B Y CHAD SKILES
With all the advances of our post-modern time, it is saddening to see such a huge step backward with California’s passing of Proposition 8. Electing the first African-American president is now countered with a push-back in cultural progression. And while the gay community rallied against the proposition, any American who appreciates our Constitution and believes in equality should also stand against this social bigotry.
This travesty goes beyond the state limits of California, Florida, or Arizona.Anti-gay organizations, religious zealots, and puritanical traditionalists use this recent “development” as momentum to suppress the rights of gays across the entire nation. Given this fact, a proper examination and consideration of the context of this affair should be in order, and as far as the mainstream discourse seems to be going; it isn’t.
The problem with banning same-sex marriage is that regardless of what one’s moral convictions may be, by doing so one is interfering with individuals’ personal life choices which produce no harm or threat to anyone else’s rights. This thoroughly dismantles this awful argument often asserted by the Mormon right, who served as the central force pushing the proposition, that this ban is similar to other restrictions for marriage, such as for those who wish to marry someone underaged. In this scenario, the abuse of an adolescent mind is a clear case of injustice, whereas the case of two homosexual adults wishing to spend their lives together is not.
Furthermore, it is simply a deliberate step backward from progress; history helps us know this. Just a century and a half ago, marriages were primarily arranged and negotiated amongst men. The eager young man would consult a lady’s father for the consent to marry. Even years after tackling that foolishness, it was well understood that marriages were limited by various criteria of race, class, and—undoubtedly—gender. Over time, we have realized that trying to minimize as big a concept of love is irresponsible and wrong. For awhile, we plowed through this outdated, ignorant view of tightly-defined love, but the passing of this proposition is a sizeable blockade. I propose that we ought to continue to maximize the rights of those in love, whatever their sexual choices may be. This is not a voting issue; it is a civil rights issue.
“The people of California have spoken” has erupted in the echo chamber of the proposition’s supporters, as if we are to view this issue as resolved and the decision finalized. This kind of thinking does not reflect the future of America; it reflects its past—its darkest past. Thankfully, we never settled the issue of slavery back when it was immensely favored in the Southern United States. We never settled the issue of civil rights back when there were still colored water-fountains and separate bathrooms for blacks. Likewise, this issue is not settled; America needs to bounce back. These couples not only deserve their civil union rights, but they deserve our respect and our voices as well. A shaking of the head or an “Aw, that’s too bad” will not do, because, just as there always has been, there are some people in our country afraid of change, and are willing to exert their prejudices to prevent it.
It is funny and saddening, to see youth culture get the picture more than anyone else. Various coalitions of active youth have spoke up across the country. While I am proud to be a part of that youth, I am disappointed and let down by our older generations who have done well to teach us many lessons, but do not seem willing to learn one from us. In short, the youthful vigor that helped America progress through a long list of social injustices needs to be called upon once more—not just for the sake of deserving same-sex couples, but for the hope and progress of our nation.
