gay marriage

WHITE26B/C/24NOV99/DD/FILE

I am ashamed of California, where the gay marriage ban was upheld today by the state supreme court.

What infuriates me the most are the defenders of “traditional” marriage; those who insist we are better off with only men marrying women. When they’re asked why, the answer is some blather about the decay of society, and God’s will, and Christian nation, and infringing upon our rights and blah … blah … blah.

Idiots. All of them. Idiots.

One day, in the not-too-distant future, opponents of gay marriage will look back and be ashamed of themselves. They’ll be the George Wallaces of the early 2000s—immoral fools just not smart enough to understand historical implications. This sort of commercial will be shown in documentaries, and people will laugh. Such garbage.

For anyone who disagrees, take it from me: I have gay friends who are married. Some of them have children. They raise them with love; live with love; deal with emotional and business and financial and life decisions just like heterosexual couples do.

It’s time to end this nonsense and do the right thing.

7 thoughts on “gay marriage”

  1. Gay rights is THE civil rights battle going on right now. The question is the same as in previous such battles:
    How can you deny someone the same rights you have just because of who or what they are?
    What I find most disheartening is that so many people who fought the good fight in previous civil rights battles are on the wrong side in this one. I understand that you believe your bible tells you homosexuality is wrong. But that’s the same point the bigots argued in denying civil rights to people of color, the same argument made in denying those rights to people from other countries, people of other faiths, the argument used to deny rights to anyone who is different. It was wrong then and it is wrong now. If you don’t want gays and lesbians in your church, fine, just find a bunch of other bigots (there are plenty out there) and form the Church of God with No Gays and Lesbians Allowed Here in the Third Century A.D. and don’t let them in. Not that they’d wanna be in there anyway. But don’t use that as an excuse to deny gays and lesbians the same rights enjoyed by other citizens of this country, the same human rights everyone should enjoy. If two people want to get married, that’s their business. They should have the same rights, privileges and protections our legal system accords anyone else willing to make that commitment. I can’t see how that harms you. One of these days, and I really hope it won’t be long, this country is going to have to realize that this kind of discrimination violates the very principles on which this nation was founded. And even if the Founding Fathers failed to immediately extend the rights guaranteed by those principles to women, people of color, or those of a different sexual orientation, the document they created, our Constitution, does just that. We’ve denied it long enough. It’s time to put the prejudices we learned as children behind us, just as we did in the struggles for civil rights for women and people of color. It’s time to stand up and be counted, and I stand ready to defend this Constitution, these principles and my fellow human beings.

  2. Jeff-
    Let’s have an intelligent conversation about the issue. First, anyone who thought the supreme court of California should have overturned Prop 8 is an idiot. All of them. Idiots.
    Put the Gay Marriage aside for a second and think. Do you really want the courts deciding that it is unconstitutional to modify the constitution? If so, then I think you need to start writing sports columns and blogs in Venezuela. Just be careful what you say about the government there.
    This is really two issues- the fundamental rule of law and democracy and gay marriage. I think you can hate the ruling’s effect on gay marriage, but you had better be glad that the court didn’t ignore the legitimate vote of the people of California. Judges are supposed to interpret the constitution- and we are screwed as a nation when a court can decide (over the vote of the citizens) what should be done.
    A majority of people in California voted against gay marriage. Call them idiots or bigots or whatever, but I can’t imagine that a freedom loving liberal like yourself would want a court to ignore the vote and disenfranchise millions. Yikes- that would be fundamentally violating the principles upon which this country was founded.

  3. Jeff,

    My mother is gay. She’s been with her partner for more than 15 years now (she was with her original partner for seven).

    They aren’t officially “married” because a) Michigan law doesn’t allow it; and b) they don’t give a shit. Still, they live together and provide a household that is as warm or warmer than many traditional households I’ve experienced.

    The emotional impact of my parents’ divorce (I was six when my mom came out; I’m 28 now) has taken its toll on me in certain ways, but the fact my mother is gay is something I’m so proud of. I’m proud because it taught me tolerance and diversity at a young age. I’m also proud of my mother for having the courage to be happy, because “leaving her kids” was the hardest thing she’s ever had to do.

    Furthermore, my family and household would’ve been SO TOXIC had my mother buried who she really is and stayed. What’s better? Misery for the sake of tradition or true happiness that many view as taboo. Happiness wins. Love wins, regardless of what states or voters or courts say.

    My point: If these Christian assholes really cared about preserving healthy families (which they don’t; it’s politically and religiously-driven), they would look at Ted Haggard (I feel bad for him, by the way) and others and realize “man and wife” doesn’t always equal stability and a loving family.

  4. re: scott daily’s comment. the thing that is being ignored is that the majority should NEVER decide upon the minority regarding civil issues. civil issues like gay marriage should never be up for a populist vote.

    otherwise, the civil rights movement would never have happened and women would not be able to vote, just to name a couple.

  5. I know states have the right to decide things like who can get a marriage license, as long as they don’t discriminate in a way that violates the U.S. Constitution. Denying gays and lesbians such a civil license is a violation. If you can’t understand it, let me make it simple for you. Take the sentence: Gays can’t get married. Now, sub any other group for ‘Gays’:
    Geniuses can’t get married.
    Realtors can’t get married.
    Soldiers can’t get married.
    Small business owners can’t get married.
    I could go on, but I hope you get the point.
    So I ask Scott Daily: If the people of California pass a proposition that says surfers can’t get married, would you want the state supreme court to uphold it?

  6. Scott: I can’t imagine that a freedom loving liberal like yourself would want a court to ignore the vote and disenfranchise millions. Yikes- that would be fundamentally violating the principles upon which this country was founded.

    So having the majority vote to remove equal rights from a minority group is in keeping with those principles? I forget, can you enumerate those principles for me again? I might be living in the wrong country.

Leave a Reply