More Approval of Homosexuality
This past Saturday, I discussed an article about an upcoming vote on homosexual marriage in the California legislature. Yesterday, the legislature passed the measure, which now goes to the governor.
The Associated Press has an article on the subject with some comments I want to respond to. The article quotes one of the sponsors of the bill:
"'Do what we know is in our hearts,' said the bill's sponsor, San Francisco Democrat Mark Leno. 'Make sure all California families will have the same protection under the law.'"
What's in the hearts of one generation is often different from what's in the hearts of another generation. We ought to go by more than what's in our hearts.
The Assemblyman's second comment, regarding "the same protection under the law", is ridiculous. You don't need to legalize homosexual marriage in order for a homosexual man to be able to marry a woman. Homosexuals have just as much access to marriage as heterosexuals. What people like Mark Leno want to do is change the meaning of marriage. It would be sort of like saying that a 12-year-old who never served in the military should be allowed to get military servicemen's benefits from the government. After all, it would be unfair to only let people who serve in the military get such benefits.
The article continues:
"Democratic Assemblyman Paul Koretz called bans on gay marriage 'the last frontier of bigotry and discrimination, and it's time we put an end to it.'"
No, as I showed in a recent article here, the process of moving on to polygamy and incest, for example, is already underway.
The article concludes:
"But opponents repeatedly cited the public's vote five years ago to approve Proposition 22, an initiative put on the ballot by gay marriage opponents to keep California from recognizing same-sex marriages performed in other states or countries. 'History will record that you betrayed your constituents and their moral and ethical values,' said Republican Assemblyman Jay La Suer."
La Suer's comment is accurate as far as it goes. But we should ask another question. What will the California people do now? Will they express their disgust with these people in the legislature and vote them out of office, producing a major change in the makeup of that legislature? I doubt it. As we think of who's at fault in these things, let's not forget the people who put these legislators there in the first place.
The Associated Press has an article on the subject with some comments I want to respond to. The article quotes one of the sponsors of the bill:
"'Do what we know is in our hearts,' said the bill's sponsor, San Francisco Democrat Mark Leno. 'Make sure all California families will have the same protection under the law.'"
What's in the hearts of one generation is often different from what's in the hearts of another generation. We ought to go by more than what's in our hearts.
The Assemblyman's second comment, regarding "the same protection under the law", is ridiculous. You don't need to legalize homosexual marriage in order for a homosexual man to be able to marry a woman. Homosexuals have just as much access to marriage as heterosexuals. What people like Mark Leno want to do is change the meaning of marriage. It would be sort of like saying that a 12-year-old who never served in the military should be allowed to get military servicemen's benefits from the government. After all, it would be unfair to only let people who serve in the military get such benefits.
The article continues:
"Democratic Assemblyman Paul Koretz called bans on gay marriage 'the last frontier of bigotry and discrimination, and it's time we put an end to it.'"
No, as I showed in a recent article here, the process of moving on to polygamy and incest, for example, is already underway.
The article concludes:
"But opponents repeatedly cited the public's vote five years ago to approve Proposition 22, an initiative put on the ballot by gay marriage opponents to keep California from recognizing same-sex marriages performed in other states or countries. 'History will record that you betrayed your constituents and their moral and ethical values,' said Republican Assemblyman Jay La Suer."
La Suer's comment is accurate as far as it goes. But we should ask another question. What will the California people do now? Will they express their disgust with these people in the legislature and vote them out of office, producing a major change in the makeup of that legislature? I doubt it. As we think of who's at fault in these things, let's not forget the people who put these legislators there in the first place.
posted by Jason Engwer at 4:29 AM
<< Home