Equality?

But the “gay” passage of Obama’s speech underscored the lingering gap between the American ideal and the American reality. “Our journey is not complete,” he said, “until our gay brothers and sisters are treated like anyone else under the law — for if we are truly created equal, then surely the love we commit to one another must be equal as well.”    A Map of Human Dignity by Frank Bruni

This passage, as well as the article's overall message, reminds me a lot of the struggles for racial equality that had gathered nationwide attention decades ago. Now this may seem like a shallow analysis, and it likely is from a narrow comparative perspective, but the same principle applies as reflected in Barack Obama's speech. The Declaration of Independence reads: 

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal..." 

Interestingly, the 16th president of the United States, Abraham Lincoln, the president whom Barack Obama has recently been compared to in correlation with the political divisions that occured during the 2012 election, alluded the very same passage of the Declaration of Independence during his famous Gettysburg Address: 

"...our fathers brought forth on this continent a new nation, conceived in liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal."

This nation continues to strive for equality, but it seems to have difficulty defining it. This is evident from the "separate but equal" determination by the Supreme Court over the Plessy vs. Ferguson case in the late 19th century. Plessy Argued that the forced separation of blacks from whites inherently implies that blacks are inferior to whites and that forced separation was, therefore, a violation of the Fourteenth Amendment. The Supreme Court ruled: 

"...it is not by reason of anything found in the act, but solely because the colored race chooses to put that construction upon it."

However, in 1954, the Supreme Court repealed this decision in their ruling of Brown vs. Board of Education, putting an end to public school segregation and, by extension, segregation altogether, although not immediately or easily. It seems obvious that our interpretations of what is right or wrong, what is equal or unequal, is determined by societal context. Our definitions continue to change. Fortunately, the Civil Rights movement finally established equality for blacks in the eyes of the government, but even today racial tensions are prevalent among ordinary citizens. This is where it gets difficult to define equality. Are they equal in the eyes of the government or in the eyes of the people? Government recognition equality merely indicates a person's right to vote, to hold office, to be protected by law under the same circumstances. Public recognition is deeper. The government isn't greatly concerned as to one's physical appearance, personal backgrounds, or personal choices    the people are. We perceive, and then we judge based upon the principles and doctrine we hold to ourselves. Inherently, a black individual is not characteristically equal to a white individual, a Hispanic individual, or any other individual of a distinctive race. As well, a homosexual is not the same as a heterosexual    they are characteristically different. So is it important that LGBT's are extended the same marital rights as other human beings? Well, that really depends on one's definition of marriage. Marriage has been conventionally defined as between a man and a woman; it is a precedent that has been established for millennia but has been given legal significance in relation to government. Does its legal significance mean that every individual is entitled to it despite there sexual orientation, or should marriage remain a strictly heterosexual union as defined by its significance based on biological definition?