Equality
“Equality!” That’s what I have heard people yell out their windows when I have been standing on street corners waving Yes on 8 signs. I have done this twice already and plan to do it again tomorrow. The first time I was in a group of about 80 supporters, and the second time there were about 30 of us. Most of the feedback we got from motorists and pedestrians was positive. Lots of thumbs up, honking, waving, mouthed “thank you”s and truckers and paramedics giving us a shout out with their big horns and sirens. But I would say that about 20% of cars that passed gave us some sort of negative feedback. One woman yelled while driving through the intersection, “You need to think about equality for all!” And another woman yelled through an open window, “Equality! What about equality!?” Some that were stopping to turn on a red signal would say nothing until the very last second and as they accelerated away call us bigots, or give us the bird, or yell, “no on 8!” One high school girl read the sign about parental rights and yelled, “your sign makes no sense!”
I have been thinking and pondering a lot about this, especially yesterday as I was reading the many reader comments on articles throughout the internet. The main argument I see from no voters is equality. After reading several of the debates between commenters, I felt sick and depressed. I want to believe that people are generally good, but I have seen so much meanness, sarcasm, and anti-religion statements that I feel really troubled. One thing that has been good about it though, is that it all has made me really think and re-examine my motives for supporting Proposition 8. I had a great discussion about it last night with my husband Rob, and I think a Yes vote on 8 is still the right thing even if you leave religion completely out of it (which of course I don’t, and I don’t think the founding fathers expected us to either).
So why does it matter for everyone, even atheists and those who believe in social progress? One thing I read yesterday was a comment that said (paraphrasing), “Being gay is not a choice. As a heterosexual I cannot say when I decided to be straight. That’s just the way I am, and that’s just the way they are.”
I cannot help but think about the many lifestyles that fall into this same category. There are those who are naturally angry, or naturally happy, or naturally depressed, or naturally mean, or naturally kind, or naturally bitter, or naturally funny, or naturally addictive, or naturally skinny, or naturally fat, and on and on forever. Can a person recall when they decided to be a drug addict, or when they chose to be a mean mother? If a person with one of these traits lives a lifestyle that promotes the manifestation of their nature, they must of course live with the natural consequence of their actions. A naturally angry man that beats his wife or girlfriend, must accept that he will be arrested and possibly jailed for it, regardless of whether or not he “can’t help it.” A woman that is naturally cracking jokes all the time, may have to live with the consequences of offending those who don’t get her humor, regardless of her intentions. A friend that is naturally depressed will have to deal with difficulties in maintaining friendships, regardless of the fact that they don’t have the strength to. And a man that is naturally fat will have to try every day to be diligent about diet and exercise regardless of how he feels it is unfair that he was cursed with a slow metabolism. And a gay man or woman who lives in a relationship is perfectly free to do so but it cannot be called marriage, regardless of the fact that he wants to same recognition given to heterosexual couples.
What I as a yes voter am saying is that marriage has meant the same thing since the beginning of creation, time, tradition, or whatever. It has always meant a union between a man and a woman. My feelings toward whether homosexuality is right or wrong are moot here. I agree that there should be a word to identify their union, but let’s find one that is unique to the idea of two people of the same gender joining in a committed relationship. I’m sure someone more clever than me could come up with a good one.
These things simply are. The world isn’t always fair, and if we try to make it our mission to level the playing field to provide for every personality and situation, there would be no moral code of conduct for society, and thus fear and anger would rule over us. Vote Yes on 8 because it matters!
Amy, I’m glad you posted about the sign waving and your thoughts about it all. And thanks for posting the LOB videos. 🙂
Holly
Amy, I love reading everything you have to say on this subject (even though I don’t live in California). 😀
Thank you Amy, very well written. You are doing a wonderful job of being a voice on the internet. I have had many of these same thoughts–agency is a factor that must be considered.
Good points. Can we call a chair a table? I suppose we could, but it wouldn’t make sense.
Glad to hear someone with courage to stand at the street corner.
Nicely said Amy. I have a hard time articulating my thoughts on Prop 8, but you always say it perfectly. Thanks for all the great posts you’ve done about Prop 8!
I am proud of everything you are doing to pass this proposition!
Hey, who are those hot mamas holding those signs?
“I agree that there should be a word to identify their union, but let’s find one that is unique to the idea of two people of the same gender joining in a committed relationship.”
That phrase is “domestic partnership” and according to the California family code it affords homosexuals equal privileges of married couples. Again, this makes the whole NO campaign a moot point
I am confused by your logic.
If an angry person beats his wife, he is hurting his wife. If a person is joking inapproprately, it is offensive to the audience. If a person is depressed, it brings the people around him/her down. If a man is fat, he is hurting himself. Being a homosexual hurts nobody. Give me one reason how it has hurt you and why they shouldn’t have the right to get married.
The following is untrue
“What I as a yes voter am saying is that marriage has meant the same thing since the beginning of creation, time, tradition, or whatever.”
Marriage once meant that a woman was property. That is not true today. Marriage also once meant the union between two people of the same race. That is also not true today. Marriage is not the same as it always has been. It has adjusted for human equality.
I am not religious and you did not answer the question that you claim to have about why I should care if homosexual people get married.
The only thing I see is that it comes down to religion. I feel as if proposition 8 is religious intolerance towards my lack of religion.
I’m not saying that a homosexual in a committed relationship hurts me. What I’m saying is that it cannot be called a marriage.
Marriage has always meant the union of people of different gender with the intent of having children. (Obviously not all do, but that’s another discussion.) In order for a homosexual couple to have children they have to go outside their relationship, so it is not just about the two anymore. I agree that the social implications of marriage have changed through time. There was a time when women were considered property etc. But neither has marriage always been about love. If it were just about two people in love making a commitment, we would not be having this discussion.
Even if this issue did come down to religion verses irreligion, that would not negate my view. The logic I don’t understand is why if any social issue involves a religious view it should not be considered.
You have your right to believe what you want as a religious person, however you do not have the right to impose that view on others. America is supposed to be a place where religion and government are separate from eachother.
I have an argument about the idea that marriage is about people having children. If we are outlawing gay marriage because they can’t have children. Then, logic would say that we would have to oulaw marriages to infertile people, old people, or those who simply did not want to have children. You can’t just say that it’s okay for heterosexual couples to not have children and call it a marriage if it’s not okay for homosexual couples to not have children and call it a marriage. Unless you are willing to take the stance that all non-child bearing couples should not be married, then this argument is invalid.
There was a time when blacks and whites could not drink out of the same drinking fountain. At the time, people tried to justify this by saying that they were separate but equal. However, this gave the message to the black community that they were second class citizens. This is the same thing that is happening today with homosexuals. You say that they can have the same benefits, but can’t call it marriage. This is sending a message that the homosexual community is not good enough and therefore are second class citizens. In fact, you may actually believe that they are second class citizens, but the law and government should not be saying that.
Proposition 8 has caused so much pain to good people and it is all for the sake of religion. This is not what religion should be about. Religion is supposed to teach people to love and care for eachother not pass judgement. What ever happened to “judge not lest ye be judged”? Whether or not a homosexual is sinning is between that person and god. There becomes a problem when religion tries to force itself on other people, this is what causes pain, violence and wars.
America is a democracy. The people voted and the initiative passed because a majority of the people voted in favor of it. That’s how a democracy works. I understand that you didn’t vote for it, so, in that sense it’s being imposed on you, but that’s true for every single law that is passed or politician that is elected that you didn’t vote for. Obama’s presidency is now being imposed on everyone that didn’t vote for him. Are you equally as outraged over the passage of Proposition 2 since this is clearly the animal rights activists imposing their view on others? What about Proposition 12? This is clearly the veterans rights activists imposing their view on others.
What is society’s interest in marriage then, if not to encourage the best environment for raising the next generation? Society certainly has no interest in acknowledging and celebrating my love for another individual, regardless of how important those feelings are to me personally. It is true that marriage is permitted among a wide spectrum of people, including those that currently don’t want or are unable to have children.
Some over-inclusiveness is desirable to account for couples that change their minds or for advances in medical technology that permit previously infertile couples to have children (or for times when the infertility turns out to be temporary, etc.). Also, I’m sure you would agree that inquiries by the state into the attitudes and medical status of the couple would be highly invasive. However, in the case of a same-sex couple, no invasive questioning is needed to know that no children will result from their union since it is biologically not possible. Therefore, society has declined to encourage these unions.
Homosexuals aren’t singled out here. There are other unions that society has declined to encourage. Currently, cousins are not permitted to marry. Why? Is it because society hates cousins? Are we bigoted and judgmental against those cousins that just want to be together and live in peace? No, it’s because their unions have a tendency to produce children that our society has deemed to be generally sub-optimal so we don’t encourage them. Why, then, should society promote unions that, by their very design, produce no children at all?
I found it quite interesting that African-Americans voted overwhelmingly FOR Prop 8. Perhaps they saw the error in equating their long and violent struggle for civil rights with the effort to change the definition of marriage. No one is saying that homosexuals can’t be with whomever they want or can’t do whatever they want in the privacy of their homes. What homosexuals are seeking is an acknowledgment from the state that their unions are identical to heterosexual unions and should be promoted and encouraged in the same way. Society voted and disagreed. That’s it.
I agree with a lot of what you’re saying here. I think both sides of this issue have had extremist elements that said and did hurtful things. All of it makes me sad. It’s been hard to read and hear other people call me, as a supporter of Prop 8, a bigot and homophobic when I am taking a stand for something I feel is moral and in the best interest of our country. Everyone, the religious and irreligious, should treat each other with respect and refrain from personal attacks, especially as we debate tough, divisive issues such as this one.