Yet another landmark Supreme Court case may very well be the civil rights case regarding the overturn of Prop 8 in the State of California. Though it may seem to many gay Americans like the morally wrong thing, it may also be legally right to uphold it...
As difficult as the likely outcome of the case will be for those of us who support gay marriage, the court's rationale will almost certainly strengthen a fundamental tenet of the progressive movement: the right of ordinary citizens to maintain authority over their state constitutions.The court's challenge will be whether the state will become the second state in the nation to extend the freedoms of gay Americans and allow marriage to same-sex couples, or to continue the national quagmire with regards to the reality of gay marriage and the discriminatory undertones of it in a nation that is just beginning to finally overcome the scars of slavery...God Bless America
- 1
- 2
The Loving Decision
- Share:
-
Email To A Friend
Please fill in the following information and we'll email this link.
Opponents will scream that the issue should be put to the people, as it was in Arizona, Florida and California. (Arkansas had a different sort of measure, forbidding unmarried couples from adopting or serving as foster parents. This will undoubtedly have the effect of leaving more kids without stable homes. For shame.) Of course if the issue in Loving had been put to the people, there is no doubt that many would have been delighted to make racial intermarriage a crime. That's why God invented courts.
The world only spins forward.
"I think the day will come when the lesbian and gay community will have its own Loving v. Virginia," says David Buckel, the Marriage Project director for Lambda Legal.
Yes, and then the past will seem as preposterous and mean-spirited as the events leading up to the Loving decision do today. After all, this is about one of the most powerful forces for good on earth, the determination of two human beings to tether their lives forever. The pitch of the opposition this year spoke to how far we have already come—the states in which civil unions and domestic partnerships are recognized, the families in which gay partners are welcome and beloved.
The antis argued that churches could be forced to perform same-sex unions, when any divorced Roman Catholic can tell you that the clergy refuse to officiate whenever they see fit. They argued that the purpose of same-sex marriage was the indoctrination of children, a popular talking point that has no basis in reality. As Ellen DeGeneres, who was married several months ago to the lovely Portia de Rossi (great dress, girl), said about being shaped by the orientation of those around you, "I was raised by two heterosexuals. I was surrounded by heterosexuals. Just everywhere I looked: heterosexuals. They did not influence me." As for the notion that allowing gay men and lesbians to marry will destroy conventional marriage, I have found heterosexuals perfectly willing to do that themselves.
The last word here goes to an authority on battling connubial bigotry. On the anniversary of the Loving decision last year, the bride wore tolerance. Mildred Loving, mother and grandmother, who once had cops burst into her bedroom because she was sleeping with her own husband, was quoted in a rare public statement saying she believed all Americans, "no matter their race, no matter their sex, no matter their sexual orientation, should have that same freedom to marry." She concluded, "That's what Loving, and loving, are all about."
© 2008
- 1
- 2
- Share:
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
