"Gay is the new black"
| By citizen - Jan 30th, 2006 at 2:00 am EST |
"Gay is the new black." I encountered this witty t-shirt slogan for the first time a few weeks ago, and I think it very nicely delivers an important message: civil rights are civil rights, no matter who you are.
Now, certainly, the social struggles of blacks and homosexuals in America are far from identical - the historical weight of slavery in this country is a burden without equal in the history of oppressed people struggling for equality. However, there are similarites in the obstacles faced by out gay men and women to those which precipitated the African American civil rights movement. Gays and lesbians have been discriminated against in hiring and promotion; they have experienced hate crime and public reproach for daring to expect equal status and recognition of their identities; they have been treated as unwanted members of society, an unclean caste. The terror of AIDS in the 1980's, coupled with its perception as the "gay disease" (an impression re-enforced in the propaganda of religious firebrands) did a great deal to support that last position.
A great deal of progress has been made in assuring legal protection for gays and lesbians, and at the same time, society has become more accepting of different sexual orientations. Homosexuality found it's way into the popular culture in television and movies, though it is still very often presented in near-caricature. Celebrities have lent their status to increasing acceptance, as WNBA basketball star Sheryl Swoopes did when she came out this past October, a courageous decision in the still-often-homophobic world of professional sports.
But it is not enough to be satisfied with the progress that has been made so far. The issue of gay marriage has only recently emerged in the national spotlight, but its seeming novelty as an issue is absolutely no excuse to consider it unimportant. That gays deserve identical status to heterosexuals in all legal contracts, including marriage, is a Constitutional - and moral - no-brainer. That the Democratic Party, which in the 1960's came to define itself as the party of civil rights, has not taken up this cause whole-heartedly is a shame and an embarassment.
For now, progress on this issue comes in the form of periodic court victories. The latest was in my home state of Maryland, where Baltimore City Circuit Court Judge M. Brooke Murdock ruled that a law barring same-sex couples from wedding in Maryland violated the state constitution. The judgment is suspended pending appeal.
The published opinion (available online here) dissected the arguements of the state with surgical precision. On the arguement that same-sex marriage bans are not discriminatory, because all men are free to marry all women and vice versa, the judge concluded thusly:
On the arguement that a discriminatory law can be allowed if it serves a particular state interest, Judge Murdock wrote:
On the arguement that the demands of gay couples could be adequately met with civil unions:
In the 2004 election, 11 states voted by referendum on constitutional amendments banning gay marriage. All of these initiatives passed. Public opinion in America remains largely against gay marriage. As with the civil rights struggles of the past, it is in the courts where progress will be made, at least for the time being. Ultimately, though, it is the responsibility of Congress and the state legislatures to enshrine protections. Before equality is fully realized, gay marriage will have to face more battles in the political realm, and fare better than it has done in the past. This demands the unwavering support of the Democratic party. It also demands that each of us take a strong stand: the protections of marriage are not special rights, they are basic rights. To discriminate against individuals based on who they chose to marry - whatever the justification - is wrong. Gay is the new black - and discrimination is ugly, whoever the victim may be.
Now, certainly, the social struggles of blacks and homosexuals in America are far from identical - the historical weight of slavery in this country is a burden without equal in the history of oppressed people struggling for equality. However, there are similarites in the obstacles faced by out gay men and women to those which precipitated the African American civil rights movement. Gays and lesbians have been discriminated against in hiring and promotion; they have experienced hate crime and public reproach for daring to expect equal status and recognition of their identities; they have been treated as unwanted members of society, an unclean caste. The terror of AIDS in the 1980's, coupled with its perception as the "gay disease" (an impression re-enforced in the propaganda of religious firebrands) did a great deal to support that last position.
A great deal of progress has been made in assuring legal protection for gays and lesbians, and at the same time, society has become more accepting of different sexual orientations. Homosexuality found it's way into the popular culture in television and movies, though it is still very often presented in near-caricature. Celebrities have lent their status to increasing acceptance, as WNBA basketball star Sheryl Swoopes did when she came out this past October, a courageous decision in the still-often-homophobic world of professional sports.
But it is not enough to be satisfied with the progress that has been made so far. The issue of gay marriage has only recently emerged in the national spotlight, but its seeming novelty as an issue is absolutely no excuse to consider it unimportant. That gays deserve identical status to heterosexuals in all legal contracts, including marriage, is a Constitutional - and moral - no-brainer. That the Democratic Party, which in the 1960's came to define itself as the party of civil rights, has not taken up this cause whole-heartedly is a shame and an embarassment.
For now, progress on this issue comes in the form of periodic court victories. The latest was in my home state of Maryland, where Baltimore City Circuit Court Judge M. Brooke Murdock ruled that a law barring same-sex couples from wedding in Maryland violated the state constitution. The judgment is suspended pending appeal.
The published opinion (available online here) dissected the arguements of the state with surgical precision. On the arguement that same-sex marriage bans are not discriminatory, because all men are free to marry all women and vice versa, the judge concluded thusly:
"This Court finds that the equal application theory fails as a matter of law because it is inherently illogical as a matter of fact."
On the arguement that a discriminatory law can be allowed if it serves a particular state interest, Judge Murdock wrote:
"...these assumptions are not rational speculation, they are broad unsupported generalizations that do not establish a rational relation between same-sex marriage and the State's interests in promoting procreation, child-rearing, and the best interests of children."
On the arguement that the demands of gay couples could be adequately met with civil unions:
"If these ancilary statutes make a married couple and a non-married couple essentially equivalent with respect to the effects of marriage, there is simply no rational reason to prevent the marriage."
In the 2004 election, 11 states voted by referendum on constitutional amendments banning gay marriage. All of these initiatives passed. Public opinion in America remains largely against gay marriage. As with the civil rights struggles of the past, it is in the courts where progress will be made, at least for the time being. Ultimately, though, it is the responsibility of Congress and the state legislatures to enshrine protections. Before equality is fully realized, gay marriage will have to face more battles in the political realm, and fare better than it has done in the past. This demands the unwavering support of the Democratic party. It also demands that each of us take a strong stand: the protections of marriage are not special rights, they are basic rights. To discriminate against individuals based on who they chose to marry - whatever the justification - is wrong. Gay is the new black - and discrimination is ugly, whoever the victim may be.
!
Comments are closed for this post.
Lesson to be learned:
PUBLIC OPINION IS NOT ALWAYS THE RIGHT OPINION.
It is, in fact, just an opinion.
The Civil Rights Act was not meant to protect only blacks, but all Americans. It certainly was not meant to deny those same rights to other minorities just because they are being persecuted by a religious group. It is time we stop allowing that religious group to persecute homosexuals, claiming they have the full public support. They sure as heck don't have my support.
What is the difference between a homosexual, a heterosexual, and Christian?
Nothing: they are all humans, and unless you catch them in a sexual act (or lack thereof) there is nothing to distinguish one from the other. Even that can be a flimsy way of distinguising them, because bi-sexuality is also prevalent, and Christians are a large source of homosexuals (see: Church scandal). Sure, certain humans that fit these labels are very proud and open about it, but they are still just humans and American citizens.
Christian Conservatives have sought to demonize homosexuals as "going against God" and therefore, are less deserving of the protection of law. That is, obviously, bull dung. We need to examine how our political system has allowed them to push for legislation that seeks to deny equal protection of the law based on sexual preference and create a movement that promotes true equality without inhibiting religious freedom.
Interracial marriage was opposed by 80% of the population when the courts forced it through; thank god we didn't kowtow to popular opinion at the time.
And there's one other shocking similarity that really must not be overlooked: hate killings.
This is the before-and-after of a fifteen year-old kid named Emmett Till, brutally killed for "disrespecting" a white woman. (CAUTION: very graphic photo) Link
This is Matthew Shepard, killed for hitting on a
heterosexual. Link
This is the fencepost where Matthew Shepard was crucified. Link
Two Midwestern kids, brutally murdered not for what they did, but for what they were.
This is the account of the death of James Byrd, murdered and dragged behind a truck as a trophy by three white racists. Link
This is the account of the 1984 murder of Chales Howard, a 23 year-old openly gay man in Maine, killed by three homophobic youths. Link
The t-shirt hit the nail on the head. "Gay is the new black."