This week the state of California voted to pass Proposition 8, a constitutional amendment limiting marriage to a union between a man and a woman. Immediately afterwards, I was saddened by the number of negative Facebook messages that appeared from my friends in California. For example:
“…Californians chose bigotry and discrimination over love and commitment”
“…sad she lives in a state with so many bigots and haters”
The list goes on and on, but the mean-spirited messages were consistent across the board. The word “bigot” is defined as a “person who is intolerant of opinions, lifestyles, or identities differing from his or her own.” I find it interesting that by participating in the name calling and hatemongering, they are becoming the very thing they are accusing others of being.
Just because someone holds differing views and opinions doesn’t mean they are bigots and haters. It saddens me that people aren’t even trying to understand the other side. Instead, they intimidate and discredit by embarking on a campaign of name-calling against their opponents (e.g. radical right, homophobes, bigots, haters).
Many people, including the writer of this blog, simply want to protect the traditional definition of marriage. They aren’t necessarily saying that civil unions shouldn’t be supported or that legal and government benefits shouldn’t be extended to same sex couples. They just want to protect traditional values and keep the time-tested definition of marriage intact.
For others, the issue of marriage didn’t even factor into the equation. They voted in favor of proposition 8 to send a message to the courts. Courts shouldn’t define American values; that right belongs solely to the people. In 2000, California voters went to the polls and voted overwhelming in favor of legally protecting marriage. Yet, four judges went against the will of the people and declared the law unconstitutional. These four appointed lawyers overruled more than four million California voters — think about that.
No one should have the right or the power to dictate their individual values upon the American people. Our founding fathers took great efforts to ensure that the power of activist judges would be restrained. They attempted to put checks and balances in place to prevent judicial tyranny. If we relax those controls and allow judges to make the laws rather than interpret them, tyranny will prevail — and once it starts, who knows where it will end.
This blog isn’t intended to sway opinion “for” or “against” proposition 8. People have their own opinions, and that’s fine as long as they can respect the beliefs of others who don’t agree with them. If we could learn to accept defeat gracefully (like McCain did this week), wipe out double standards and nasty name calling, we’d get more accomplished. Maybe we could even come up with a proposal that both sides could support — wouldn’t that be novel?
Tags: proposition 8
Loading ...
