Posted on 12/27/2008 6:14:01 AM PST by IbJensen
The cause of gay rights has made enormous progress in the last couple of decades, but the more specific cause of gay marriage continues to be battered.
In the same election that voters helped bridge the United States' racial divide by electing the country's first African-American president, voters in California overrode a ruling of that state's Supreme Court and effectively rebanned gay marriage.
Reliably Democratic-voting California — home to those much-mocked "San Francisco values" that tolerate gay lifestyles — has now joined 29 other states, including Ohio, banning gay marriage.
Protests in reaction to the vote popped up across the country, including in Dayton. And recently some activists encouraged people to use a sick day, or to "call in gay," as a national demonstration of the broad economic impact of gays.
The backlash against California's Proposition 8 also could seed expansion of a mostly symbolic effort by cities, including in Ohio, to support their gay communities. Cleveland City Council, for example, last month took a stand in support of its gay community by creating a domestic partner registry.
Such registries date to the 1980s in northern California. The idea is to recognize committed relationships formally, and, in so doing, encourage employers and others to extend to gay couples benefits typically offered to married heterosexual couples. Nobody is required to recognize gay couples. But for businesses or organizations that want to be gay-friendly, the registry gives gays official documentation of their relationships.
Of course, the registry does not substitute for marriage. It is merely a public record of partnerships. But the record can allow, for instance, a hospital to verify a gay partner for visitation or organ donation authorization, provided the hospital wishes to do so.
Three Ohio cities have now taken this step: The others are Toledo and Cleveland Heights. Dayton leaders say the issue is "not on our radar right now," according to spokesman Tom Biedenharn.
Gay rights has been a political hot potato in the region's central city since 1999 when then-City Commissioner Mary Wiseman, who is gay and just this year was elected to the Montgomery County Common Pleas Court, proposed a sensible extension of the city's nondiscrimination ordinance to gays. That touched off a firestorm of protests from the religious community and then-Mayor Mike Turner, who rallied support to defeat the measure.
Last year — not quite a decade later — the city commission on a 3-1 vote adopted Ms. Wiseman's proposal, notwithstanding the continued community protests. (Commissioner Joey Williams didn't vote, and Commissioner Dean Lovelace was the "no" vote.)
For now, Mr. Biedenharn said, the commission thinks it has shown its support for the gay community.
"I think symbolically it sets where we are with this," he said. "We are open, amenable and respectful of everybody's rights."
Gay marriage votes notwithstanding, the ground is shifting in favor of gay rights. Young people especially don't get why there should be any fuss about sexual orientation. Businesses are increasingly sensitive to their gay employees because, for them, the issue is workers' skills, not lifestyles. Many Republican politicians see a need for their party to separate itself from anti-gay causes.
Ohio's gay marriage ban probably won't be undone anytime soon. But the fact that it's in the constitution doesn't mean it's in concrete.
They'll never editorialize about how the vast majority of serial killers were homosexuals and that getting their 'gay' backsides into elementary schools for demonstration programs is inherently evil.
The Democrat Party and their pals in the media have absolutely nothing to do with Christianity and everything to do with satan and hell.
I wish we could get 38 states to make it permanent in our Constitution.
“But the fact that it’s in the constitution doesn’t mean it’s in concrete.”
This statement makes them dangerous.
Oh, they’re dangerous alright. To these rats the Constitution is like Play-Doh.
That's because they've been brainwashed into believing such nonsense.
What, exactly do they mean by that?
Are these some special rights that ONLY GAYS have?
Just asking.
I thought the Constitution covered us all....equally.
If I wanted to marry another guy, I couldn't either and I'm not gay.
It applies equally to everybody.
In order to get a ban on same-sex marriage enshrined in the US Constitution, we’d have to let the libs enshrine FOCA in the Constitution also. A lot of folks on our side would rather die than let that happen. So we are at a logjam.
“They have made enormous PROGRESS”.
That statement only works if you can accept teaching their perverted and destructive Lifestyle in our “Public Schools”.
How many have died from Aids, since it was discovered.
They might be able to change the laws, and maybe even the constitution, but they’ll have a lot harder time changing the Bible! From Genesis right through the New Testament it’s very clear that marriage is between one man and one woman.
Good point
These communist-fascists will declare the Holy Bible a subversive document and their storm troopers will burn them.
Catcher In The Rye, Fear of Flying, etc. etc. will be safe, however.
Wait until a test case pops up wherein a man wants to marry his female horse.
Men marrying male horses will be covered, of course, by the homosexual marriage law that will be 'edicted' nationwide. (This will be after all 50 states are dissolved and replaced by 5 regions each ruled by a gauleiter.)
There will be a lot of committee work involved in cobbling (they call it 'crafting') together a bill to allow siblings to wed and fathers to wed daughters, sons, pigs, cows, et al.
You need only observe “journalism” students in college to see just how degraded most of them are. Drunks and druggies. Is there any bigger bunch of lushes? Is there an easier degree program? It explains totally their job performances as big govt, pervert loving, commie stooges.
Any provision that's put in by amendment can be altered or removed by amendment. Which is perfectly legitimate.
Unfortunately, that's probably not what he means.
I live in Dayton and HATE the Dayton Daily News. I would never get a print subscription.
Under the new 'Leader' if a homosexual strolling down the boulevard sees a young man he fancies he will legally be able to claim the young man if another homosexual, or a homosexual higher up in rank in the Democrat Party, doesn't claim the youth.
Homosexuals will have the right to claim a heterosexual's residence and pay whatever the Party deems a fair price.
Under a bi-sexual reign homosexuals will be at the top of the 'pecking order.'
Anyone making any disparaging remarks about homosexual, transgendered, bi-sexual persons will be sentenced by a tribunal to immediate death.
I did once upon a time, but refused to subscribe to the Dayton Daily Worker.
After moving south I refused to subscribe to the local Gannett rag.
I prefer to wait by the sidelines and watch the lousy, socialist media die.
There are a very few newspapers and magazines that espouse true conservative opinions.
The Philadelphia Bulletin, The Investors Business Daily and the American Rifleman!
Give me a few weeks and I'll come up with some others.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.