Subscribe to Breaking News
Loading ...A Nasty Hangover From Prop 8 Ruling
Having watched the court proceedings on television, I was pretty certain that the California Supreme Court was going to uphold Proposition 8, the ballot initiative to overturn an earlier court ruling allowing gay couples the freedom to marry.
Still, knowing that a punch to the gut is coming does not make it hurt any less. The 6-1 ruling was degrading, humiliating and a shameful day that will live in infamy. The decision upheld tyranny of the majority and promoted the idiotic idea of mob rule.What next?
Can the voters of California now decide whether I can eat bacon and eggs for breakfast? Are they able to choose if I can own a cat or a dog? May they regulate my weight or pick what career I choose?
These are serious questions. The fact is, banning my potential marriage is more an imposition and hardship than if the voters had chosen to enact the above examples. Any non-biased person would agree that the idea of the public banning the possibility of their marriage would be both invasive and traumatizing. Yet, the voters of California, backed by the Supreme Court, upheld this Orwellian idea.
Really, what are the limits to such insanity? Are we unique individuals with inalienable rights or public property with provisional rights granted or eliminated by the whims of the fickle electorate?
In his dissent, Justice Carlos Moreno was correct to write, “Denying gays and lesbians the right to marry, by wrenching minority rights away from judicial protection and subjecting them instead to a majority vote, attacks the very core of the equal protection principle.”
There are now calls from gay and lesbian leaders to place the marriage question back on the ballot in California. The competitive side of me says, “bring it on, let’s win.” But, another side believes that the gay and lesbian community should simply boycott all votes relating to rights – and take our outrage to the streets and the halls of Congress. After all, why are we the only minority in the history of this nation that has had to explicitly win public approval for our most basic needs?
Hell, if African-Americans had been forced to win equality through referendum they’d still be drinking out of separate water fountains in the South. Yet, we are routinely forced to degrade our humanity and grovel to voters, who smugly sit on the throne, judging whether we are worthy to visit our ailing spouses (scratch that, we are now partners, again) in their hospital beds.
The only silver lining is that the very act of fighting has compelled more people to “come out” – thus eroding the stigma of homosexuality. Recent public opinion polls have reflected this shift, with supporters of marriage equality reaching more than 40 percent. Demographic trends are also favorable, with younger voters embracing the freedom to marry.
No doubt, anti-gay forces are celebrating today’s ruling as a major victory. Still, the court’s ruling upholding the same-sex marriages that already took place in California must be disconcerting. If the existence of 18,000 gay married couples did not cause God to plunge California into the ocean, why would 180,000 make a difference? Our opponents have a real messaging problem that will only deepen, as more Californians are introduced to these couples.
The “Lucky 18,000” also creates the existence of a new caste system for couples. At the top of the hierarchy are straight married couples that receive state and federal benefits. The next rung down, we have legally married gay couples who receive state benefits. Then, of course, we have the untouchables, who receive state domestic partnerships as a result of their inferior status. It seems that until gay couples can tie the knot, the judicial system will be tied up in knots over these supposedly “separate but equal” arrangements. And, I’m confident the public will eventually see the current reality as inherently unfair.
At a rally in New York in response to the ruling, I joined thousands of New Yorkers who turned their disappointment into determination and pain into progress. Our movement is resilient and we understand that this is merely a speed bump that will not be a deterrent from ultimate victory.
I am further encouraged by the hoards of young activists who joined me at the Union Square demonstration. Mobilized by a sense of injustice and organized through the Internet, they may be the first generation fully supported by their peers. By the time they attend their college reunions, state sanctioned discrimination will be a distant memory, like homework and drinking games.
Unfortunately, that day has yet to arrive, and gay people of all ages are experiencing a nasty hangover from the California Supreme Court’s egregious ruling.
Henry Pascale Said: “God made marriage for a man and a woman. It is not a court decision, it is the difference between right and wrong. It is wrong without a doubt. These sick people mock God and holy marriage.”
Any “God” that would have you as its spokesperson deserves to be mocked.
On the gay marriage issue. I am 65 years old now, soon to be 66 and a retired school teacher. I have always supported the object of gay marriage. For me though, it is too late. I have out-lived my life partner. I do hope that I live long enough to see gay marriage be legal in this country and have all the benefits of marriage that I and my life partner did not have.
I am also an honorably discharged US Navy veteran and really into supporting the over-turn of DADT. I was gay when I went into the Navy in 1961, and still gay when I got out. I even had a boyfriend serving on the same base with me. All of this was in New York. I was transferred to USNAS New York, more commonly known then as Floyd Bennett Field right at the end of Flatbush, in 1962. When I first got there I didn’t know anything about New York, didn’t know where any of the gay bars where or anything, but the Navy helped me out. They gave me a piece of paper with a list of places, that was referred to as, the “Out of Bounds” list. I then knew exactly where to go. See they really didn’t have a gay bar guide for general publication yet. I was just 17 when I joined the Navy, knew I was gay from the age of 14. Had my first boyfriend at 15. Of course we didn’t use the word gay yet, or boyfriend. We were just two happy homo’s having a good time together. If walls could talk. I remember pre-Stonewall New York like it was yesterday, even with all the police hassles and bar raids. I wanted to march on July 4th 1965 in Philadelphia, but Uncle Sam had other plans.
Anyway, good luck with every state getting same-sex marriage laws passed. It is well overdue. I love the enthusiasm and passion all of you younger people have today. I still have it too, just not quite as fast as I used to be. You all have my support. Ted Larson
A couple of postings here sound like they represent the Taliban in America. Good grief, people! Many religious people support all minority rights! Stop trying to force YOUR version of religion on everyone else. If that is the type of country you want, you will be very happy in the Islamic countries where you either become a Muslim or lose your head—its their version of religion OR ELSE.
Henry Pascale, did you know that most Americans, and most Christians, think society should accept homosexuality?
The Pew Center survey released a huge survey at the end of March. One question was, do you think homosexuality should be accepted or discouraged by society?
According to the survey, 56% of mainline Protestants and 58% of Catholics think homosexuality should be accepted. That’s compared with the national average of 50% for all Americans. Only 40% of all Americans think homosexuality should be discouraged.
Of the few Orthodox Christians, only 48% think homosexuality should be accepted. However, even fewer at 37% think it should be discouraged. Evangelicals, Mormons, and the few Jehovah’s Witnesses were unlikely to think it should be accepted: 26%, 24%, and a tiny 12% for Jehovah’s Witnesses.
Of the small Other Christians group, 69% think it should be accepted. Historically Black churches are at 39%, vs. a somewhat larger 46% who think it should be discouraged.
Remember, Americans are MUCH more likely to support equal rights for gay people than to think homosexuality should be accepted. For example, 67% supported same-sex marriage or civil unions in an April CBS/NY Times poll. That’s 42% for marriage (a 9% increase in one month) and 25% for civil unions. In the Pew Center survey, 58% of evangelicals aged 18 to 29 supported same-sex marriage or civil unions.
Chris Lee you are so blind. Every medical association in the world says homosexuality is normal, natural, and anything but marriage is placing our relationships, families, and children below yours. We are the same whether you care to understand it or not.
Here are some links for you to educate yourself on. Oh and btw at least African Americans could cry to their families about the prejudice they faced, LGBT cant even do that.
http://www.soulforce.org/pdf/whatthebiblesays.pdf
http://www.soulforce.org/pdf/whatthesciencesays.pdf
http://www.soulforce.org/pdf/false_focus.pdf
Chris Lee,
Do you really mean black suffrage? That’s the right of African Americans to vote. I’ve never heard anyone equate marriage rights with the right to vote. They do draw comparisons between interracial marriage and same-sex marriage, because the arguments used against them are the same: it will change the institution of marriage, it’s against tradition, and so on.
Marriage ceremonies for same-sex couples have been around for thousands of years. There were same-sex vows in both the Roman Catholic liturgy and the Greek Orthodox liturgy through the 16th century, and some same-sex marriages are still being conducted today. So marriage may have started as a religious ceremony, but the notion of a heterosexuals-only religious ceremony is recent.
Incidentally, it’s the right to a civil marriage, not a religious marriage, that supporters of equal rights are looking for. Religious marriage would stay exactly the way it is. A church can legally refuse to marry interracial couples to this day, and they’ll always be able to refuse same-sex couples.
Why do we want people to come out of the closet? So people will know who we are: that we’re not monsters who should be denied the happiness of marriage or the right to be judged on merit at work. When people know the truth, they discover that gay people are no better but no worse than straight people, so we deserve equal rights. They see for themselves that we’re normal. Isn’t that why you want us to stay in the closet? So people won’t find that out?
If breeders want a government run by religion, than they need to move to Iran. P.S. Don’t bother to write!!!!!
A quick comment for Henry Pascale. Not everyone subscribes to an ancient and often flawed writing. This writer was reared in a rural Southern Baptist Church and question many passages. I left the Christian church because I cannot accept it’s teachings.”Gay pride, I never seen a gay gay in my life.” May I suggest that you visit a gay friendly church (I suggest Metropolitan Community Church)and see more than just a few “gay gays, lesbians, bi-sexual and trans”.
I also wish to add something that I saw online today.”Jesus had 2 dads”.
I am always confused as to why the “equal rights for marriage” argument is always equated with black suffrage. The two are not even remotely similar. If it was wouldn’t you assume that all of the blacks would be on board and vote against it? Stop trying to equate the two. Second, marriage started off as a religious ceremony. Why this constant need to change what they have had for centuries? Leave them alone and let them do it the way they always have. Write a law that calls a homosexual union as something else and have ALL of the same rights as a “marriage” and I would be on board whole heartedly. Gay couples should not have any rights taken from them, and they should be able to bond as their heterosexual counterparts if they so choose. But stop trying to get society to accept that a union between a man and a woman is the same as a homosexual couple. It is not the same and never will be even if you antagonize the entire world into switching the religious ceremony into acceptance. If you feel that it is a normal behavior why are you spending so much time and effort trying to convince everyone else that it is? Why does anyone need to come “out of the closet”? Society has embraced your lifestyle and has for the most part left you alone and let you live your lives normally. But that just isn’t good enough for some reason.
God made marriage for a man and a woman. It is not a court decision, it is the difference between right and wrong. It is wrong without a doubt. These sick people mock God and holy marriage. They cannot multiply as God says, if you believe that you will not be punished for your abominations against God. God will not be Mocked. You must repent of your evil and humble yourself before the lord of this shameful act. And you should be ashame. Gay pride, I never seen a gay gay in my life.
Hordes, sir. But yes, I agree with the sentiment in the article. I thought the arguments presented on our side were weak and a waste of time and money. The Olsen-Boies case is on much firmer and well-traveled ground.
>…but instead also are responsible for seeing to it that the electorate are not merely an enfranchised mob.
No, not really. That’s the constitution’s job. Then, the people who are chartered with upholding the constitution (that’s a long list) can act appropriately.
California, you’ve got yourself a flawed constitution. I’d recommend tuning it up. Now might be a good time to begin such an initiative, because I sense that a majority of CA voters were shocked at how “sudden” this all went down, and it felt unfair to many, many people. I think they’d be open to hearing an argument right now for the idea that “it’s too easy to amend our constitution, and that’s not a good thing.”
Forgive me if I’ve got this wrong (I’m no legal scholar), but it was my impression that in a democracy (especially a democracy with a judiciary that’s meant to be independent) judges do not merely carry out “the law” but instead also are responsible for seeing to it that the electorate are not merely an enfranchised mob. Just as “liberal” is a word that is ripe for rehabilitation in the U.S., “activist judge” should be a term of praise. What earthly use is a judge who carries out the law while allowing injustice to flourish? So I disagree that the judges had no choice. As many a philosopher has observed, not to choose is itself a choice.
A loss yes. However over at the dailykos they question how much of a loss it is actually in fact. Apparently one can still call a loved one of the same sex a husband or wife. Is the loss only the word marriage and not the rights instead? Mariaje anyone? That’s their take of this. Time will tell. Also it seems to me that gay couples in CA can just start calling themselves married anyway. Who will know if they truly are one of the real 18000? Did they pass out ID cards?
Agreed. It was expected because the judges had no choice but to follow the law. That is their job. The California Constitution is far to easy to amend. We won our rights and have had them taken away again. As one of the “Lucky 18,000″ I feel badly for those who wish to marry. I know standing up for our rights, getting married in San Francisco when Mayor Newsom opened the golden gates, and again when it was the LAW of the state of California, has advanced our cause. But it is a sad day when we retreat back to discrimination for some members of our society. People are people, we all live in society, we all deserve equality. We will not cease our efforts. Seeing the Prop 8 voting map made me realize that the coastal areas of California might as well be a different state from the inland counties. But we ARE one state. And California will regain her “progressive” crown … someday.