The recent Iowa Supreme Court decision which declared the ban on same-gender marriage unconstitutional is sure to stimulate more conversation and debate for several weeks to come. Painfully lacking from public discourse about marriage equality here in the state, however, is an affirmative African American voice and the compassionate voice of the Black church.

While it is not uncommon to see local Black leaders standing united with other politicians and activists in opposition to the Iowa Supreme Court decision, it is important to note that national Black leaders like Julian Bond of the NAACP and Rev. Al Sharpton of the National Action Network have taken an affirming stance on gay rights as civil rights, and they both support marriage equality.  Despite the fact that some of our most fascinating strategic and literary minds during the Black Revolution movement have been gay and lesbian, like Bayard Rustin, Audre Lourde, James Baldwin, and Lorraine Hansberry, rarely do we see local Black leaders who champion the cause on behalf of our gay and lesbian neighbors who live in our communities and frequent our Sunday services.  

One of these rare exceptions is Bishop Julius C. Trimble of the United Methodist Church.  He declined an invitation from Catholic Bishops of Iowa and other religious leaders in condemning the Iowa Supreme Court decision.  Instead, he stated that he “strongly believed that the Iowa Supreme Court acted with judicial integrity in its determination that ‘civil marriages must be judged under constitutional standards of equal protection and not under religious doctrines or religious views of individuals.’”

Furthermore, Bishop Trimble challenged Iowa United Methodists to engage in spiritual introspection and self-discovery, asking “What does ‘radical hospitality’ look like, when the practices of the state and the policies of the church differ?”  Excluding this exception, however, raises an important question:  Why is there among some Blacks such stiff opposition to marriage equality, on the one hand, and a curiously annoying and deafening silence from some supporters on this important human and civil rights issue, on the other?

Perhaps part of the disconnect arises from a misunderstanding of what this decision means in practical terms.  Many wonder, for instance, if this now means that pastors and other religious clerics will be forced to scrap their religious convictions, violate their consciences, and perform wedding ceremonies for gay and lesbian individuals since it is now a matter of law.

Recognizing the sincerity of religionists who believe that traditional marriage would be undermined if marriage equality were upheld, the court declared that civil unions between gay and lesbian partners do not infringe upon current religious practices, and that civil marriage does not define marriage for religious institutions.  

Striking about the angst of some religionists to maintain the integrity of traditional marriage, of course, is the fact that traditional marriage reportedly dissolves nearly 50% of the time among opposite-sex partners.  Among Blacks, even though studies show that married African Americans fare better economically and are happier than their unmarried counterparts, Harvard professor Andrew J. Cherlin posits in his publication Marriage, Divorce, Remarriage that “during the days of slavery a Black child was more likely to grow up living with both parents than he or she is today.”

These statistics suggest that removing the ban against same-sex marriage will not necessarily undermine traditional marriage, as is often postulated.  Traditional marriage is already imperiled.  These religionists and activists should probably invest more energy into strengthening and maintaining loving heterosexual marriages as opposed to affronting same-sex partners and challenging their human and civil rights.   In fact, the court states that “marriage is a civil contract” and works to ensure equal protection of the law for all of its citizens.  Religious clerics and institutions are free to continue to perform the traditional marriage ceremonies, and keep their convictions and their consciences in tact.

Interestingly, Alexander Robinson, president and CEO of the National Black Coalition for Justice, maintains that qualitative studies reveal most Blacks do not view homosexuality as endemic to our own communities. “What happens,” Robinson suggests, “is that Blacks tend to have somewhat of an out-of-body experience and somehow convince themselves that the LGBT issue is not a Black issue as much as it is a white issue.  Perhaps this, in part, helps explain Black opposition to the LGBT movement, not just in Iowa, but everywhere.”

Still others in the African American community agree with those in the majority population who argue that gay and lesbian couples could not possibly provide an optimal environment to raise children. While many would acknowledge that homes with both a father and a mother, dual-gender parenting, may be the optimal environment, this argument tends to be weak in the face of our social realities.  Do we protest with equal passion and animation against marriages that have sexual predators and womanizers as fathers, child abusers as mothers, absentee and neglectful parents who fail to pay child support, or parents who are violent felons?  Are these examples of “optimal parenting” present among the heterosexual community? And do we insist that an amendment be made to the marriage statute to rectify these less than optimal parenting situations that have been with us the whole time, regardless of race or ethnicity?

The Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., famously said that “injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.”  Contrary to popular opinion, we would learn that most of our gay and lesbian neighbors will tell us that they did not choose their sexual orientation, if we can arrest our deeply-seated homophobia long enough and exercise the love and patience to listen attentively to their stories.  Certainly, we do not want to be guilty of inflicting the pain of discrimination and marginalization on our gay and lesbian neighbors, or to be guilty of denying other human beings equal protection of the law, especially after gaining the freedoms that we as African Americans enjoy through our own  fight for equal opportunity and equal protection of the law.  

Instead, let us all—regardless of race, ethnicity, or sexual orientation – organize and unite our love, talent and energy around demanding that our legislators fight to eradicate the crippling disparities in economic development, education, healthcare, and criminal justice that plague our communities across our great state.  And if we are not engaged in the fight to advance the cause of human and civil rights on behalf of our gay and lesbian neighbors, perhaps on this particular subject it is better to imitate the great teacher of hospitality of biblical fame: simply remain silent.