Homosexuality Split America

New-York could become the sixth American state where unisex marriages are permitted. The bill equalizing in rights living in unisex marriages with traditional spouses was approved by the New York senate supervised by republicans. Now the governor of the state who was the initiator of the bill should sign the document.

It is impossible to say that opinion of members of parliament was unanimous - 33 senators (29 democrats and 4 republicans) voted for lifting the ban, 29 supported keeping of the ban for marriage registration. That is at little change of a parity of positions in the senate its next structure can vote for cancellation of unisex marriages. Thus the New York senate already rejected such bill two years ago.

Meanwhile New York becomes the sixth under account and the most densely populated state where unisex marriages will be permitted.

The problem of legalization of unisex marriages has been splitting America for many years: many states have accepted special regulations forbidding marriages of homosexuals. Marriage registration between homosexual partners is forbidden in 39 states.

Unisex marriages are legally lawful in five American states: Iowa, Vermont, Connecticut, Massachusetts and New-Hampshire as well as in Washington, district of Columbia. In four states - Delaware, Illinois, New Jerseys and on Hawaii unisex unions are permitted.

The first unisex marriage was registered in the USA in 2004 in Massachusetts.

According to last polls, 58% of citizens of New York acted for legalization of such marriages in this state. As a whole voices of supporters and opponents of unisex marriages are divided approximately fifty-fifty around the country, according  to Pew Research poll, 45% of Americans are pro legalization, 46% - contra.

From editorial board: There is a question why purely sex pathological collision became one of serious political problems of a modern society in the most different countries? Not the problem of racism or oppression of workers, not the problem of sexual exploitation of children and not slave-owning but the right of homosexuals to get "family" - like this, in inverted commas as steady union of same-gender citizens can't lead to continuation of family in any way, that is it can't be family in any way no matter what decision legislators accept.

Why we are not talking about the right of pedophiles who suffer strong and steady feelings to children? Why not the right of Sodomites wishing to marry dogs and pigs? Why not the right of women to urinate standing and men - against a wind?

Why not to legalize the right of cannibals? For example, if someone bequeathed to bury himself in a stomach of the darling... What do you say? - It doesn't correspond with the standard understanding of a word "funeral"? Well, homosexual "marriage" also doesn't quite correspond.

Actually all LGBT-movement today is directed to obtain the right to publicity of homosexual relations - as those unisex communications have been legalized in the majority of countries, that is they are not pursued in any way. As to sidelong glances - unless it's possible to forbid them legislatively?

It reminds me very much situation, say, with polygamous marriages - by the way, without any inverted commas as they are real marriages. All know that there is big quantity of relations where there are more than two figurants of relations, it happens not only among Moslems or Mormons. People in Moscow also for years live "for two families", all civil-law nuances are regulated with the help of wills, paternity recognition and so on. At that we don't hear requirements to carry out parade of polygamists or to legalize polygamous marriages - all passes somehow not so noisy.

Though from the point of view of interests of society the question with polygamous marriages is much more actual - after all there are children in such marriages, while a family where farther is one but there are several mothers can't receive apartment. Besides your family wouldn't be considered large though there are a lot of children. So there are no privileges.

The problem of polygamy interests nobody, it's perceived as vestige of times of Tsar Solomon whom, by the way, the church considers the prophet despite of extensive harem on the one hand and strict church morals on the other. While marriages of homosexuals are for some reason progressive, though unisex relations pretty often can be met even in monkey's herd.

Thus people are somehow not aware that there couldn't be quiet relation to homosexuality in the society for purely psychological reasons, it's even possible to say - biological. No matter what laws you pass but there always will be negative attitude to homosexualists among "hetero" - it's normal protective mechanism, same as suspicious relation to "strangers" or distinction in psychotypes of men and women. It can't be removed legislatively, thought being the tsar of the nature a man is not omnipotent. Using public mechanisms and legislation is possible to get rid of reasons for excesses, to introduce norms and tolerance borders but no more than that.

You can grant women equal rights with men but no woman ever becomes world champion on weightlifting among men though you can let her participate in man's championship. You can punish strictly and quite fairly for anti-Semitism but all the same there will be Jews and those who are not Jews, both will aspire to live on the customs. The same way with homosexualists - the fact that they exist and will continue existence doesn't mean that homosexual relations will become comprehensible to the majority of society. Demonstration of homosexual relations, aspiration to publicity doesn't serve tolerance - more likely on the contrary it reminds of aggression as about ancient protective reaction of heterosexual majority.

It's a challenge for America in much bigger degree, than for reflexive-tolerant Europe or, let us assume, traditional Russia where even lefthanders are "retrained". A conflict between freedom which was a symbol of formation of the American society and Puritan attitude of the white majority which also was a basis at creation of America arises. Gay movement brings not solved conflict between two pillars of the American society - aspiration to freedom and strict Puritan morals.

If to result analogies swinger movement of 60s years of the last century was "February" of the American sexual revolution and gay movement is a mutiny of the Czechoslovak regiment which gave the start for partition of the society and civil war.

In XX century America managed to avoid social revolutions, having created mafia powerful trade-union associations and having simply "bought" working class top. America managed to avoid separatism and civil war between "white" and "black". America managed to suppress territorial separatism. Though whether it will manage to overcome the split which passes literally in everyone and has relation to everyone?

Аnatoly Baranov

Send by mail

Print