The Fight For Rights Never Stops

Canada has had legal same sex marriage for a decade.  The world hasn't ended, society hasn't collapsed into anarchy, people aren't marrying their goats, lawnmowers or anything else either.

On the heels of the US Supreme Court rulings on DOMA and Proposition 8, I found that Calgary's hardline Bishop, Fred Henry, has once again opened his yap on the subject.

But they do copy marriage and family, and in the process, they compete with and diminish the uniquely important status of both. While the culture has failed in many ways to be marriage-strengthening, this is no reason to give up. Now is the time to strengthen marriage, not redefine it.

More or less this is the standard whining that we heard from Henry during the debates over legalizing same sex marriage in Canada.

Calgary Herald columnist Naomi Lakritz wrote a letter which correctly chastises the Bishop for his criticisms.

Henry says “God’s wise design” confirms that differences between the genders matter. To which anyone who believes in God should reply that, as part of God’s wise design, He has also created people who are homosexual.

A day later, we get the following drivel published as a letter to the editor:

Legal and financial equality can be achieved through civil unions without attaching the sacred term "marriage." But the very river of life flows through the union of a man and woman. This does not occur in any samesex relationship. Everyone needs a mother and a father. Why would any caring society intentionally deprive children of that universally recognized need?

Just as there is no rest in the abortion rights discussion the same applies to equality rights for LGBT people or other minority groups.  As much as it would be nice to relax and take a break, we must remember the old saying "The price of liberty is eternal vigilance".

 

Dear Anti-Marriage Bigots

Figure it out.

Equality means equal - not "separate but equal".

I'm not so naive as to think this is the end of the discussion in California, but it's good to see the judiciary calling Prop 8 (aka Prop Hate) out for what it is.

Proposition 8 Blowback ... Part ???

I don't agree with the tactics described here or here - both represent a kind of protest that is wholly inappropriate.

That said, when millions of dollars are spent to strip rights from people, or to deny them equal standing in society, one cannot be overly shocked when there is a dramatic backlash. I stated back here that the most public backers of Proposition 8 in California would find themselves bearing the brunt of the outrage many would feel over that proposition's passage - I cannot claim that I'm overly surprised that some would resort to more extreme expressions of their outrage - although I am disappointed.

On a more constructive front, the legal challenges for Proposition 8 are intriguing indeed. Over at Lambda Legal, they have quite an interesting case they are putting forward:

The groups argue that Prop. 8 is invalid because it improperly attempts to undo the constitution's core commitment to equality and deprives the courts of their essential role of protecting the rights of minorities. According to the California Constitution, such a radical change in the way the courts and state government work cannot be decided by a simple ballot measure.

The California Constitution makes clear that a major change in the roles played by the different branches of government cannot be made by a simple majority vote through the initiative process, but at the very least must first go through the state legislature. Changes to the underlying principles of the constitution must be approved by two-thirds of both houses of the legislature before going to voters. That didn't happen with Proposition 8, and that's why it's invalid.

Interesting argument - I'll be very curious to see how far it goes. In the meantime, I sincerely hope that the recent reports of violence and implied violence are no more than the short term outrage of a few, and not a sign of a more extreme backlash - that will do nobody in the argument any good.

Consequences...

In the US elections this month, voters in California had before them a ballot item called Proposition 8. Proposition 8 was an amendment to the state constitution that for all intents and purposes banned gay marriage.

The campaign itself was contentious, and particularly notable was the fact that the LDS Church became very publicly involved - sinking millions of dollars into the Pro-Proposition 8 campaign.

As Benediction Blogs On points out, one has to imagine that there will be consequences of some sort for the LDS church, and in particular its members.

There are some legal challenges being raised against Proposition 8 itself, although I have serious doubts as to their viability.

More interesting is this story over at BoxTurtle Bulletin. In terms of smart thinking - you own a business that has a large clientele, it's probably not the best idea in the world to make a public donations to a cause that strips rights away from a big chunk of your clientele.

I imagine that there will be a few businesses in parts of California that will find a big chunk of their clientele picks up and goes elsewhere - especially if the business or its owner is linked to pro-Proposition 8 in some way. Sadly, that may be by no more than simple association with a particular faith - but such is the price that many will pay in response to the very public support their church leadership gave to Proposition 8.