Prop 8 hate: Gay ain’t married to King


Martin King that is

Originally published by our Legal Editor, Mike “gamecock” DeVine as Charlotte Law and Civil Rights Examiner for Examiner.com

After the most liberal state in the nation rejected same-sex marriage at the ballot box for the second time this decade, protests rallies were held across the nation, including here in Charlotte.

Some gay rights activists point to the defeat of same-sex marriage with the passage of Proposition 8 in California and similar bans approved in Arizona and Florida on this past Election Day as evidence of hate:

“We need a movement in this country,” said Joanie Beasley of Gastonia. “It is time we said no to all bigotry and hate. It is time we demanded our civil rights.”

Bigotry and hate?

Merely to favor maintaining the 5000 year old definition of the institution of marriage, is now considered “hate”?


Civil rights?

There is no civil right to marry a person of the same sex ratified in any State’s constitution (including North Carolina’s) or the U.S. Constitution, although, judges in Massachusetts and Connecticut essential re-wrote their respective Constitutions to find such a previously “hidden” right.

Beasley, 53, sang along with the crowd Saturday, closing her eyes at the chorus of “We Shall Overcome.” She attended the rally with her partner Nancy Leedy, also 53.

As a veteran trial lawyer that has represented gays in discrimination claims, I think many gay activists make a huge mistake trying to marry their cause to the Civil Rights Movement for blacks and other racial and ethnic minorities.

Gay ain’t the new black

First of all, it was not necessary for judges to twist the meanings of words in constitutions to support their claims. Thurgood Marshall, Rosa Parks and Martin Luther King, Jr. (pictured) could point to the 14th Amendment, ratified by supermajorities of Congress and the States, soon after the Civil War, as the basis of their equal rights.

Secondly, many activists in the present movement are essentially demanding that Americans approve of their “lifestyle”, which, translated, means their sexual preferences and behavior. This is a political loser.

Lastly, a distinct, but vocal minority of those hurling bigot and hate epithets at supporters of traditional marriage, resort to the sine qua non of hate: violence.

The real haters have physically harassed churchgoers (especially Mormons), destroyed property and engaged in various other obnoxious physical and non-physical acts that in no way remind one of those that made the tune of “We Shall Overcome” famous.

Clearly, these miscreants in no way represent the overwhelming majority of gays and lesbians, many of whom don’t even favor changing marriage laws. But the leaders of those who do, need to take a page out of MLK’s book and denounce the violence done in their name much as King denounced Black Panthers and the pre-conversion Malcolm X.

Individual, not group, rights is the way

I once counseled an openly gay legislator to seek legal changes based on the American concept of “individual” rather than group rights. This is a proven political winner.

Many states have enacted laws that address concerns of inheritance, hospital visitation, and other issues. Moreover, many Americans have no problem with civil unions, especially if they are available to individuals without regard to inquiries of sexual preference.

These successes are being achieved the old fashioned way, free speech to persuade followed by votes by We the People in states and localities.

One day Americans may favor changing the definition of marriage. That day has not yet come. But some gay rights activists want to force the issue on the states thru the courts and point to President-Elect Barack Obama’s campaign statements of his desire to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act.

That act, signed by President Bill Clinton, provides that no state could be required to respect same-sex marriages in other states. (There are Constitutional issues under the Full Faith and Credit Clause that the U.S. Supreme Court has never addressed, I would note).

I think this would be a huge political mistake given the overwhelming opposition to same-sex marriage and given the damage court imposed social views anathema to those of most Americans can have on the body politic, such as Roe v. Wade’s instant legalization of abortion that arrested evolution on the issue in the states.

The best path for gays to one day achieve their civil rights goals is to insist on a civil debate worthy of Martin Luther King and which engages all of the body politic, rather than having judges cram their agenda down America’s throat.

Mike DeVine’s Examiner.com and Charlotte Observer columns.

“One man with courage makes a majority.” – Andrew Jackson


Category: , , , ,

RSS feed

10 Comments Leave a comment

I note that the haters are not protesting in front of Mosque's...

JadedByPolitics (Diary) Tuesday, November 25th at 2:17PM EST (link)

what are they afraid of? and they are not in front of black churches…..what are they afraid of? I dismiss their rants because they don’t have the commitment of their convictions….so they look like the sore losers they are!

 

my problem with the issue

KBDay (Diary) Tuesday, November 25th at 6:02PM EST (link)

The people spoke through their vote. I think this is the best way to handle matters like this. I think that should be the end of it. The issue was put to a fair vote and they lost.

KB Day/The US Report

“Good judgment seeks balance and progress; lack of it eventually finds imbalance and frustration.” (Eisenhower)

 

Forced acceptance is not acceptance.

Steph C (Diary) Tuesday, November 25th at 6:08PM EST (link)

It’s lip service. In addition, one has to feel sorry for people who so belittle themselves that there is nothing about them worthy of anything except their sexual preferences.

Pity them I may but accept their way of life and how they conduct themselves, I do not.

“[I]f the public are bound to yield obedience to laws to which they cannot give their approbation, they are slaves to those who make such laws and enforce them.” –Candidus in the Boston Gazette, 1772
Hillbilly Politics

exactly, for them to define themselves by

Mike gamecock DeVine (Diary) Tuesday, November 25th at 7:27PM EST (link)

“orientation.” All are orieented to sin, but I choose to define myself by being the object of the love of God.

Mike DeVine’s Examiner.com, Charlotte Observer and The Minority Report columns
“One man with courage makes a majority.” – Andrew Jackson

 
 

What's the substantive difference?

socallib Tuesday, November 25th at 9:21PM EST (link)

Why can’t gays also point to the 14th amendment? (and isn’t a 14th amendment necessarily a claim based on group rights?). You’re right that there’s no specific constitutional protection for gay marriage, but the 9th amendment indicates that the constitution isn’t intended to be exhaustive of all rights. Moreover, there was no constitutional protection for inter marriage either, according to your standard, but the Supreme Court ruled in Loving v. Virginia that it was unconstitutional to prohibit inter-racial marriage.

Indeed, the Loving case just shows that marriage has not been a static over the last 5,000 years but has constantly been evolving and changing. Previously, marriaged entailed the idea of coverture, in which the wife and her property became an extension of the husband’s property. In other words, married women had no property rights. But subsequent legal rulings overruled this notion of “traditional” marriage. Marriage is constantly evolving.

 

No, the 14th amendment precisely and purposefully does not base rights on membership in a group

Mike gamecock DeVine (Diary) Wednesday, November 26th at 12:00AM EST (link)

nor does the Bill of Rights. All by design. It is individual rights all the way back to the Declaration.

Mike DeVine’s Examiner.com, Charlotte Observer and The Minority Report columns
“One man with courage makes a majority.” – Andrew Jackson

The purpose of the 14th amendment was to place blacks and all individuals

Mike gamecock DeVine (Diary) Wednesday, November 26th at 12:05AM EST (link)

in the same shoes whites occupied before it. Race is not substantive. Sex is. No individual is denied the right to marry. The institution of Marriage is substantively distinct from the institution of slavery. There was no right to same-sex marriage before the 14th amendment, nor after.

Mike DeVine’s Examiner.com, Charlotte Observer and The Minority Report columns
“One man with courage makes a majority.” – Andrew Jackson

I would stand corrected but...

Steph C (Diary) Wednesday, November 26th at 8:22AM EST (link)

It’s not about orientation alone. It’s about preferences in lifestyles and how they define themselves by those preferences, essentially ignoring everything else that makes up their lives.

There’s more to a life than “orientation” but not according to those who are pushing an agenda against the rest of society, hence preferences.

“[I]f the public are bound to yield obedience to laws to which they cannot give their approbation, they are slaves to those who make such laws and enforce them.” –Candidus in the Boston Gazette, 1772
Hillbilly Politics

agreed - nt

Mike gamecock DeVine (Diary) Wednesday, November 26th at 10:38AM EST (link)

Mike DeVine’s Examiner.com, Charlotte Observer and The Minority Report columns
“One man with courage makes a majority.” – Andrew Jackson

they badger the groups they can wage a campaign of fear in

JLenardDetroit (Diary) Wednesday, November 26th at 12:30PM EST (link)

The whole divide and conquer. The same way they could Race-bait in the last Election – the prove you’re not Racist by voting for the “Black man” rant (which had some effect in battle-ground States) has given way to the “prove you’re not homophobic by voting the Gay agenda” tactic. That BS isn’t going to work in the Black or Islamic community, so they try to “twist” the “Civil Rights” angle to “play” to those “White guilt” votes they know can be garnered if they push the right buttons.

Time to add GAYISM to the list

Regards from NoMoTown (the MOTORlessCITY)
“Liberals, looking to do for? America what they’ve done for? Detroit! which is DESTROY IT!”
“I think, therefore I am Conservative”
“Conservative by choice, Republican by necessity”
“You can lead a Liberal to the Truth/Facts, but you cannot make them THINK!”
“Romney [No, not my first choice] does NOT have a MORMON problem. He has a, far too many Americans; these days; are MORONS problem!”


(RS:Help) (JLD) (Hollyweird) (Brain-deads) (SPIN-cycle) (Obamaocare) (Party of kNOw) (Conservatism) (TEApeats) (respectful) (message) (Warning: Children Will Die!!)
Heil “O” Hell No Obamao is NOT MY PRESIDENT! “No U won’t”
I want “O” to FAIL (here, here, & whole Diary (Ofail) here, is why)
The first Liberal was Satan” – a Rush caller (other Quotes)