WAS ANYONE paying attention? On July 1, Virginia took up the mantle of one of the most backward states in the Union. Distracted and distanced by our summer vacations, we may not have noticed, but the University community will be dealing with the aftermath of this assault on civil rights for years.
The blow comes in the form of an amendment to the 1997 Marriage Affirmation Act, which became law last month, signaling an era of anti-gay discrimination to outrival nearly any other state in its antagonism of gays and lesbians. From the first of July on, "A civil union, partnership contract or other arrangement between persons of the same sex purporting to bestow the privileges and obligations of marriage is prohibited." Moreover, under the new law, any such union, contract or arrangement entered into in any other state, "and any contractual rights created thereby," are "void and unenforceable in Virginia."
Quite a complex bit of legal jargon, but simply stated, the Commonwealth's legislature has decided that the best way to affirm marriage is to straitjacket not only Virginia's contracts into its definition of family, but those of other states as well. Clever, perhaps, to the anti-gay-marriage activists that crafted it, but both devastatingly overreaching and glaringly unconstitutional.
Take the recent custody case of Janet and Lisa Miller-Jenkins and their daughter. Despite a pending custody case in Vermont, the state in which the two women were joined in a (later dissolved) civil union, Lisa was able to take her case to a Virginia court, where Frederick County Circuit Judge John R. Prosser declared the union irrelevant. Prosser's decision is willfully ignorant of federal law, which states that once a custody proceeding has properly begun in any state, no other state's courts have jurisdiction over that case. Not to mention the Full Faith and Credit Clause of the Constitution, which says each state must honor legal agreements, contracts and judgments from other states (and although the Federal Defense of Marriage Act exempts states from honoring gay marriages, Prosser's unconstitutional violation of Vermont's custody laws is premised upon this new amendment). It would seem, however, that the so-called affirmation of marriage heeds no such restrictions, from federal law or even constitutional mandate.
The American Bar Association warns that the new amendment is so deliberately vague that it could "nullify a variety of contracts used by same-sex couples to create rights and benefits that otherwise would be denied to them because they aren't married." Furthermore, this unprecedented anti-gay measure is so intentionally ambiguous that its legislative application could not only be used to deny homosexual couples currently existing rights, but could even challenge business contracts between unmarried, heterosexual people of the same sex such as real estate holdings and business partnerships. Gov. Mark R. Warner has described the act as an attempt to "violate contracts between individuals, whether they are gay or straight" and noted that "the ramifications of this could be enormous in terms of their ability to break apart business partnerships. It would move Virginia so far out of the mainstream that that's not where I think we ought to be."
Curious about what this has to do with your education? To begin, Virginia is the only state to forbid even private companies, unless self-insured, from extending health insurance benefits to unmarried couples. So when U.Va. tries to attract any prospective professor or administrator engaged in any sort of relationship outside a heterosexual marriage, it becomes far less competitive. And when this university can't attract the faculty to maintain its sterling reputation, both our education and degree value suffer greatly. The aforementioned threat to heterosexual partnerships certainly won't help any business, industry or company attempting to draw employees, not to mention how unlikely any homosexual would be to accept a job in such a hostile locale.
It bears mention that gay rights are far from fringe politics; 63 percent of Fortune 500 companies include sexual orientation in their non-discrimination policies. With this in mind, it's difficult to imagine why any business would set up shop in Virginia, which means a less competitive job market when we graduate. Not to mention the backlash. If activist groups like Virginia is for Haters have their (completely justified) way, boycotts could seriously damage Virginia's tourism and industries. Gays and lesbians account for over $485 billion annually in U.S. consumer spending, any part of which would be more than pocket change to a state already in a budget crisis.
The state legislature is playing politics with our education, our future and our economy in the name of persecuting a group of individuals. So if you weren't paying attention, now's a good time to start.
Katie Cristol's column appears Fridays in The Cavalier Daily. She can be reached at kcristol@cavalierdaily.com.
Read More
PATEL: Personal development courses support students beyond the gradebook
By Heer Patel | 3 days agoThe University must rethink its approach to education beyond traditional major-specific requirements and mandate personal development courses.
EDITORIAL: Commercialization threatens U.Va.’s educational mission
By Editorial Board | 3 days agoAfter all, measuring the University’s worth in terms of accrued capital, operational efficiency and numerical rankings molds this space into just another cookie-cutter institution.
YOUNIS: Why every U.Va. student should say yes to English
By Ayat Younis | January 9, 2025Every student at the University, regardless of their primary field of study, can professionally and academically benefit from engaging with the English department.
