Posted: 11/18/2008 05:19:18 PM PST
As reaction to the vote on Proposition 8 continues, reasonable people have a right to ask whether some of the tactics of same-sex marriage supporters will provoke another backlash.
People are free to protest, but at best, or worst depending on how you see this volatile issue, gay-rights supporters who are engaging in some questionable tactics risk alienating people in the middle who may have been considering changing their positions.
The positions of both sides are more than clear. Gay-rights advocates not only want California courts to toss out the Yes on 8 vote from the Nov. 4 election, but in some cases are targeting supporters of the measure and publicizing, mainly using the Internet, the names of people who gave money to the measure.
In one well-publicized incident, the director of a Sacramento musical theater group was hounded from his position after it was revealed he supported Proposition 8.
In other cases, churches have been picketed by same-sex marriage proponents, who are accusing people who voted for 8 of being hate-filled homophobes and are likening their support to segregationists who opposed civil rights for blacks – an over-the-top reaction that will just inflame this debate.
Supporters of Proposition 8, which banned government-sanctioned same-sex marriage in California, say the gay-rights supporters are engaging in a witch hunt, and are seeking to overturn the will of the people. They point to actions such as Tuesday’s decision by the Santa
Cruz County Board of Supervisors to join the San Francisco lawsuit seeking to overturn the majority vote. The Santa Cruz City Council may follow suit next week.
More than that, traditional marriage supporters say the issue is a moral and religious one, and the protesters are trying to reverse thousands of years of teaching and doctrine.
The Sentinel urged that Proposition 8 be defeated. Our argument at the time remains: Churches are free to marry whomever they like, and to do so within their religious traditions and doctrinal understanding – but government should not discriminate when issuing a civil marriage license to a couple.
Seeking a way out of the polarizing debate now occurring, several local people have written to the Sentinel urging the state to move toward granting “civil unions” for both heterosexual and homosexual couples – without using the word “marriage,” which would be associated with religious traditions. In such unions, gays would have all the rights and equal treatment under the law that heterosexual couples enjoy. Still, they have fought hard for the right to legal “marriage,” and changing the wording might feel like a defeat many would be unwilling to accept.
Religious communities, in turn, would have to give up their battle over “legal marriage.”
Would such an idea ever gain traction? Probably not now. Same-sex marriage proponents need to realize, however, they are unlikely to get many churches and congregations to change their minds, especially not with picket lines and inflammatory signs, much less calls for boycotts and “outing” Yes on 8 supporters. Will they also target blacks, who voted yes on the measure by about a 70-30 percent margin, and President-elect Barack Obama, who also has said he does not favor same-sex marriage?
Harassing and threatening opponents is no way to build support for equal treatment under the law.
These are the same folks that try to make the case that their plight is analagous to the civil rights efforts of Dr. King…does this look like the work for Dr. King? I do not understand is why homosexuals want to transmogrify “marriage”.
The relativisitc abyss is consuming this country and we are losing are ability to establish any sense of meaning.
