of full equality for gay men and women. I predict, based on the reaction of my current students to this issue, that the next generation will not even understand why earlier generations took so long to recognize equality for gays. A woman’s right to choose abortion As easy as the resolution of the gay marriage issue would be under our Constitution—full equality either in marriage or civil unions for all—that’s how difficult it is to resolve the abortion issue as a 312 HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017399