2008 Woodie Awards
Editorial: Proposition 8 passing hurts gays, society
Issue date: 11/12/08 Section: Opinion
Not only should Proposition 8 be overturned, it should have never been passed.
But for anyone who likes their civil rights served with a touch of irony, this election was symbolic perfection.
As America elected a half-black man as its new president, a ballot measure that allows a constitutional amendment banning gays to marry passed in California. And similar propositions were passed in Arizona and Florida.
California's voters even passed a proposition to give chickens more legroom - but the gays gettin' together still makes 'em feel icky.
It's mind-boggling that such intolerance can still exist. Not only that, but that intolerance still comes in fancy packaging, complete with an extensive campaign against the rights of other human beings.
Members of the Church of Latter Day Saints contributed about 43 percent of the
$36 million raised for the ban's cause and purchased TV time in Utah that encouraged Mormons from around the United States to donate, The Associated Press reported.
As if the issue of out-of-state funding wasn't shady enough, add a little religion into the mix, and you've got a shocking unethical entanglement.
A series of misleading ads released by Proposition 8 proponents asserted that California's children were in danger if the ballot measure failed. Saying that, from a young age, they would be exposed to materials that are offensive to their parents, including books that mention gay marriage.
The California Education Code makes specifications if school districts choose to teach comprehensive sex education, such as age appropriateness, according to
findlaw.com. The code also states that it should be "appropriate for use with pupils of all races, genders, sexual orientations, ethnic and cultural backgrounds," in addition to abstaining from religious doctrines.
The advertisements claim that in the two states that allow same-sex marriages - Massachusetts and Connecticut - parents have no right to object to what kind of sexual education their children receive and it would be the same in California. This is false.
The California Education Code not only allows districts to decide against teaching health and sex education, but also has provisions stating that parents can pull their children from those classes or others dealing with sensitive subject matters.
Although gays are allowed to file for domestic partnerships in California, giving them most of the rights afforded to heterosexual married couples, it still withholds them from a cultural staple in American society and denies them as a part of that society.
Banning gays from marrying infers that they are "others," and makes painfully clear to everyone else that they are different - hearkening back to a time when interracial couples were banned from marrying.
From a legal standpoint, the amendment took place on the basis of a popular vote. This takes power away from the courts when it comes to determining the law - which is, you know, their job. Moreover, the amendment itself defies constitutional rationality: the document is supposed to give people rights, not abridge them.
What's more, the California Supreme Court overturned the previous ban on gay marriage in May, saying sexual orientation "does not constitute a legitimate basis upon which to deny or withhold legal rights." Since then, more than 11,000 gay marriages have taken place, NPR reported.
In the process, no lives were torn apart - only brought together.
Editorial Board
Genny McLaren, Managing Editor
Katy Sweeny, News Editor
Megan Wilson, Opinion Editor
Connor Ramey, Sports Editor
Kenna Hunt, Entertainment Editor
Nicole Williams, Features Editor
Elysse Bonner, Photo Editor
Walter Foley, Chief Copy Editor
Elizabeth Varin, Online Editor
Roody Vazquez, Video Editor
Related links
Gay marriage ban shows California is 'ready for change'
But for anyone who likes their civil rights served with a touch of irony, this election was symbolic perfection.
As America elected a half-black man as its new president, a ballot measure that allows a constitutional amendment banning gays to marry passed in California. And similar propositions were passed in Arizona and Florida.
California's voters even passed a proposition to give chickens more legroom - but the gays gettin' together still makes 'em feel icky.
It's mind-boggling that such intolerance can still exist. Not only that, but that intolerance still comes in fancy packaging, complete with an extensive campaign against the rights of other human beings.
Members of the Church of Latter Day Saints contributed about 43 percent of the
$36 million raised for the ban's cause and purchased TV time in Utah that encouraged Mormons from around the United States to donate, The Associated Press reported.
As if the issue of out-of-state funding wasn't shady enough, add a little religion into the mix, and you've got a shocking unethical entanglement.
A series of misleading ads released by Proposition 8 proponents asserted that California's children were in danger if the ballot measure failed. Saying that, from a young age, they would be exposed to materials that are offensive to their parents, including books that mention gay marriage.
The California Education Code makes specifications if school districts choose to teach comprehensive sex education, such as age appropriateness, according to
findlaw.com. The code also states that it should be "appropriate for use with pupils of all races, genders, sexual orientations, ethnic and cultural backgrounds," in addition to abstaining from religious doctrines.
The advertisements claim that in the two states that allow same-sex marriages - Massachusetts and Connecticut - parents have no right to object to what kind of sexual education their children receive and it would be the same in California. This is false.
The California Education Code not only allows districts to decide against teaching health and sex education, but also has provisions stating that parents can pull their children from those classes or others dealing with sensitive subject matters.
Although gays are allowed to file for domestic partnerships in California, giving them most of the rights afforded to heterosexual married couples, it still withholds them from a cultural staple in American society and denies them as a part of that society.
Banning gays from marrying infers that they are "others," and makes painfully clear to everyone else that they are different - hearkening back to a time when interracial couples were banned from marrying.
From a legal standpoint, the amendment took place on the basis of a popular vote. This takes power away from the courts when it comes to determining the law - which is, you know, their job. Moreover, the amendment itself defies constitutional rationality: the document is supposed to give people rights, not abridge them.
What's more, the California Supreme Court overturned the previous ban on gay marriage in May, saying sexual orientation "does not constitute a legitimate basis upon which to deny or withhold legal rights." Since then, more than 11,000 gay marriages have taken place, NPR reported.
In the process, no lives were torn apart - only brought together.
Genny McLaren, Managing Editor
Katy Sweeny, News Editor
Megan Wilson, Opinion Editor
Connor Ramey, Sports Editor
Kenna Hunt, Entertainment Editor
Nicole Williams, Features Editor
Elysse Bonner, Photo Editor
Walter Foley, Chief Copy Editor
Elizabeth Varin, Online Editor
Roody Vazquez, Video Editor
Related links
Gay marriage ban shows California is 'ready for change'
Viewing Comments 1 - 6 of 6
concerned citizen
posted 11/12/08 @ 8:46 AM PST
I serve on a school board here in California and have received an unbiased legal opinion on the subject from a reputable statewide association of school administrators. (Continued…)
Dropping By
posted 11/12/08 @ 10:28 AM PST
Thirty states have now allowed their citizens to vote on gay "marriage" -- all 30 states have rejected it. You reveal your own narrow-minded provincialism when deciding that this amounts to nothing more than people feeling "icky" that gays might get together. (Continued…)
Another perspective
posted 11/13/08 @ 8:51 PM PST
This is just an observation.
Back in 1900, people felt "icky" when blacks got together. Additionally, the curriculum in our schools focused on the accomplishments of whites overwhelmingly. (Continued…)
shane
posted 11/15/08 @ 7:47 PM PST
This whole issue is absurd. Even if marriage was legal in California, it would not be recognized at the federal level. All this talk about rights is bogus, no one wants to deny rights to gays, this is about changing the definition of marriage to reflect a different kind of arrangement. (Continued…)
mama-mia
posted 11/17/08 @ 4:51 AM PST
You can sign a petition to appeal prop 8 at
www.couragecampaign.org/RepealProp8
Thanks for caring !
Sane Councel
posted 11/30/08 @ 4:17 PM PST
Proposition 8 not passing hurts society more. Gay marriage does not provide anything for the future. ( i.e. no children) This is marriage most fundamental purpose and the only reason it has been historically supported/regulated by governments. (Continued…)
Post a Comment