Further thoughts on Prop Hate
I’m tempted to say that I refuse to get married again unless/until all people have the right to get married to the person of their choice, regardless of race, religion or sexual orientation. After all, marriage should be for everyone …
The problem with maintaining the fiction of “marriage” and “civil unions” comes down to the segregationist concept of “separate but equal”; which as was proven time and time again during the civil rights movement of the 1950s and 1960s was never equal.
I can understand people having moral/religious qualms against marriage between two people of the same sex, but for me personally it’s about NOT legislating and especially not Constitutionalizing morality. Morality comes from within. It should not be imposed on others.
No one has ever been able to give me a rational non-religious reason for why gay marriage should be banned; no one has been able to tell me how allowing two men or two women to get married to each other damages their own marriage to the point that it needs to be “protected” by law.
If someone can give me a coherent argument on that side, maybe I’ll reconsider; but until then, personally, I must choose to support equal rights for everyone regardless of sexual orientation. I refuse to say sexual preference, because I knew several gay people in the Bay Area who would have preferred to be heterosexual rather than gay.
Well, as many of those friends used to say, “Never straight, always gaily forward!” and “It’s not over until the bulldyke sings.”
Whether the fight against Prop Hate can be successfully appealed to the US Supreme Court, or there is yet another ballot initiative in 2010 to overturn the current constitutional revisions, this fight is not over.