Gay Words

He always, through the power of his words, moves me.

Andrew Sullivan has flaws, as do we all, but there is no denying that the man is one of the great writers of our day.  Though he’s written much more, much of which is far more eloquent even than this, this morning there is a discussion about the impact of AIDS, from Andrew on Tuesday:

If you think that the Vietnam war took around 60,000 young American lives randomly over a decade or more, then imagine the psychic and social impact of 300,000 young Americans dying in a few years. Imagine a Vietnam Memorial five times the size. The victims were from every state and city and town and village. They were part of millions and millions of families. Suddenly, gay men were visible in ways we had never been before. And our humanity – revealed by the awful, terrifying, gruesome deaths of those in the first years of the plague – ripped off the veneer of stereotype and demonization and made us seem as human as we are. More, actually: part of our families.

I think that horrifying period made the difference. It also galvanized gay men and lesbians into fighting more passionately than ever – because our very lives were at stake. There were different strategies – from Act-Up actions to Log Cabin conventions. But more and more of us learned self-respect and refused to tolerate the condescension, double standards, discrimination and violence so many still endured. We were deadly serious. And we fight on in part because of those we had lost. At least I know I do.

For all that he may do to frustrate or annoy all of us at times, the man has fought on without end to make this world we live in more understanding of gay lives and more willing to accept that LGBT equality is the moral path for our country — and world — to take.  What’s more, he has fought on with, at times, some of the most eloquent words that I’ve read.

* * * * *

Way back on Jan. 10, 2000, when Andrew was a senior editor at The New Republic and the Vermont Supreme Court had ruled in Baker v. Vermont that equal benefits and protections had to be given to same-sex couples, Andrew, through the Editors of TNR, wrote what I have long believed to be the most powerfully unambiguous two sentences written in the argument for marriage equality:

Legalizing gay marriage . . . is not a radical reformulation of an unchanging institution. It is the long-overdue correction of a moral anomaly that dehumanizes and excludes a significant portion of the human race.

Finally, the conclusion of that editorial — “Separate but Equal?” — it seems to me, was as much Andrew’s note to himself as it was an argument to be heard far and wide, in responding to the possibility of “civil unions” being adopted, which later happened, rather than marriage itself:

There is in fact no argument for a domestic-partnership compromise except that the maintenance of stigma is an important social value–that if homosexuals are finally allowed on the marriage bus, they should still be required to sit in the back. This “solution” smacks of the equally incoherent half-measure of “don’t ask, don’t tell,” another unwieldy contraption that was designed to overcome discrimination but instead has ruthlessly reinforced it. Equality is equality. Marriage is marriage. There is no ultimate moral or political answer to this question but to grant both. And to keep marshaling the moral, religious, civic, and human reasons why it is an eminently important and noble thing to do.

That is, of course, what Andrew has gone on to do.  And the Vermont legislature, of course, passed full marriage equality in their state earlier this year.

Thanks to Andrew, and many others, for your lifelong dedication to our cause.

Popularity: 1% [?]