In celebration of the recent Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruling against Proposition 8, I was going to write something uplifting about the perseverance of the LGBTQ community. But I decided not to.
For one, I am sure that there are so many others who are going to be dwelling on that subject. For another, based upon the reactions coming from the religious right, I feel that another direction is in order -- that is, a missive directed to Maggie Gallagher of the National Organization for Marriage, the Family Research Council, and all those other folks whining about the ruling. (This missive would have included Mitt Romney because of his negative words about the ruling. However, seeing that it is Mitt Romney, I figure a week from now we'll find him supporting it.)
Maggie Gallagher wrote a piece with the headline, "Ninth Circuit to 7 Million California Voters: You Are Irrational Bigots." Meanwhile, others such as the Family Research Council, Concerned Women for America, etc. have sent out the usual junk about "unelected judges," "activist judges," "redefinition of marriage," and all of the other hyperbolic mess we have come to expect from them.
But here is my question, and it's relatively simple.
Just where were these folks when the original trial was taking place last year? Why didn't any of these folks testify as to why Prop 8 was needed? Remember, Prop 8's proponents could only find two witnesses, and both did a poor job defending the law. One witness, David Blankenhorn, inadvertently made the case for the anti-Prop-8 side. Where were Maggie Gallagher, Brian Brown, Peter Sprigg, Tony Perkins, or any of these other folks who put so much work in getting the law passed? Gallagher's headline alleges that 7 million people voted for Prop 8. However, amongst those 7 million, only two witnesses could be found? Who are they kidding?
All this outrage after the fact is bogus. It's a diversion, and a pitiful one at that. It's an attempt to obscure a basic fact: that Proposition 8 was built upon deliberate lies that Maggie Gallagher, Tony Perkins, Peter Sprigg, and the rest of those pushing it were too fearful to defend in court. None of these people -- not one -- had the guts to stand up in court, take an oath, and attest to the veracity of the claims they made regarding what allegedly would happen should marriage equality become legal in California, because they knew that the lawyers attacking the law, David Boies and Ted Olson, would call them out and reveal their deception.
So Maggie dearest and the rest of you folks, please stop whining. You are not fooling anyone. You dug this hole yourself, so you have no reason to cry out when the dirt comes in to bury you.
Fighting marriage equality for these folks is how they make a living. Skipping the original trial was, for them, just simply a sound business decision.
- To get their initial marriage license, a couple needs a current or recent document proving that they can have kids together by natural ways.
- A marriage license is not a permanent document. Regular checks are made: if the woman is pregnant or if the couple has natural kids under the age of 18, then the license is automatically renewed (couples are not allowed to refuse renewal). Otherwise, the license is automatically void. The only way to divorce is to have at least one kid and raise him/her to adulthood.
Let's see if Maggie, Tony and co. could live with such a system.