Marriage Equality – Write on the World

For something people describe as sacred, romantic, and eternal, marriage in the United States is surprisingly bureaucratic. Before two people can be “married,” they need a government-issued license. A clerk records the paperwork. A legal framework determines how assets will be divided if the relationship ends. And in many cases, the couple signs the same basic legal agreement that millions of other couples sign, whether it suits their lives or not. In other words, marriage—at least in the eyes of the state—is already a contract. We just pretend it isn’t.

Two ways to say “I do”: one sacred, one legal—both important, both separate.

The confusion comes from the fact that in modern culture, two completely different institutions are treated as though they are the same thing: religious marriage and legal marriage. They are not.

Continue reading →

Many Americans talk about states’ rights as if it’s a shield for inaction, but the truth is that with states’ rights come states’ responsibilities. The federal government sets minimum standards for the country, but it’s up to each state to decide when those standards don’t go far enough. States have the authority—and the obligation—to raise the bar if they believe it’s the right thing for their residents. A higher minimum wage, stronger environmental protections, or expanded healthcare access can all start at the state level before ever being considered federally.

When states take the lead, change becomes possible. Highlighting the power of local action to set higher standards and drive national progress.

It’s easy to forget the sheer size and diversity of the United States. With so many people spread across vast distances and different cultures, making nationwide change is incredibly difficult, sometimes impossible, without groundwork laid by states first. Many social issues, including marriage equality, have followed this path. By June 2015, 36 states plus Washington, D.C., had already legalized same-sex marriage—proving that federal progress often relies on state-level experimentation and leadership. States shouldn’t see this as a hindrance—they should see it as an opportunity to lead national change from their own communities.

Continue reading →