A Few Thoughts on Iowa

By now pretty much everybody has heard the news that the Iowa State Supreme Court has ruled that the state's law limiting marriage to a man and a woman violates the constitutional rights of equal protection. And, if you've been to this blog before, you know that I agree with that ruling.

But, while I agree that this is an important ruling, and a step in the right direction toward the inevitable recognition of marriage equality nationwide, I'm not exactly partying like it's 1999 over this.

Basically: We've been here before. We, in California, have certainly been here before. And if the California experience teaches anything, it's that the pendulum swings both ways before finding its resting position.

The Iowa Court found that their current state law does not fit within their current state constitution. There are two ways to fix this. Either amend the law to recognize same-sex marriages. Or amend the constitution to clarify and cement the ban.

I applaud the Iowa Supreme Court for their unanimous decision, but all they've really done is select the stage for the next big battle. The war is far from over.

The fat lady has yet to sing on this one

Along with the hopeful euphoria of Obama's election came the sobering slap in the face of California's Proposition 8 passing. From an overwhelmingly "blue" state came the first ever amendment to a state constitution removing rights already granted. This is embarrassing to me as a Californian, far beyond the mere disappointment of losing an election, it's major step backwards in the civil rights battle that helped bring Obama to the White House.

But there are two things I'm focusing on the remain hopeful that, although we just lost a major battle, we will eventually win the war.

First: Prop 8 barely passed, with votes still being counted till late on Wednesday before an official result was announced. Compare this to the 2002 "defense of marriage" ballot proposition that passed with 61% of the vote. Despite the loss, many minds have been changed over a relatively short period of time.

A few years of "domestic partnerships" and a few months of same-sex marriage have managed to convince a large part of California's electorate that the world won't end, and their own marriages will not be damaged, by extending the marriage right to all law abiding, competent adult citizens.

This is a hopeful sign, because the real battle is just beginning. Which brings us to the second point:

Marriages that are recognized in some states, but not in others, are tainted anyway, and eventually this will need to be answered at the federal level. The lawsuits already filed as a result of Proposition 8 may be the key to that. And, if they are challenged all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court, by the time they reach that level, President Obama may have appointed one or two new justices.

Our state Attorney General, Jerry Brown, has said that, once challenged, it will be his job to defend Proposition 8, and that he will do his job - even though he opposed its passing. But he also said that, since there's no language in Proposition 8 making it retroactive, he will defend the 18,000 same-sex couples who were legally married to retain their marriage.

This pretty much guarantees that there will be legal challenges from both sides: Gay and lesbian couples who are now not allowed to marry, and Prop 8 supporters who are upset that there are still 18,000 legal gay marriages among their neighbors.

The forces of progress may have lost this one proposition battle (due in large part to deceptive advertising and intervention by religious forces from outside California), but time and history are on the side of marriage equality.

I'm not giving up just yet. Like somebody else has been saying lately, "Yes we can." Fire it up! Ready to go!

Final Pre-Election Blog (maybe)

Driving around doing my Sunday errands today I was stopped at an intersection with a few people holding up signs in favor of Proposition 8, the California constitutional amendment that would deny same-sex couples the right to marry (see my No on 8 vlog here). The slogan on their signs was, "Prop 8 = Free Speech."

Having nothing else to do while waiting for a long signal, I rolled down the window and and asked, "How does Prop 8 have anything to do with free speech?"

"The people voted against gay marriage in 2002, and judges overturned it!" was his reply.

"Because it was found to be unconstitutional. It had nothing to do with free speech," I answered. "Obviously you still have the right to be as intolerant as you like," (maybe I shouldn't have said that?)

"They already have all the rights!" he said, thankfully changing the subject from my accusation of his intolerance.

"Let me ask you something," I attempted, "What would you do if somebody decided that your marriage could only be called a 'partnership'?"

He turned away. I guess I stumped him.

"Would you call that equal?" I tried again.

"Have a nice day," he told me between clenched teeth.

"Can you answer the question? Would you be satisfied if your marriage were reduced to a 'partnership'?"

A scowl was all I got from him.

"Of course not," I answered. "So you're a hypocrite as well as a liar," (I have a tendency for going too far), "Have a nice day!" The light changed and I drove off.

On the brighter side, I had a nice talk with a McCain supporter at Trader Joe's (I was wearing an Obama shirt, of course). We each agreed that it looked like an Obama victory, but that we didn't trust the polls either way. So, if you haven't voted yet, be sure to get out there on Tuesday and do what you've got to do!

Standing up for What's Right (No on Prop 8)

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."
(you know the source)

Does this apply to gays and lesbians? It seems to me that marriage would be covered under those unalienable rights. "Defense of marriage" laws today are no different or less hateful to me than anti-miscegenation laws a generation ago.

In California we're about to have that referendum again, with Proposition 8 on our November 4 ballot. I can't see how anybody could view this as anything other than legalized discrimination, and yet according to the polls, it just might pass. It's rare that I feel ashamed to be a Californian, but this is one of those moments.


Find more videos like this on VloggerHeads

Mary's baby and the hypocrisy of the right

To the fundamentalist right wing, Vice President Dick Cheney can do no wrong. He has championed all their causes, and fought all their foes - including those who would grant equal marriage rights to all or allow homosexual couples to adopt children.

Cheney has gladly led the anti-gay parade, despite the fact that his daughter, Mary, is a lesbian in a long-term relationship with another woman. Mary describes her partnership with Heather as "a marriage" despite the fact that they live in Virginia, which has a state law and a constitutional amendment prohibiting same-sex marriage or civil unions.

With today's news that Mary (37) and Heather (45) are expecting a baby, the VP gets to again talk out of each side of his crooked mouth. Yes, Mary is pregnant (no word on who the father is, or how the pregnancy came about - insert your own David Crosby joke here), and the VP Dick and his wife, Lynn, have issued a statement saying that they are looking forward to their 6th grandchild.

Has Dick shown any leadership or daring by making a statement about how it's the fault of the religious right that this baby will be born out-of-wedlock? Any word on the hypocrisy that gives Heather no legal rights regarding her partner's child? Any plea to recognize the legitimacy of this 14-year relationship and their partnership in preparing to raise a child? Of course not.

Dick always has to have it both ways. He openly supports ands loves his daughter - as he should - all while playing political footsie with those who would damn her to Hell.