|
|
|
|
Why is Bush So Busy Bashing Same-Sex Marriage? |
|
Gutting the Constitution
The core of our constitution, I think, can be summed up in three words: freedom of choice. No other country in the history of the world has put so much faith in the simple idea that citizens themselves know best what's good for themselves. If we ever come to a time where individuals are no longer able to make reasonable choices without unreasonable interference by government or neighbors, America at that point will cease to be America. I don't think this amendment's backers have thought the whole thing through. For one, if same-sex couples end up being barred from getting married in one fashion or another, the psychological and emotional toll will be devastating. In one fell swoop an entire segment of the population will be denied any hope of change, which is after all the heart of the American experience. Faith in America's promise would be irreparably shattered. Another looming problem: this country has treaties and agreements with other countries which automatically recognize marriages performed within their boundaries. What will happen when same-sex Dutch or Canadian couples decide to immigrate here? Will the US refuse to recognize their relationships? If we refuse to abide by simple marriage treaties, what treaties will we choose to ignore next? And what happens in those foreign-based corporations that offer domestic partner benefits? Will they have to deny their American employees the same benefits they're handing out to workers in Europe? Our reputation is already in jeopardy over Iraq. As Canada and western Europe move towards marital equalization, this self-styled "land of the free" risks becoming a laughing stock. We can't let that happen. What can Kentucky's gay and lesbian population do to convince our two senators and six representatives to vote against this amendment? To be honest, not a damn thing. Let's face it: this state's congressional delegation has proven by its votes to be the most conservative in the South, and that includes Mississippi. None of them have any use for us; one-who has a gay son-reportedly won't allow his lover to attend family functions. We shouldn't hesitate to voice our opinion: they need to know we're out here watching them. But we need to save our energy for more useful pursuits. A better option is to give money to one of the fine organizations working to combat this terrible idea. Lambda Legal Defense and Education Fund has been in the lead of the same-sex marriage issue for over ten years. The Human Rights Campaign and the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force also have marriage projects in need of assistance. A few months ago I editorialized against same-sex marriage as unnecessary. I'm still not sure it would be right for me, but, as a new relationship develops, my ideas are evolving. A more important issue is looming. The fight against this federal marriage amendment is no longer just a fight for the rights of a small segment of the population: it's a fight to preserve a way of life that's been fast eroding under four years of neoconservative attacks. If we can't stop this amendment dead in its tracks, we may not be able to stem further destruction of our culture of freedom in the decades just ahead. A federal marriage amendment would be the first stop on the road to ruination of the American spirit. Let's hope America's train never reaches that station.
David Williams, Publisher Playing to the Worst in Politics Today, the President of the United States endorsed a constitutional amendment barring the legal recognition of same-sex marriages -- a shameful stand that violates the president's pledge to be a "uniter, not a divider." History will record that President Bush has played to the worst of politics -- pitting one group of Americans against another. A constitutional amendment as proposed by President Bush would mark the first time in U.S. history an amendment has been used to deny legal rights to a minority group within this country. The President has taken exactly the wrong stand. The promise of this nation is "liberty and justice for all." By his actions today, the President has squandered an opportunity to expand the rights of America's lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender citizens in a regrettable effort to pander for re-election votes. The reality is that same-sex marriage in no way threatens the marriages of our heterosexual friends and neighbors. Every year, Metropolitan Community Churches perform more than 6000 same-sex weddings which celebrate love, commitment and relationship. These are noble ideals which should be honored and celebrated -- not attacked and denigrated. Our community must now face the very real threat of increased hostility because of the President has fanned the flames of divisiveness. That LGBT communities have long been targets of anti-gay hate crimes and violence, and the use of LGBT people as a wedge issue to gain votes will only feed hatred in this country. The predominantly gay Metropolitan Community Churches know something about the effects of hate. As I reported to the White House Conference on Hate Crimes, 21 MCC churches have been the targets of firebombing and arson, and many more have been vandalized and desecrated in anti-gay hate crimes -- solely because of the sexual orientation of our members. The President's actions leave our people fearful, and subject to a new wave of anti-gay discrimination. Hatred, bigotry, and discrimination must not be enshrined in our nation's Constitution. Today I call upon all people of goodwill to reject the politics of divisiveness and to unequivocally oppose this proposed constitutional amendment.
Rev. Troy D. Perry Policy Hypocrisy In Iraq, those Americans guiding the formation of a new government are seeking to resist writing the values and restrictions of a particular faith into the governing documents. We do not believe that one religion ought to dictate the civil rights of a diverse and free people. Freedom is, after all, why we claimed that we were invading Iraq. The Bush administration, however, has a complete lack of a sense of irony. It does not seem to occur to President Bush that a call for a Constitutional Amendment banning same sex marriage is doing exactly what he is resisting in Iraq. The President said in his press conference that a majority of religions define marriage as being between a man and a woman. This he cites as justification for amending the Constitution to insure that same- sex couples are not afforded the same civil rights. Using the majority's religious values as the basis for discrimination is a far greater danger to the values of this country than same-sex marriage can ever be. Our church, the Cathedral of Hope, routinely performs marriages for heterosexuals and for gay couples. The ritual is identical. The vows are exactly the same. The difference is that at the end of the service, one couple will get certain civil rights and one couple will not. The State discriminates against one set of taxpayers and rewards the heterosexuality of the other. No religion should be required to perform same sex marriages. However, the U.S. Constitution should not be used to impose those religious values on the entire country. All tax-paying citizens deserve the same civil rights. A gay couple who pays taxes, obeys the laws, votes in elections, and are good citizens should not be discriminated against because the President's conservative religious base thinks homosexuality is a sin. They also believe that abortion is a sin, but the President is not proposing a Constitutional ban on abortion ... at least not yet. If discrimination against same sex couples is enshrined in the U.S. constitution where will it end. Conservative state legislatures can then pass a whole range of discriminations based on the fact that the Constitution has designated heterosexuality as a preferred status. If this religious based value is imposed on the country where will it stop. This is not about protecting marriage, it has never been. When Britney Spears can get married for 24 as a joke, same sex couples are not the ones marriage needs protecting from. Yet in those 24 hours the government gave Ms Spears more civil protection than a same sex couple gets after they have been together, paying taxes for 24 years. All taxpayers deserve equal protection under the law. Religious based discrimination is no more holy in this country than it is in Iraq. Mr. Bush can't have it both ways. American Ayatollah's should not be allowed to govern here or there.
Feb. 25, 2004 |
George W. Bush is intent on adding discrimination to the U.S. Constitution