A Constitutional Amendment to Take Rights Away?
As many expected, the ruling last week that came down from the CA Supreme Court will be viciously contested by several anti-gay groups. You know - I am just one guy who is part of a community of literally millions of Americans. If statistics hold true (possibly 1 out of 10 people are homosexual), we are talking about roughly 30 million homosexual Americans. With California somewhere around 36 or 37 million, we may be looking at somewhere between 3 and 4 million homos running around the Golden State.
Gay and lesbian people want to take part in the civil process of marriage. At least in California what the Supreme Court ruled on was the right for two same-sex people to become married in the eyes of the state. In its purest sense, the ruling is a California matter. Of course, ultimately it is not - because there is precedent in the area of civil rights which clearly shows that as the tide turns in California so will it turn elsewhere in the country.
Many of the arguments against same-sex marriage are nothing more than feeble attempts to dress up discrimination. In a country where most people nowadays get married several times over and raise families in all sorts of structural arrangements, this argument that marriage was intended (by god, I suppose) to be only between one man and one woman and that their main objective in life is to bear children as a united mom and dad is so inherently flawed I am not even sure where to begin. That statement alone dares to classify millions of people in our country as something less than godly. Single parents are somehow incomplete. Any grandparent who is basically forced to assume their child's role of parent is abnormal. Women or men who are unable to bear children for countless biological reasons - are they somehow classified as tier-2 on the "able to have families" screen? I'm afraid the list goes on.
Let's be honest. The people today who are so violently against same-sex marriage are virtually mirror images of the people 50 years ago who were opposed to interracial marriage. It's not really a divine matter, it's more of a fear of anything different. As tolerant as America touts itself on the world scene, so too must we accept our hypocrisy. We are talking about civil rights here, not religious rights - and definitely not the religious Right. :)
I hope all Californians (and all Americans in time) come to realize that this ruling stands on the virtue of protecting rights, not taking them away. Zane and I are planning our event in the hopes that November's ballot will come and go. And we are by no means alone. There are so many couples anxiously preparing for the step they are committed to take forward. Why go back in time?
Here's a challenge for all of us: Go find two gay guys or two lesbians who are currently raising children in your community. It will not be as hard as many of us may think. Just watch them with their kids. Come to understand that we are dealing with a pretty similar bottom line - loving parents are teaching their children how to become successful human beings. That is the ideal, right? There is no logical reason why they should be prevented from forming a civil marriage. Plenty of irrational and emotional reasons have been shared, but I cannot find a single one based on reason.
The take-away from recent events is simple: all of us who are rational people who recognize that loving people form loving homes and raise loving families - should the ballot be soiled with anti-gay, pro-hypocritical rhetoric this November - let's take the step to preserve our rationality as well as defend a higher sense of reason and vote to keep California moving in the right direction.
Looks like tomorrow is the big day!!
