I am angry and sickened by Maine putting gay marriage rights on a ballot. They just became state number 31 to overturn equal marriage rights for same-sex couples in a popular vote, after those rights became law in that state.

How is it that gay civil rights are allowed to be put to a popular vote? How is this in any way legal? It is not legal. It is a direct violation of our Constitutional right to equal protection under the law. LGBT organizations are going about this issue completely the wrong way. This is a U.S. Constitution 14th Amendment issue.

Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.– 14th Amendment, United States Constitution

If our civil rights can be decided by popular vote, and not by our right to equal protection under the law, why not put anyone’s civil rights to a popular vote? Because it violates the U.S. Constitution.

Why don’t gay and lesbian couples have the same right to equal protection under the law guaranteed in the 14th Amendment to the Constitution, including the equal right for two adults of the age of consent who are of the same gender to enter into the civil contract of marriage? Because we’re not really a country about equality in practice. We never have been.

We are a country full of bigots who will deny civil rights to any group we can until we are forced to stop denying those rights by the federal courts or by specific federal laws banning discrimination. When we obtain civil rights for one group, those rights do not carry over to the next group subject to the same discrimination (Gay marriage is similar to interracial marriage, see Loving v Virginia, 1967).

It seems in America no minority group has any civil rights until they are tested in the federal courts and the U.S. Congress. We’re supposed to be a country that guarantees equal rights to all, except we’re not. Any minority group discriminated against is automatically denied civil rights until the group wins a Supreme Court case protecting those rights, or Congress passes a law guaranteeing those rights. Our Constitution is essentially meaningless for minorities until it is enforced. Minorities must exercise their right to due process of law to receive the equal rights guaranteed in the same Constitutional Amendment.

Second Amendment rights don’t seem so tenuous. Anyone who carries a gun in accordance with the laws of the state in which they live cannot be stopped from carrying a gun. Gun laws are not discriminatory either. We saw that Constitutional Amendment exercised during the August town hall meetings on health care. Some who were licensed to carry guns, openly or concealed, brought them to town hall rallies and meetings, even one where President Obama was speaking. They were not permitted access to the President, but they were not removed from the rallies outside the buildings where the President was speaking. Why weren’t their guns taken away? Because of their 2nd Amendment rights to keep and bare arms. Why doesn’t the 14th Amendment have the same weight as the 2nd Amendment?

When are we going to start fighting for gay and lesbian equal rights on the civil rights battleground on which it belongs?

When are we going to demand our 14th Amendment rights the way others demand and exercise their 2nd Amendment rights?

Photo credit:  San Francisco Chronicle photo by Liz Mangelsdorf

Technorati Tags: Civil Rights and Justice, gay marriage, LGBT civil rights, U.S. Constitution 14th Amendment

There is good news this week on the same-sex marriage front. New Hampshire is the 6th state to legalize gay marriage. The NH legislation was signed into law on June 3, 2009.

The 6 states that perform legal same-sex marriages are:

• Massachusetts
• Connecticut
• Iowa
• Vermont (as of 9/1/2009)
• Maine (as of 9/14/2009
• New Hampshire (as of 1/1/2010)

Washington D.C. and New York recognize same-sex marriages performed in other states and countries.

California still recognizes the 18,000 or so same-sex marriages performed in that state during the period it was legal.

Other countries that perform legal same-sex marriages are:

• Belgium
• Canada
• Netherlands
• Norway
• South Africa
• Spain
• Sweden

Same-sex marriage is a civil rights issue because a specific group has been singled out for discrimination based on the genders of each of the couple desiring to marry legally. Until same-sex couples can marry just as opposite-sex couples can now, and those marriages are nationally recognized, gay and lesbian civil rights are being violated based on gender discrimination, due process of law and equal protection under the law.

As with all civil rights issues, the United States is progressive in some areas and backward in others, but eventually, equal rights are extended to everyone.

In the meantime, many gay and lesbian rights groups and the ACLU are fighting state-by-state to legalize gay marriage. When enough states have legal same-sex marriage, a federal case can be brought before the U.S. Supreme Court to repeal the federal Defense of Marriage Act of 1996, and extend equal protection under the law to marry another consenting adult to all American citizens.

Benefits of legal same-sex marriage:

• Long-term relationship stability
• Family stability
• All the rights and responsibilities of marriage (there are over 1000)
• Stable two-parent families for children
• Children are protected from loss of one parent at the whim of the other, the whims of state law changes, or the whim of states to deny child custody and adoption to LGBT parents. Should same-sex parents divorce, the children will have all the protections of children of hetero divorced parents.
• Separation of church and state is upheld
• Equal protection and due process under the law are preserved

What a lot of people don’t realize is children are deeply, negatively affected by their same-sex parents not being legally allowed to get married. If you didn’t know, many gay and lesbian couples have children, whether from previous heterosexual marriages or partnerships, artificial insemination or adoption. These children deserve the same protections as children of heterosexual parents.

Cons of legal same-sex marriage:

• None

Some very vocal people don’t like it and don’t believe LGBT people should have the same rights heterosexuals have.This position doesn’t hold legal or moral water, and it continues to allow the church to be blurred with the state, and the religious predilections of some to be imposed on a minority group.

The same arguments being used against the LGBT population on marriage are very similar to the arguments used to deny African Americans equal rights (changed by the Civil Rights Act of 1964) and for interracial couples to legally marry (legalized everywhere in 1967 in the U.S. Supreme Court case Loving v Virginia).

Those opposing same-sex marriage are going to quickly find themselves on the wrong side of history. The tide is turning rapidly toward equal rights for LGBT Americans. Five years ago only one state, Massachusetts, legalized gay marriage. It has taken only months for marriage rights to be legalized in 5 more states. Same-sex marriage rights were taken away in California or we would have 7 states with legal same-sex marriage today.

California will recover its gay marriage rights sooner rather than later because they face a legal conundrum that all the legal marriages of same-sex couples are still recognized. The legal argument becomes if several thousand same-sex couples were married in the state and the state still recognizes those marriages, how can they justify they are treating everyone equally under the law by denying marriage to more same-sex couples?

They can’t, and that is the argument that will have to go back to court or back onto a ballot. Prop 8 may have amended the CA constitution, but due process and equal protection under the law are violated by the amendment and the amendment will have to be reversed because of that fact. Many states that passed Constitutional Amendments of the same type will eventually have them overturned by due process and equal protection law suits or by means of the ballot.

I don’t think Proposition 8 would pass today if another election were held, although the vote would still be close. In a few years, the number of people who would vote against Prop 8 will increase dramatically as more states legalize same-sex marriage and the age of the population becomes slightly younger.

What those of us who support same-sex marriage rights must do is make sure we encourage young voters with similar views to vote. We must also make our views known to the people we know and to the extent possible, to our wider communities. We must be activists and advocates of our cause. Sitting on the sidelines never changed anything.

What everyone needs to understand, pro or con, is that equal protection under the law is for all Americans, and the right to marry is a protected right.

If you are against legal same-sex marriage, no one is asking you to marry someone of the same gender. No one is asking your church to be required to perform weddings. No one is asking you to like it or agree with it. The law demands, however, that you tolerate it in our society, just like interracial marriages and equal rights for African Americans and other minorities had to be and still have to be tolerated.

Don’t start on the “next people will want to marry children or their pets” argument. It’s ludicrous because children and pets cannot enter into legal contracts. Legal marriage is a legal contract and must be entered into by people of the age of majority who are legally capable of signing a contract.

Whether or not you support the right of same-sex couples to marry legally, I hope you will leave your thoughts in the comments in a civil tone which debates the issue. Hateful speech and attacks will be deleted.

Technorati Tags: being the change i wish to see, due process, equal protection under the law, gay marriage, LGBT civil rights

I am truly shocked and extremely angry that President-elect Barack Obama would extend an invitation to as divisive a pastor as Rick Warren of Saddleback Church in California to give the invocation at his inauguration.

The civil rights leader and minister, Rev. Joseph E. Lowery (age 87), who will give the benediction, has been completely overshadowed because of the Rick Warren miscalculation. Rev. Lowery is a progressive minister who prefers to err on the side of inclusion when ministering to God’s children. He welcomes all people into his ministry and beliefs, including gays and lesbians. He preaches God’s love over specific Bible quotes others use to exclude people from their ministries. Being African American and from the civil rights era, he knows just how Bible verses can be used to exclude and denigrate people. Rev. Lowery is the kind of minister who should be giving the invocation at President Obama’s inauguration. The first voice of faith we should hear is the voice of love, compassion and inclusion. We should not hear the voice of intolerance, exclusion and hate from Mr. Warren.

The following video sums up the issue well:

Mr. Warren equates gays and lesbians with pedophiles and incest, has announced on Dateline NBC in an interview with Ann Curry that he has some rather depraved sexual appetites of his own, runs a “cure for being gay” ministry program, and does not allow gays or lesbians to become members of his church. Rev. Warren is more than against gay marriage rights. He is clearly against gays and lesbians period and his church demonstrates he is completely intolerant.

On an unrelated, but much more disturbing, note, Mr. Warren has called for the assassination of the President of Iran, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. In an era when our country greatly desires and needs better relations with Iran, Mr. Warren has been so bold as to pass judgment (a death sentence) on President Ahmadinejad. How are we to improve relations with Iran and the rest of the world if America continues to put people of intolerance and hubris at the forefront of important public events?

Mr. Warren equates the legal procedure of abortion and a woman’s right to choose to the Nazi Holocaust. The Holocaust murders were directed at Jews, gays, the mentally ill, the elderly, non-Aryans, and anyone who didn’t meet with Hitler’s world view. The Nazis did not allow abortions for ethnic Germans of Aryan descent. A single Aryan mother of an Aryan child was supported by the state. All women of Aryan descent were encouraged to have Aryan children, married or not. If a woman became pregnant by a non-Aryan, she was granted an abortion and if the father could be found, he was placed in a concentration camp. If a child was born to Aryan parents with some defect, the child was murdered and the parents sterilized or worse, sent to a concentration camp while their Aryan heritage was investigated. It was believed if you were of truly Aryan roots, you could not have defective children, and if you did, you must not be Aryan after all.

I wonder if Mr. Warren believes himself and his followers to be superior to the rest of us in the eyes of God? Perhaps if a couple in his following has a gay or lesbian child, they must not be true Christians in his definition of the word? Perhaps he will go further in his intolerance and remove parents of gays and lesbians from his congregation?

Mr. Warren believes only 2% of the population is gay (science measures it at 10%) and he believes being gay is a disease. Believing being gay is a disease that can be cured is nothing less than quackery. The American Psychiatric Association, American Medical Association, American Psychological Association and the American Pediatric Association have clearly shown and have rewritten their diagnostic guidelines stating that being homosexual is a normal part of being human and is not a deviant behavior or a disease of any kind. It may not be the average human experience, but it is normal and natural that some people are gay and that it isn’t a choice. Mr. Warren also does not believe in evolution. What happened to science being a guiding principal in the Obama administration?

President-elect Obama says he is a staunch supporter of gay and lesbian equal rights, though he has said he is against gay marriage rights. Which is it, Mr. President-elect? Are you for or against equal rights for gays and lesbians?

Replace “gay and lesbian” with “black” or “interracial” and see how you feel. I do not believe the President-elect would invite a neo-Nazi or racist to pray at his inauguration. Why is he inviting a bigot who hates gays and lesbians?

I suggest President-elect Obama and his transition team check their math. I believe they have grossly underestimated the feelings of LGBT Americans, their supporters, and liberals and progressives who worked so hard to get Mr. Obama elected. We are not in the mood to be marginalized in the name of “inclusiveness” when that means someone who hates gays and lesbians, and believes we are equivalent to child molesters and a disease that needs to be eradicated is what is meant by “inclusive”.

This whole thing smacks of the Jeremiah Wright debacle from which Mr. Obama had to distance himself. How many times will Rick Warren rear his ugly head and how much negative press does that man have to bring in the coming month before Mr. Obama will dismiss him? Only time will tell.

I also suggest President-elect Obama give the honor of the invocation at his inauguration to Rev. Lowery, and if he must keep Mr. Warren in the inauguration day line-up, have him give a short benediction and be ready to cut him off if he strays into intolerant territory. I, and many others, would prefer that Mr. Warren be dropped from the program and the honor of both the invocation and benediction be given to Rev. Lowery.

Technorati Tags: Barack Obama, being the change i wish to see, bigot, Civil Rights and Justice, gay and lesbian, gay marriage, Inauguration Invocation, Rev. Joseph Lowery, Rick Warren, Social Change