We live in two states, Florida and California, that on Tuesday voted to write vulgar discrimination into their constitutions. In Florida, voters passed Amendment 2; that measure, with its Orwellian alias "The Marriage Protection Amendment," prevents homosexual people from entering any "legal union that is treated as marriage or the substantial equivalent thereof." In California, Proposition 8--"Eliminates Right of Same-Sex Couples to Marry" -- appears to have passed narrowly.
On a day when so many of us choked up reflecting on how far we've come, we also revealed how far we have to go.
Our constitutions were designed to protect our rights, not strip them away. Co-opting constitutions to deny rights to minorities is a grotesque perversion of the principles upon which this country was founded. As a nation, we've come to these conclusions before. In Brown vs. Board of Education, the Supreme Court swept aside decades of precedent and exploded the concept that separate could ever really be equal.
That was 54 years ago. How aggravating, then, to see the marriage bigots in California point to same-sex civil unions as an appropriate alternative to marriage. (Florida's amendment was worded so as to prevent even the possibility of civil unions.) How utterly revolting to hear ban supporters, like Revs. James Garlow of San Diego and Joel Hunter of Florida, crow about their "victory."
We could go on and on about how these amendments (as well as one in Arizona and an equally offensive statute approved in Arkansas) are wrong and unfair; how they are fundamentally un-American; how they devastate individual people with genuine human feelings. But we won't.
Instead, we'll point out just one of the ways in which the voters of these states -- especially California -- have just shot themselves in the foot. California is nearly broke. Its voters, in addition to voicing their opposition to the equal treatment of all citizens, have just approved a series of expensive projects, including a $45-billion high-speed railroad.
How does a state energize its economy, fix its budget shortfall, and pay for social services in the midst of a national and potentially global recession of uncertain duration? That's not entirely clear. But what does seem obvious is that you don't do it by alienating up to 10% of the best talent. No state should understand this better than California, which has built large parts of itself around the science and technology industries.
Let's say you're a hotshot programmer or biomedical researcher looking for a job or a good home base for your startup. Let's also say you happen to be homosexual. Do you pick the place that, while sunny, has just officially declared you a second-class citizen? Or do you move to another hotbed of scientific and technological activity, like Massachusetts or Connecticut, where you'll be allowed to marry the person you love? This kind of decision is being made by brilliant scientists and entrepreneurs all the time. Sorry, Genentech. You're welcome, Genzyme.
Senators Boxer and Feinstein, the mayors of San Diego, Los Angeles, and San Francisco, the state's major editorial pages, Pacific Gas and Electric, tech titans Google and Apple -- all opposed Proposition 8. Their opposition was rooted in the American ideal of liberty and justice for all, but it made practical sense, too. Call it a slow brain drain (brain leak?), call it a competitive disadvantage in recruitment, call it what you want. At the end of the day, bigotry is not just morally repugnant -- it's also bad business.
Mildred Loving's statement about freedom to marry. Everyone should read it. If you don't cry when you read it, you're not a human being. Please use your favorite social sites to buzz it up.
There is only one cure for ignorance - and that's education.
http://www.freedomtomarry.org/pdfs/mildred_loving-statement.pdf
The Christian Left is Right, and is the only true manifestation of Christ-like behavior.
Stop the Spiritual Arrogants and their influence on civil law. If you want to establish a Theocacy in America - fine. But since I am not a member of your religion, I am now tax exempt.
Whoo-hoo! Christians everywhere are paying my federal taxes!
I can assure you that racists and segregationists cited tradition and their convictions, values and morals as the basis of their positions. They said it wasn't a matter of civil rights but rather a matter of fundamentally changing traditional society. They supported public water fountains, public transportation and public schools for African-Americas as long as they were separated from the fountains, buses and schools of white citizens. They too pointed to the Bible as their guide and they also took great offense to being called bigots.
You may think that you are new and progressive with your stance on civil unions but you are actual very familiar to me and your arguments are absolutely no different than the racist arguments I've heard all my life.
I know what's in my heart and it's not hate or ignorance or prejudice. I believe civil unions are a compromise. but please leave marriage to relationhips between men and women. the problem is gay rights advocates want to shove their lifestyle down our throats and if you don't go along then you are a bigot. i dont think so. in my heart, i know gay marriage is wrong.
gays are trying to pull this guilt trip on people of color reminding them about the days of segregation. it's not going to work. we know better.
As someone taught “We don’t discriminate” I found this paradoxical affront to another minority group not only shocking, but duplicitous. Citing religion as their justification, they began to march out the parade of reverends, pastors and priests to rationalize the bigotry. It was but a few decades past the old Southern bible thumpers used religion to validate racial and ethnic discrimination. De Tocqueville’s tyranny of the majority has reared its ugly head in California.
I'm betting on 50 state legalization by 2015, because having miscegenation and sodomy laws in just *some* states worked out so well. Be angry, rightly, but understand that California and Florida still have far greater enlightenment on the subject - scarily - than much of the country. I'm in Tennesee, and have to remind myself to mention stuff to my kids when the opportunity presents, to counter all the vile garbage they hear from some of their classmates and adults for that matter about gender and orientation.
I believe you're missing the point. What this decision amounts to (at least in CA) is "seperate but equal". You say homosexuals should just be happy and accept it, seeing as how the only real difference is that it's not called "marriage". My question to you is this: Why should they? Why should homosexuals just sit back and accept the fact that they're being treated like second-class citizens? Why? Because of some religious ideology that they might not even share and doesn't have any place in deciding legislation, as per the US Constitution?
This decision in CA is the equivalent of segregation--it's 21st century Jim Crow no matter how you try to justify it. Seperate is NOT equal. Just because you believe that there is no such thing as "gay marriage" doesn't mean it's the truth. I can only assume people that believe this do so because of religious reasons. You can't legislate based on religious ideology. This is NOT a theocracy. I hope the supreme court overturns this decision on the basis that it is CLEARLY unconstitutional.
BTW - you've completely negated your argument that this shouldn't matter because marriage is "only a word", because that's EXACTLY what your side is fighting over.
--------------------------------
The reason is that homosexuality is really a psychological disorder..... seriously, have you ever examined the so called "study" that was the basis of the normalization?
One question being raised is the more diverse (so to speak) religious/political problem of the Black and Hispanic vote. According to exit polls (I believe) the claim is 70% of blacks and 55+% of Hispanics, who came out in record numbers to vote for Obama in California also voted Yes on Prop. 8.
It would seem that the Right is not the only party with a "religion" problem.
Liberals and Progressives have long attacked the Republican Party as being hijacked by conservative Evangelicals. I have been reading the back and forth rehtoric blossoming elsewhere which consist of at least 2 (at the extremes) camps:
"Oppressed-er than Thou" - Black persons denouncing even the use of the term "Civil Rights" by LGBT's as demeaning of their struggle for equality in America.
"Betrayal" - LGBT's who say they helped push for Black rights, helped get Obama elected and now feel like Blacks are using the same bible that gave them solace during that struggle as a Whip to keep LGBT's "in their place."
Misuse of Religion is not just a Republican Party problem.
I hope President Obama can help us unify our own party or I fear for the prospects of uniting the divided country he inherits from Bush.
2) By going after the Mormon church you are essentially denying Mormons a very important first amendment issue; freedom of religion..... a right easily more important than a homosexual's right to call their union a "marriage."
3) Before the election it was commonly supposed that pro-homosexuals would use the marriage issue to go after organized religion's tax status (as they have done in Massachusetts), now that they don't have that issue they are still going after churches anyway.... so obviously the "Yes on 8" supporters were correct.
See the problem here???
We will thankfully spread our money and the joy of our families in Massachussetts where we are welcomed.
As Mother to a beautiful, hard working, dear souled lesbian daughter my awareness of gay-lesbian community has been heightened. This, "you can choose to be gay or not" argument is ridiculous, maybe a tenth of 1% of humans would choose such a difficult path- though even if it were a choice, making any citizen second class runs against the tenets of our United States Of America.
All in all, it is a very upsetting for me, and a setback to for America.
"Says brain researcher Dr. Simon LeVay:
"At this point, the most widely held opinion [on causation of homosexuality] is that multiple factors play a role.
"In 1988, PFLAG member Tinkle Hake surveyed a number of well-known figures in the field about their views on homosexuality. She asked: 'Many observers believe that a person's sexual orientation is determined by one of more of the following factors: genetic, hormonal, psychological, or social. Based on today's state-of-the-art-science, what is your opinion?'
"The answers included the following: 'all of the above in concert' (Alan Bell), 'all of these variables' (Richard Green), 'multiple factors' (Gilbert Herdt), 'a combination of all the factors named' (Evelyn Hooker), 'all of these factors' (Judd Marmor), 'a combination of causes' (Richard Pillard), 'possibly genetic and hormonal, but juvenile sexual rehearsal play is particularly important' (John Money), and 'genetic and hormonal factors, and perhaps also some early childhood experiences' (James Weinrich)." (Page 273)
--Simon LeVay (1996), in Queer Science, published by MIT Press.
http://www.leaderu.com/orgs/narth/homorig.html
I couldn't have said it better myself.
The number one reason to be inclusive in your business is to avoid driving away some of the best talent with discriminatory policies. It's just bad business.
In America, the rights of the individual are primary and inalienable. And governments are instituted to protect such rights, including, but not limited to the right to life, liberty, property and the pursuit of happiness. This includes marriage contracts. There is no valid, rational, logical, moral basis for the elimination of rights by majority vote (or minority influence). The banning of same-sex marriage by a consortium of religious groups is a gross violation of individual rights and of the separation of church and state.
I voted NO on Proposition 8 for the very same reason I voted NO on Obama (and McCain) Their faith faith-based moralities are equally arbitrary, unfounded and dangerous—and will bear the same legislative consequences.
I just don't get how we as a nation can be evolved enough to have just elected the first African-American president, but yet still feel it's okay to discriminate against our gay brothers and sisters.
*sigh*
It really does feel unconstitutional.