No on Prop 8
Sharon's friend, Arika, received a Pro-Prop 8 phamplet in the mail and she wrote back this open letter... I thought it was quite well-written and hit many of the points I've often argued. I would like to get married some day (assuming I ever meet someone!), so I hope Prop 8 doesn't pass... Here's her letter:
To Whom It May Concern:
I recently received the enclosed materials in the mail regarding "Proposition 8." I guess perhaps it didn't occur to you folks that in sending this material out to lots of everyday Californians, you might likely include gay, married people like myself. We're part of your communities, part of the wonderfully diverse landscape that is California. Part of what makes our state, and our country, great, is that we have room for many viewpoints, including your own. And I believe you have every right to oppose gay marriage personally, and within your churches. But when you start imposing your views on others, and on the state, well, that's where I have to draw the line.
Your literature says that the majority of Californians already voted on this, but that was many years ago, and many Californians have since come to understand that gay marriage poses no threat to heterosexual marriage. And even if a majority do oppose same-sex marriage personally, most Californians understand that legally, discrimination is wrong. At one time, a majority opposed interracial marriage. At one point a majority in the South favored slavery. It didn't make it right or acceptable under the Constitution, which thankfully now specifically guarantees equal rights to all of us.
You described the Supreme Court judges as "activists," but the justice writing the majority decision was a self-described Republican. He did not base his decision on a political agenda. He just knew enough to know that there is simply no legal basis for depriving people of their civil rights. "Tradition" isn't enough considering the number of divorced and otherwise nontraditional families here in California, and to make a law that hurts these families is simply unconstitutional, whether those be gay families, or heterosexual families who are not married, or children of divorce. Frankly I am surprised that you have not campaigned against all families that are different from yours, or that go against your religion. Should you begin an equally public and funded campaign to make divorce illegal, based on its threat to traditional marriage, I might be more inclined to take a look at your materials.
You worry that same-sex marriage will be "taught" in schools, and feature ads with a little girl excited that a "king can marry a king and a prince can marry a princess." Well, when I was a little girl, I was raised, just like all of us were, long before gay marriage was even a consideration, and I asked my mother why girls had to marry boys, and why girls couldn't marry girls. She gave me all the appropriate answers for the time, involving reproduction and tradition. And yet, I'm still gay. Homosexuality is not a choice. If you're gay, you're gay, and whether or not it is "taught" in the schools won't change that. You can't "teach" someone to be gay, or not to be gay. And whether we are "married" or not, gay couples will continue to exist, and have children, and by not allowing marriage, you hurt these families' civil rights, but you do not prevent them from existing, because again, being gay is not "optional." And if you asked most gay teenagers, myself included when I was one, they'd tell you they did everything they could to try to be like everyone else. And thanks to prejudice and discrimination, teen suicide among gays is not uncommon. Is that a "family value," in your eyes?
You believe that it's a choice to act on our homosexuality, but it's not the government's place to say that that choice is "wrong," because your personal faith believes it to be. Would you want the government choosing your moral values for you?
You worry about threats to religious organizations, but no such threat exists. Churches are free to marry, and not marry whomever they please, thanks to the separation of Church and State, as outlined in the constitution. But since you bring up religion, I feel I should remind you of a passage from Romans I, the same book that allegedly condemns homosexuality:
"Let us not therefore judge one another any more: but judge this rather, that no man put a stumbling block or an occasion to fall in his brother's way." (Romans I 13:2)
As a person of faith, I hope you will leave the judgment to God, and refrain from putting such a stumbling block into the way of your fellow Californians. Vote NO on Proposition 8.
Thank you.
Arika Mittman
Santa Monica, California
To Whom It May Concern:
I recently received the enclosed materials in the mail regarding "Proposition 8." I guess perhaps it didn't occur to you folks that in sending this material out to lots of everyday Californians, you might likely include gay, married people like myself. We're part of your communities, part of the wonderfully diverse landscape that is California. Part of what makes our state, and our country, great, is that we have room for many viewpoints, including your own. And I believe you have every right to oppose gay marriage personally, and within your churches. But when you start imposing your views on others, and on the state, well, that's where I have to draw the line.
Your literature says that the majority of Californians already voted on this, but that was many years ago, and many Californians have since come to understand that gay marriage poses no threat to heterosexual marriage. And even if a majority do oppose same-sex marriage personally, most Californians understand that legally, discrimination is wrong. At one time, a majority opposed interracial marriage. At one point a majority in the South favored slavery. It didn't make it right or acceptable under the Constitution, which thankfully now specifically guarantees equal rights to all of us.
You described the Supreme Court judges as "activists," but the justice writing the majority decision was a self-described Republican. He did not base his decision on a political agenda. He just knew enough to know that there is simply no legal basis for depriving people of their civil rights. "Tradition" isn't enough considering the number of divorced and otherwise nontraditional families here in California, and to make a law that hurts these families is simply unconstitutional, whether those be gay families, or heterosexual families who are not married, or children of divorce. Frankly I am surprised that you have not campaigned against all families that are different from yours, or that go against your religion. Should you begin an equally public and funded campaign to make divorce illegal, based on its threat to traditional marriage, I might be more inclined to take a look at your materials.
You worry that same-sex marriage will be "taught" in schools, and feature ads with a little girl excited that a "king can marry a king and a prince can marry a princess." Well, when I was a little girl, I was raised, just like all of us were, long before gay marriage was even a consideration, and I asked my mother why girls had to marry boys, and why girls couldn't marry girls. She gave me all the appropriate answers for the time, involving reproduction and tradition. And yet, I'm still gay. Homosexuality is not a choice. If you're gay, you're gay, and whether or not it is "taught" in the schools won't change that. You can't "teach" someone to be gay, or not to be gay. And whether we are "married" or not, gay couples will continue to exist, and have children, and by not allowing marriage, you hurt these families' civil rights, but you do not prevent them from existing, because again, being gay is not "optional." And if you asked most gay teenagers, myself included when I was one, they'd tell you they did everything they could to try to be like everyone else. And thanks to prejudice and discrimination, teen suicide among gays is not uncommon. Is that a "family value," in your eyes?
You believe that it's a choice to act on our homosexuality, but it's not the government's place to say that that choice is "wrong," because your personal faith believes it to be. Would you want the government choosing your moral values for you?
You worry about threats to religious organizations, but no such threat exists. Churches are free to marry, and not marry whomever they please, thanks to the separation of Church and State, as outlined in the constitution. But since you bring up religion, I feel I should remind you of a passage from Romans I, the same book that allegedly condemns homosexuality:
"Let us not therefore judge one another any more: but judge this rather, that no man put a stumbling block or an occasion to fall in his brother's way." (Romans I 13:2)
As a person of faith, I hope you will leave the judgment to God, and refrain from putting such a stumbling block into the way of your fellow Californians. Vote NO on Proposition 8.
Thank you.
Arika Mittman
Santa Monica, California
posted by Ryan at
1:16 PM
|
2 comments
