Gay Marriage and Democracy: Equality for All (review)

As a book that hopes to "convince the reader that the fundamental principles of American Democracy not only allow but also require the legislation of same-sex marriage" (2), R. Claire Snyder's Gay Marriage and Democracy archives its purpose well. By the end, I found myself convinced of the central argument through her thorough use of evidence, deep citation, and varied examples. One of the greatest achievements of this book is the multiangled approach it takes to scholarship; Snyder draws on classical and contemporary political theorists, legal precedent, and historical examples to craft a uniquely textured and insightful text. Her rich understanding of these sometimes disparate traditions is evident as she repeatedly finds important intersections among them.

Of course, Snyder's claim is as much about democracy as it is marriage, which begs the question for political scholars: What are these fundamental principles on which she premises her argument? The main one Snyder evokes in this book is "equality among citizens" (2). In the third chapter, she lays out this central argument in detail: "While significant numbers of people have always been treated unequally despite liberal ideals, the principle of equality has functioned as one of progressive change over time" (49). She claims that as soon as this principle is not upheld, a government ceases to be democratic (her example: democratically elected Nazi Germany). I found myself sometimes at odds with her version of democracy and wanting further explanation and argument about why her model is better than others, but I also acknowledge that is not the main purpose of this book. Indeed she does offer arguments against a deliberative model of democracy on this issue, stating that despite the benefits of public deliberation, "some principles are so fundamental to democratic society that they cannot be infringed" (6).

Ultimately, Snyder's book serves (as I believe she intended) as a resource of fresh arguments in a stale debate on same-sex marriage. Most important is the central one premised on democratic principles (chapters 1 and 3). She also includes a chapter with arguments against biblical/religious claims (chapter 4). Although nothing new, it is nonetheless a good compilation of extant arguments and a relevant area for her larger goal. Chapter 6 argues against conservative communitarian thinkers and their model of democracy as neglecting the central principle of equality. Not her strongest chapter, in my opinion, here she basically summarizes communitarian arguments (both for and against same-sex marriage) and then critiques them briefly on procedural grounds similar to deliberative democracy.

Chapters 2 and 5 give some historical perspective to the issues. The first offers an insightful history of the institution of marriage, breaking it down into four types: "the personal bond, the community-recognized relationship, the religious rite, and the civil contract" (15). She aptly contextualizes each aspect in the specific historical situation that called it into being. She uses this description then to dislodge an ahistorical, static view of marriage advocated by many on the political right, who claim same-sex marriage will destroy the institution of marriage as it has always existed. Chapter 5 takes up a different line of history by comparing the backlash to the present gay rights movement with past race and gender rights movements. Here Snyder identifies neopatriarchal tendencies from the antigay political right in its tradition of fighting progressive change. Both chapters are useful resources for contemporary advocates of same-sex marriage.

Despite its many strengths, however, this book seriously misunderstands arguments by queer theorists and insufficiently responds to their claims. As an advocate of queer theory myself, I found this to be both disappointing and yet (to a certain degree) superfluous to her main purpose. It seems to me that she only brings up queer theory at all because of outside pressure to do so. She states that after presenting her research for this book in many academic venues, "in every instance, the most common line of criticism I...