Monday, November 10, 2008

My Prop 8 (and other things related) thoughts

I try to keep from blogging about political stuff. There are plenty of political blogs out there for that reason, but this prop 8 thing just won't let me be silent. I'm not gay, but I do believe that one should not be denied the right to marry who they love because of their sexual orientation.

What's next? Are they going to ban interracial marriage? How about taking anyone who isn't Christian and hang them? Oh, I know, we can take those that are gay and put them in prison for the crime of being gay!

Do any of those make sense? The answer is they make about as much sense as this ruling!

The people that are for this keep making the case that it's immoral and against the bible. Well, so is having sex before marriage, cursing, blasphemy, etc. Many things that I would wager almost every person that placed their vote in support of prop 8 have done. Seems a bit hypocritical to me.

I'm not sure all the details about prop 8, since I don't live in California, but to me it just seems wrong to take away a group of people's right to wed. Arkansas isn't much better. Not sure the exact ruling, but its something like a same sex couple can't adopt a baby.

I'm going to go out on a limb and say that this also goes for a couple of straight guys living together, too, right? Does anyone remember My Two Dads? There is nothing wring with 2 people of the same sex raising a child. If someone does, please tell me why you feel this way.

Back to the prop 8 thing. I'm disappointed in CA. They overwhelmingly voted Obama and then went all conservative on this issue. I've heard many were scared that the schools would teach their child en to marry gay, and that if their preachers/ministers/pastors said anything pro-gay marriage they would get arrested and they didn't want that. I understand the fear, but seriously people, I'm sure that just as with sex ed, you can control what your child learns in school. If not, I'm you can bitch and moan, like all parents do whenever the slightest thing goes the way they don't want it to go.

I have many gay friends, so these are issues that are near and dear to my heart. Especially since my best friend has been in tears the past few days. She was planning on making a trek to California after the New Year to get married. I'm sure there are others that had similar plans, but those that felt they needed to take away the rights of gay people have taken that away.

That's right, I said take away the rights of gay people. It seems these days, they're the ones fighting for equal rights. In American history, women and minorities have had to fight for equal rights. This year has proven they did not do their work in vain. We just elected a black president, and a woman was a serious contender for that same job up until the summer, she even came extremely close to winning the nomination. It won't be long before the day comes when a woman is president, but will we ever stop being so homophobic in this country and give gays the rights they deserve?

We can start by letting them get married just like anyone else!

If there any wrong facts in this post, please don't hesitate to let me know.


The Natural State Hawg said...

Well, you got a couple of facts wrong. First of all, there is no right, per se, to be married. The state defines who can and can't be married (there are exceptions, of course -- you can't block interracial couples from marrying as it's clear discrimination (and, thus, a violation of federal law) when you'll let men and women of the same race marry, but exclude others).

Here in Arkansas, for example, you can't marry your first cousin, common law marriages are not recognized and polygamy is a no-no, too. If you go to Texas, you'll find that one can marry a first cousin or form a common law marriage. What's the difference? State law.

That said, are you implying that the citizens of California do not have the authority to define marriage? If so, who does have that authority?

The law passed in Arkansas, by the way, prohibits unmarried couples (gay or straight) from adopting children. Obviously, that was directed right at homosexual couples. There's no getting around that.

Those Proposition 8 and the Arkansas law you object to represent the will of the majority of voters. Certainly you aren't suggesting that we should circumvent what the voters want in cases where we're not talking about denying people in protected classes (i.e., minorities) the same privileges that those in the majority enjoy.

Bear in mind I haven't touched on whether these two laws are "right" or "wrong." Often, that's not the issue when we're talking about the will of the voters.

So, we wind up with bans on gay marriage, ill-advised lotteries and laws that don't let unmarried couples adopt.

The question, of course, is whether those laws are discriminatory and violate either state or federal law. I have a feeling, in California, the courts will decide that question.

The Natural State Hawg

Talair said...

It was pretty disappointed that on one hand the country as a whole decided to take a step beyond discrimination and then on the other decided to pass a discriminitory law. Very disappointing.

A Progressive Girl said...

thanks for posting in opposition to prop 8.

Mr. Hawg,
What if the will of the voter decided something so incredibly personal in your life?

Would you be so cavalier and ready to let the "people" decide for you. I think not. A vote for discrimination does not make it any less discriminatory.


Preston said...

I'm with Kim. We had to have a constitutional amendment for abolishing slavery or some states would have kept voting it as legal. The government is here to protect people's rights, not deny them to select groups.

Nicole said...

Well said! I recently moved to Arizona--I can't believe how backwards some people think... Thank you for standing up on this topic... The whole ban gay marriage movement/define marriage as between a man and a woman saddens me...

The Natural State Hawg said...

Good grief. Are we actually talking about prohibited discrimination in a legal sense here? Is this an issue that the legislature should have decided, rather than the voters? Is denying anyone the privilege of getting married something that rises to the level of violating the 14th Amendment?

Those were, really, my only points. Honestly, when we're talking about denying the will of the people, asking questions like "how would you feel?" or throwing around terms like discrimination are pretty pointless. At this point, the voters have weighed in on the issue. Opponents of this law ought to take a look at how this can be defeated in the courts.

I hear a lot of griping, but none of it goes past the level of "it's wrong." If you're going to attack the issue, have at it. At least explain why this law is wrong rather than simply assuming that it is.

Lola said...

Unfortunately it seems that the "will of the people" was tainted by ads for "Vote Yes for Prop 8" that were blatantly untrue. Prop 8 has absolutely nothing to do with the way children are educated in schools. Schools will not, as some advertisements suggested, indoctrinate our children into the "gay lifestyle".

Right now the Mormon Church is being criticized, and I believe rightfully so, for mobilizing their members to basically lobby for Prop 8.

With regard to the adoption laws in Arkansas, I think it is unconscionable that children are being deprived of being a part of loving, caring families.