Re: “Building his r’eacute;sum’eacute;,” Amber Vaillancourt, News, Feb. 1, 2008

Staff writer Amber Vaillancourt states that Republican Club President Brad DeFlumeri believes presidential candidate Mitt Romney will be strong “oppos[ing] homosexual rights.” Does this turn of phrase strike anybody else as odd?

We don’t often hear of the issue of gay marriage in such stark terms. “It’s a moral issue” is the description I most often hear from proponents of a national ban on homosexual unions. But at the most basic level, it isn’t a moral issue.

Or, rather it is a moral issue in the same way that denying black people the right to sit at the same diner counter as whites is a moral issue. Or the same way that forcing all Jews to wear stars on their clothing is a moral issue. Regardless of the reasons justifying why we as a nation refuse homosexuals the ability to marry, what it comes down to is that we are denying a specific group of citizens the right to reap the benefits of governmental recognition of their marriage.

Is marriage a privilege or a right? In a nation where marriages are allowed to take place only to be terminated less than 48 hours later, I would not call it a privilege. In a nation where an individual is allowed to marry time after time after time, I would not call it a privilege. In a nation where spousal selection is turned into a reality show, I would argue that it is not a privilege.

This puts us in a unique position as the election draws near. Back in the 90s, when I was still in elementary school and learning about the great civil rights movement of the 1950s and 60s, LGBT rights were not as prominent a national issue as they are today. But now they are, and I find it hard to ignore the similarities – those that have the power wish to deny others a civil right because of what makes them different.

Selecting the right person to lead the nation through such a decision is crucial. The issue of LGBT rights will come up again during the next president’s term, whether it be through a proposed amendment of the U.S. Constitution as has been attempted in the past, or in ways that are more subtle. At this point, selecting a leader who will lead us over this great moral hurdle is just as important as choosing a leader who will lead us out of economic recession or lead us to the proper decision in the wars we are engaged in.

Brandon Milardo UMass student Class of 2009