Dana Gold
04-28-05, 08:06 PM
I came across this article while browsing Google News:
Man, Woman, Other. . . The Biological Complexity Behind Simplistic Gay Marriage Laws
by Dr. John Uhl
www.OpEdNews.com
Our wonderful and beloved Declaration of Independence tells us it is a self-evident truth that we are all created equal (or at least that we white men are). It says we are endowed by our creator with inalienable rights of liberty and the pursuit of happiness. In addition, the sixth amendment of the U.S. Constitution promises us all equal protection under the law. And, there are laws to prevent discrimination against those with disabilities.
So explain to me how we can have laws (and are considering a Constitutional amendment) limiting marriage to "a man and a woman" when hundreds of thousands of people in the United States are neither. Not a man, but not really a woman either.
We all know that women have 2 X chromosomes and a preponderance of estrogen and progesterone. Men have an X and a Y chromosome, and mainly androgens. But there are also people with XO, XXX, XXY, XXXY, XXXXY, XYY, and XXYY, chromosomes. What gender are they?
Some people have had a mutation early in fetal development, and have "chromosomal mosaic"--more than one cell line in their bodies, such as X/XX, X/XXX, X/XY, and XY/XXY.
Some people have XY chromosomes like a male, but the Y is not expressed, so they appear female. Some people have XX chromosomes like a female, but appear male because part of the Y chromosome translocated to the X chromosome. What gender are they?
Some people have ambiguous genitalia, the result of partial virilization of a fetus due to too much or too little androgen due to various problems during fetal development.[i] Doctors and parents of these people generally choose a gender for them, and genital surgery may be done early in life. But, as adults, these people are often very unhappy with the choices made on their behalf. Are they the gender of their chromosomes, the gender of their hormones, the gender they feel they are, or the gender assigned to them in infancy?
Who decides what gender any of these people are? And by what criteria?
There are literally thousands of things that can and do go wrong in the sexual differentiation of human beings. Harrison's Textbook of Internal Medicine Fifteenth Edition describes many of them--in twelve pages of tiny type.[ii] And these conditions are not rare. Estimates of incidence of gender ambiguity vary, but these conditions probably occur about 1 per 1000 births. That means at least several hundred thousand Americans.
Certainly, marriage would rank high on many peoples' lists of inalienable rights, liberties, or ways to pursue happiness. Forget homosexuals. Even if there were no such thing as homosexuality, these defense of marriage laws violate the idea of equal protection and anti-discrimination, for all the thousands of people who, through absolutely no fault of their own, are of intermediate or indeterminate gender.
"Oh, don't worry," proponents of defense of marriage laws might say if they were being honest. "We won't bother those people. The law is only meant to apply to homosexuals (the group we don't like, the group the Bible says are evil)." But then these laws require not only abandonment of equal protection under the Constitution, and abandonment of separation of church and state. They also require that the law then be applied selectively as well.
It is often said that ignorance is no excuse for the law--that not knowing a law does not prevent one from having to follow it. But surely, it must be equally true that ignorance of biology is no excuse for these laws: ignorance, fear, and hate inspired; misguided, simplistic, Constitution ignoring, busybody meddling into the private affairs of people simply trying to live lives of love and commitment (and have the legal rights all of us who are married take for granted).
A few additional random thoughts and unintended consequences:
1) Heterosexual couples are well aware of the "marriage penalty": if both work, most pay more federal income taxes married than they would if they only lived together. Although there is a lot of talk of the benefits homosexual couples hope to gain from marriage, this cost to them has largely been left out of the debate. Ironically, the Defense of Marriage Act signed by President Clinton (which says that the Federal Government will not recognize gay marriages allowed elsewhere) spares gay married couples from the increased income taxes they would otherwise have to pay.
2) The U.S. Supreme Court recently struck down a Texas law forbidding sodomy. Therefore all homosexual acts between consenting adults, no matter how random or casual, no matter how unconventional or offensive to the general public, no matter how dangerous to personal or public health, are absolutely constitutionally protected.
On the other hand, loving committed long-term relationships between people who happen to be of the same or intermediate gender, are somehow so heinous and disgusting that they threaten the happiness and well-being-- even the validity and sanctity of the marriage-- of people who have never met them and will never see them. This degree of intolerance, hypocrisy, logical inconsistency, intrusion into people's personal lives, and intentional discrimination is reminiscent of, and unprecedented since, Jim Crow and anti-miscegenation laws. How would Jesus vote?
[i] Harrison s Principles of Internal Medicine, 15th Edition; Disorders of sexual differentiation, pages 2172-2184.
[ii] Harrison s Principles of Internal Medicine, 15th Edition; Disorders of sexual differentiation, pages 2172-2184.
Dr. John Uhl lifeonacrowdedplanet@<hidden> is an emergency physician, with more than 20 years experience working in a county hospital's emergency department/trauma center, and on Stanford University's clinical faculty, teaching medical students, interns and residents. He is the author of Life on a Crowded Planet: How You can Help Create a Sustainable Future, and New Ideas for the Left, A Political Platform for Sustainability. Both are available free from www.lifeonacrowdedplanet.com .
Man, Woman, Other. . . The Biological Complexity Behind Simplistic Gay Marriage Laws
by Dr. John Uhl
www.OpEdNews.com
Our wonderful and beloved Declaration of Independence tells us it is a self-evident truth that we are all created equal (or at least that we white men are). It says we are endowed by our creator with inalienable rights of liberty and the pursuit of happiness. In addition, the sixth amendment of the U.S. Constitution promises us all equal protection under the law. And, there are laws to prevent discrimination against those with disabilities.
So explain to me how we can have laws (and are considering a Constitutional amendment) limiting marriage to "a man and a woman" when hundreds of thousands of people in the United States are neither. Not a man, but not really a woman either.
We all know that women have 2 X chromosomes and a preponderance of estrogen and progesterone. Men have an X and a Y chromosome, and mainly androgens. But there are also people with XO, XXX, XXY, XXXY, XXXXY, XYY, and XXYY, chromosomes. What gender are they?
Some people have had a mutation early in fetal development, and have "chromosomal mosaic"--more than one cell line in their bodies, such as X/XX, X/XXX, X/XY, and XY/XXY.
Some people have XY chromosomes like a male, but the Y is not expressed, so they appear female. Some people have XX chromosomes like a female, but appear male because part of the Y chromosome translocated to the X chromosome. What gender are they?
Some people have ambiguous genitalia, the result of partial virilization of a fetus due to too much or too little androgen due to various problems during fetal development.[i] Doctors and parents of these people generally choose a gender for them, and genital surgery may be done early in life. But, as adults, these people are often very unhappy with the choices made on their behalf. Are they the gender of their chromosomes, the gender of their hormones, the gender they feel they are, or the gender assigned to them in infancy?
Who decides what gender any of these people are? And by what criteria?
There are literally thousands of things that can and do go wrong in the sexual differentiation of human beings. Harrison's Textbook of Internal Medicine Fifteenth Edition describes many of them--in twelve pages of tiny type.[ii] And these conditions are not rare. Estimates of incidence of gender ambiguity vary, but these conditions probably occur about 1 per 1000 births. That means at least several hundred thousand Americans.
Certainly, marriage would rank high on many peoples' lists of inalienable rights, liberties, or ways to pursue happiness. Forget homosexuals. Even if there were no such thing as homosexuality, these defense of marriage laws violate the idea of equal protection and anti-discrimination, for all the thousands of people who, through absolutely no fault of their own, are of intermediate or indeterminate gender.
"Oh, don't worry," proponents of defense of marriage laws might say if they were being honest. "We won't bother those people. The law is only meant to apply to homosexuals (the group we don't like, the group the Bible says are evil)." But then these laws require not only abandonment of equal protection under the Constitution, and abandonment of separation of church and state. They also require that the law then be applied selectively as well.
It is often said that ignorance is no excuse for the law--that not knowing a law does not prevent one from having to follow it. But surely, it must be equally true that ignorance of biology is no excuse for these laws: ignorance, fear, and hate inspired; misguided, simplistic, Constitution ignoring, busybody meddling into the private affairs of people simply trying to live lives of love and commitment (and have the legal rights all of us who are married take for granted).
A few additional random thoughts and unintended consequences:
1) Heterosexual couples are well aware of the "marriage penalty": if both work, most pay more federal income taxes married than they would if they only lived together. Although there is a lot of talk of the benefits homosexual couples hope to gain from marriage, this cost to them has largely been left out of the debate. Ironically, the Defense of Marriage Act signed by President Clinton (which says that the Federal Government will not recognize gay marriages allowed elsewhere) spares gay married couples from the increased income taxes they would otherwise have to pay.
2) The U.S. Supreme Court recently struck down a Texas law forbidding sodomy. Therefore all homosexual acts between consenting adults, no matter how random or casual, no matter how unconventional or offensive to the general public, no matter how dangerous to personal or public health, are absolutely constitutionally protected.
On the other hand, loving committed long-term relationships between people who happen to be of the same or intermediate gender, are somehow so heinous and disgusting that they threaten the happiness and well-being-- even the validity and sanctity of the marriage-- of people who have never met them and will never see them. This degree of intolerance, hypocrisy, logical inconsistency, intrusion into people's personal lives, and intentional discrimination is reminiscent of, and unprecedented since, Jim Crow and anti-miscegenation laws. How would Jesus vote?
[i] Harrison s Principles of Internal Medicine, 15th Edition; Disorders of sexual differentiation, pages 2172-2184.
[ii] Harrison s Principles of Internal Medicine, 15th Edition; Disorders of sexual differentiation, pages 2172-2184.
Dr. John Uhl lifeonacrowdedplanet@<hidden> is an emergency physician, with more than 20 years experience working in a county hospital's emergency department/trauma center, and on Stanford University's clinical faculty, teaching medical students, interns and residents. He is the author of Life on a Crowded Planet: How You can Help Create a Sustainable Future, and New Ideas for the Left, A Political Platform for Sustainability. Both are available free from www.lifeonacrowdedplanet.com .