The Media & the Miss

In a recent article claiming opportunity for the Democrats and doing their best to present gay marriage as an another issue that is beginning to fade with GOP voters, the media has taken a couple of recent court cases and made them the end of the discussion as to how Americans feel about gay marriage. Yet, pinning their hopes on the momentum of the Carrie Prejean issue (while also trying to assail her character), it is the media who "miss"-es again.

Now, I'll be the first to echo that heterosexuals haven't done such a bang-up job with the institution of marriage, but it isn't simply about the rights of gay people to marry. Those on the "pro" side of the issue believe that they can break down barriers by labeling others as intolerant, closed-minded, or even... here it comes...right-wing extremists (in the religious sense, no doubt). They really don't provide any argument FOR it other than people are simply AGAINST it. I've heard the issues around rights to property, insurance, adoption (a whole other story), legal decisions, etc., etc. But when as many people who oppose gay marriage are actually fine with civil unions that recognize many of the issues, then why antagonize and fight further for what people are already willing to concede?

Those on the "con" side of the issue recognize that you cannot open the floodgates of legal rights based solely on personal choices. They argue that if you open up legal protections based on these choices related to sexuality ONLY, then you must be more broadbased. What would people say about allowing people to marry multiple spouses? Animals? Kids? How about rights based on the sexual preferences of pedophiles? Rapists? Why would they be treated any different? How is it that today's gay community says that they are truly different in that regard?

Say what you want, but if there is no conclusive scientific evidence on climate change, there certainly isn't any on whether homosexuality is biologically innate or if as many agree, a choice. I have a lot of close friends with whom I have fantastic relationships. The law even offers avenues for me to make decisions for them or their kids in certain situations. But we don't have sex. And never will. And I'm certain they are glad that I've publicly proclaimed it... to borrow a phrase, "came out", if you will...

But in the end, where the media gets it wrong AGAIN, is that they fail to underestimate the electorate's willingness to amend state constitutions. This is where the issue actually ends. Not in the courts. In fact, I'm still waiting on California to try and have courts overrule a voter-approved amendment to the very state constitution they have the obligation to enforce. Imagine the comedy that would ensue when the courts attempt to say that a constitutional amendment is unconstitutional!

Voters have the power to legislate and have exercised it across the land. A couple of court cases have never been the "end" of the issue. I'm guessing voters will continue to fight these battles regardless of how much the media tells them the issue is moot.