This decision [legalizing same sex marriage] does next to nothing for California gays and lesbians, and causes real harm to people who believe in the "old" definition of marriage.
It's nothing to be proud of.
I call upon my fellow lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender/transsexual people to vote in favor of this November's California Marriage Protection Act, which is the only way to reverse the unfortunate decision.
The June weddings that can now be expected for same-sex couples all over California will actually provide little tangible advantage to anyone.
California already has a domestic-partnership law providing all the state benefits of marriage to same-sex couples, and the federal Defense of Marriage Act prevents all the federal benefits.
Sure, gays and lesbians may get a lift in self-esteem from having their relationships declared "equal" by four jurists, but does an ego boost really outweigh the real harms caused by last week's decision?
He gives examples, and quotes gay activists who "support limitations on the freedom of speech, the press, and religious expression for anyone who disagrees with them." That's a predictable result of making something a right; those involved in any facet of the wedding industry -- facilities, catering, travel, attire, etc. -- would have to provide equal accomodations or services. Saying, "we aren't comfortable with gay marriages" or "marriage is between a man and a woman" would cease to be a free speech issue, and would become discriminatory conduct.
Whether you agree with Benkof or not, viewpoints like his rarely make it into major newspapers. The Inquirer should be commended.
posted by Eric on 05.20.08 at 04:27 PM
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://classicalvalues.com/cgi-bin/pings.cgi/6708
Comments
fyi
The Italian Minister for Equal Opportunities, Mara Carfagna
she wrote "that there is a lot of discrimination in schools, universities and in the work place, and I believe that Italy has a duty to fight this attitude with resolution. Having said this however, the GLBT movement cannot expect homosexual couples have rights which are recognised as equivalent or similar to those which a heterosexual family is guaranteed and nor will they have the patronage of the government to demonstrate which is more about exhibitionism than anything else". "As for those who argue for more rights for gays" added the minister, "I am ready to discuss issues concerning private negotiations but not public recognition. To allow a gay to go and meet their companion in a hospital, a declaration to the local health authority should be enough, and similarly there should be the possibility within property letting contracts to allow for a similar possibility or by carrying out a simple administrative act to allow prison visits. If they want to discuss how to combat discrimination and to avoid inequality, the Ministry of Equal Opportunities is ready to find immediate solutions, but if someone wants to undermine the concept of family or dictate political agendas to the ministry, they will find the doors closed.
I think the startling thing of Benkof's piece was the refusal of Californians he contacted to speak to the issue of "what does this mean?" and then the forthrightness of those outside of CA to claim they are in it to see anyone who doesn't fully embrace gay marriage should be "fined, fired or jailed". The CA decision went far beyond mere SSM, to declaring "sexual orientation" a "suspect class" ... IE equivalent to "race" as an immutable characteristic where ANY law/statute/policy/etc would come under strict scrutiny.
The Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler
Don?t bang your head!
fyi
The Italian Minister for Equal Opportunities, Mara Carfagna
link