Interracial Marriage

African Americans, Gay Rights, And Barack Obama: Will They Spite Themselves And Promote Denial Of Human Rights?

Ronald 1 Comment

The African American community is divided over the declaration of President Barack Obama favoring gay marriage, and his general backing for gay rights.

A large percentage, often thought to be a majority of the African American community, is theologically conservative, and detests the concept of gay marriage.

They helped to contribute to the defeat of Proposition 8 in California a few years ago, and to the success of the amendment to the state constitution of North Carolina banning same sex marriages, civil unions and any other recognition of same sex relationships.

This is the case despite the historical reality that many Christian groups remained silent for decades over the lynchings of African Americans in the South, and the denial of interracial marriages, and the fact that the Mormon Church, so active in California in mobilizing opposition to gay marriage, did not allow African Americans to become Mormons until an epiphany in 1978 led the Mormons to change their theology!

So the question arises whether the black community will, in large numbers, abandon Barack Obama in November.

The idea that large numbers will vote Republican for Mitt Romney is highly unlikely, but if they stay home and do not vote for President, the African American community could affect the result in some states in a close race.

The point is that if they do just that, stay home, and if Obama and the Democrats lose, who will be the ultimate “victims” of a Romney victory? The answer is that the African American community will spite themselves, in the name of a religion which stood by in large numbers for a long time as they were themselves denied equal rights, only seeing change after many decades of discrimination, as many churches and sects started to change their views, and finally back civil rights for blacks.

So it would be counterproductive for blacks to forget their own struggle for civil rights, and let religion betray their better judgment about human rights!

Equality, Dignity, Hope, Acceptance: The Effect Of Barack Obama On Gay Americans!

Ronald Leave a comment

What Barack Obama did on Wednesday, May 9, will reverberate in history as much as when Lyndon B. Johnson called for passage of civil rights laws, and the Supreme Court declared interracial marriage constitutional, in the 1960s.

Just as for African Americans back then, today gay Americans and those who love and support them, see equality, dignity, hope and acceptance, part of what every human being desires as part of being human!

Yes, there were critics then, and even today, of civil rights laws for African Americans and interracial marriage, as there are, today, critics of gay rights and gay marriage.

But in the long run, these critics, past and present, will be part of the “dustbin of history”, who are, and will be, condemned and deplored, and future generations will wonder how we could call ourselves a democracy, and deny equality, dignity, hope, and acceptance to ANY minority!

Just as it did not matter whether all people accepted civil rights and interracial marriage in the 1960s, it does not matter whether they accept gay rights and gay marriage today.

It is not a question of whether something is popular, as no one should have the power to deny equality to anyone else!

This is not something where ordinary people, many of them ignorant and prejudiced, should be voting on other people’s rights.

This is where the Supreme Court should, as with Loving V. Virginia in 1967 mandating Interracial marriage as constitutional, declare gay marriage constitutional, and make it clear that it must be accepted in all states and territories of the United States, no matter what anyone’s personal feelings are regarding the matter!

Did Barack Obama Go Far Enough On Gay Marriage? Ted Olson Does Not Think So!

Ronald Leave a comment

In the midst of all the celebration and joy over President Barack Obama’s strong endorsement of the right of gay men and women to marry, he included in his statement on the issue that the matter should be dealt with on the state level, state by state.

But Ted Olson, former Solicitor General under President George W. Bush, disagrees.

He and David Boies, the two lawyers involved in the Bush V. Gore election controversy in 2000, are fighting to bring the denial of gay marriage in California, after it was first allowed, to the Supreme Court, with the idea that the Court can determine the constiitutionality of gay marriage, much as they did with interracial marriage in 1967, with the Loving V. Virginia case.

Yes, it is true that 31 states have banned gay marriage in votes of the people of those states, but why should a basic human right, the right to marry, be subjected to a vote of the people?

If this was done about interracial marriage, even today, a majority in many states would ban such a relationship, but it is not the right of anyone to tell others that they cannot have happiness, and this is the point of conservative Ted Olson and liberal David Boies!

There should be a national standard on marriage, and it should be legal and consistent everywhere in the country.

A Supreme Court decision could mandate this and end the issue for good!

And it is certain that such a decision would not prevent churches and synagogues from deciding not to marry gay people, since civil marriage is all that would be covered by such a decision.

Hopefully, sometime soon, the issue of gay marriage by civil method will be resolved in the law in favor of human rights!

An Historic Moment In Evolution Of Human Rights In America!

Ronald 2 Comments

America’s history has been one of slow evolution toward reform and change, and toward the expansion of human rights!

Today, May 9, 2012, is one of those moments that will reverberate as a memorable day in our history, as President Barack Obama has finally declared his full support for gay marriage, after having promoted action to promote gay rights in other ways earlier, including the end of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” in the military.

To gay and lesbian Americans, and those who believe in gay and lesbian human rights, it was a long time coming, but that fact will now be forgotten in the excitement that our President has taken a very moral stand on gay rights, that despite many religious objections, means that over time, the institution of same sex marriage will spread far and wide as a civil right that all other people have, and that gay Americans are entitled to have.

Barack Obama will be long remembered for this great initiative, and Joe Biden will be long praised for having prodded the President to move in the final direction of full acceptance of what he was arriving at in an evolutionary fashion.

The hate mongers, common among Republicans and conservatives, will fight tooth and nail, as they did in the case of Amendment One in North Carolina, to deny equality, even to those military people on bases in the state, a despicable action.

But eventually, there will be a move to have the US Supreme Court decide whether it is not a national right, that cannot be denied by the states, but also mandate that no church, synagogue or other religious institution, would be required to marry people they did not want to be involved in marrying. That would be left up to ministers and rabbis comfortable with the idea, or to the act of civil marriage.

If the Supreme Court could declare in Loving V. Virginia in 1967, that interracial marriages were constitutional, they can certainly do the same for same sex marriage!

To insure such a result, however, it is MORE urgent than ever before that Barack Obama win a second term in the White House, and be able to insure that the Supreme Court does not become more conservative than it already is, and continue to prevent progress and change!

The Supreme Court And Public Opinion: Not The Job Of The Judiciary!

Ronald Leave a comment

A new poll, commissioned by the New York Times, shows that 38 percent want the 2010 Health Care law overturned entirely; 29 percent want the requirement that nearly all Americans obtain health insurance overturned; and only 26 percent want to keep the entire law in place.

At the same time, when it comes down to specifics, the American people support the law. 85 percent approve the requirement that health insurance companies cover those with existing medical conditions or illnesses; 68 percent support allowing children to stay on their parents’ policies until age 26; and 77 percent support offering discounts to reduce the Medicare prescription drug coverage gap, called the “donut hole”.

At the same time, 48 percent say they find confusing how the law will affect them and their families, while 47 percent say they understand the law.

What does this tell us? It tells us that the American people, as a whole, have no clue as to what this law does, and this is partially the fault of the Obama Administration and the Democrats, but it is also the fault of the opposition Republicans, conservative talk radio, Fox News Channel, and the powerful corporate interests that want the law defeated, and really don’t care about the fact that 50 million Americans have no health care except the emergency room, if they end up there. And if they die because of lack of health care, so be it, is the attitude of these special interest groups.

And now there is discussion of the fact that the United States Supreme Court should overturn the law because of the uneducated and confused public opinion.

But that is NOT the job of the Supreme Court, to listen to public opinion, but instead to LEAD public opinion in the proper direction!

If the John Roberts led Supreme Court overturns the law, they will be condemned in history for having kept us the ONLY major industrial democracy in the world to refuse to cover all citizens on a question of life and death!

The Supreme Court is not designed to be popular, and neither are the circuit courts below them. Their job is to interpret the Constitution, and do what is right for the American people, whether popular or not..

If one had polled public opinion, and in some cases it was actually done, the following would not have occurred:

End of racial segregation in public schools in 1954
Provide for privacy rights for couples to use contraceptives in 1965
End of ban on interracial marriage in 1967
Allowance of abortion rights in 1973
Provision to advance women and minorities because of past discrimination in 1977
Giving of privacy rights to gays and lesbians, not just straight people in 2003

These are an issue of social justice and what is right morally, and the same situation applies to the issue of health care.

Popularity should NEVER be a factor in court decisions, and if the Court is unpopular, so be it!

That is why the courts are not elected, as the ignorance and emotion of the masses should never be a basis of constitutional interpretation or human rights.

The Supreme Court has made America a better place, precisely because it has done what the American people may not have appreciated at the time, but was a necessary action, over and over again!

The Advancement Of Gay Marriage Rights In California And Washington State

Ronald Leave a comment

Events of this week are very promising regarding the expansion of gay marriage rights.

California’s Ninth Circuit Court has declared Proposition 8, which banned gay marriage in 2008 as unconstitutional, upholding a district court ruling, and this makes it likely that gay marriage will be on the Supreme Court docket very soon, possibly even this year, already full of turning point cases on the Obama Health Care plan, voting rights, and illegal immigration restrictions in Arizona and Alabama.

Additionally, the state of Washington is about to become the seventh state to allow gay marriage, after passage by the state legislature and a soon to be signing by the governor of the state.

So Washington joins Vermont, New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Connecticut, New York, and Iowa as states that allow gay marriage, along with Washington DC, and hopefully, it will return to California where it was legal for a period of time before being overturned.

Twenty to thirty years from now, when gay marriage is a normal thing, many will wonder what was the fuss back in the early part of the century, much like when one looks back to before 1967, one wonders why the big deal over racial intermarriage, which was not legal until a Supreme Court decision in 1967.

Marriage cannot be forced on any religious group, but there is no legal reason why gay marriage cannot be done outside of religious institutions that reject change. It is a question of basic human rights, and equal treatment under the Constitution!

Gay Marriage And The Supreme Court: Anthony Kennedy The Crucial Vote!

Ronald Leave a comment

In 1967, the US Supreme Court issued a decision in Loving V. Virginia, declaring interracial marriage constitutional. At the time, there was still widespread feeling among the American people, particularly whites, that interracial marriage should not be allowed, with three out of four in a 1968 poll so declaring. And nearly the same percentage, 73 percent, of all races felt the same way in 1968.

It is clear, also, that a majority of people, particularly whites, were not supportive of the Supreme Court decision in 1954, Brown V. Board of Education, which mandated the end of segregation of the races in public education.

Often, the Supreme Court is ahead of the country in formulating change, and of course, conservatives resent that. But without the Court intervening, progress would be slower or completely halted.

Therefore, with the decision of New York State to allow gay marriage, it is time for gay rights advocates to bring a case to the higher court!

But, of course, there is fear that the conservative Court would rule against it, but that is seen as highly unlikely.

No one can be sure how Justices would vote, but even if one considers that Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, and Chief Justice John Roberts might vote against, the odds are that Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, Stephen Breyer, and Ruth Bader Ginsberg would vote in favor.

That leaves Justice Anthony Kennedy, the true centrist on the Court, who more often votes with the conservatives, but often sides with the liberals. And when one considers that Kennedy was the decisive vote in Lawrence V. Texas in 2003, granting privacy rights to gay couples, one has hope that he would continue to support gay rights, including marriage.

Kennedy also supported the rights of gays to stop being treated as a group deserving discrimination in the Colorado Constitution in Romer V. Evans in 1996, and also in a Circuit Court case in 1980, he showed concern about mistreatment of gays.

The timing is crucial, as Ruth Bader Ginsberg may leave the Court soon, and in the next term in office, if a Republican won the White House, both Ginsberg and Kennedy might be replaced, based on their ages, and the opportunity for a Supreme Court decision in favor of gay marriage might have passed!

And remember, unlike interracial marriage, a majority of Americans in a recent poll support the concept of gay marriage, a massive switch from just a few years ago!

So bring on a Supreme Court case and soon!

Human Rights Vs. Popular Vote, Religion, And Constitutional Amendments

Ronald Leave a comment

With the passage of gay marriage rights in the New York State legislature, the debate is again beginning about the opposition of religious groups, the call for a vote of the people on the issue, and talk of a federal constitutional amendment to prevent gay marriage nationally, and in the states.

Only once has a constitutional amendment been passed to limit human rights–the 18th Amendment ban on the manufacture and sale of intoxicating beverages–and it was repealed by the 21st Amendment fourteen years later.

The purpose of amendments has always been to improve on human rights, not restrict human rights, and gay marriage is a human right!

Organized religion has often been opposed to human rights internationally, as well as in this country, as witness the religious groups which supported slavery, racial segregation, and denial of equality for women. Of course, not all religious groups promoted denial of human rights, and there are glorious crusades on the opposite end of these issues that dignify America’s history as a country improving its human rights record over time. But should any religious group or individual views on gay marriage be determinant of such a human right existing? The answer is clearly NO!

Should the American people be able to vote on the issue of human rights, and deny unpopular groups their basic human rights? Again, the answer is NO, as it is clear that if one had had a vote on interracial marriage in the 1960s, the vast majority would have opposed it, but so what? It is none of anyone’s business what other adults do in their personal lives and for their personal happiness!

It is likely that large percentages of Americans today do not like interracial marriage, do not like racial integration, do not like that women have become so equal with men, but that is a personal thought, and should not rule on the issue of human rights!

Human rights should be inviolable, not subject to anyone’s whims or prejudices! No one should be able to deny or take away anyone’s human rights under any circumstances, as this is democracy and human freedom on its grandest scale!

The Gallup Poll And Gay Marriage

Ronald Leave a comment

The latest Gallup Poll shows a growing support of gay marriage among Democrats and Independents, but stagnant among Republicans.

According to the poll, 69 percent of Democrats and 59 percent of Independents now support the right of gay men and lesbians to marrry, with both numbers growing rapidly over the past few months.

But Republicans in the poll remain frozen at 28 percent in support, with a lot of this based on evangelical Christian influence on the party, plus the fact that the GOP has NEVER stood for any major reform that promotes civil rights and equality since the 1920s, although they were ahead on reform in the Reconstruction period after the Civil War (Radical Republicans) and the Progressive Era (Progressive Republicans).

Among younger people, particularly, the opposition to gay marriage is small in number, although among older Americans, particularly the elderly who are Christian, the opposition is stronger.

What is clear is that gay marriage is eventually going to be seen as a norm, with the passage of time.

When one looks back 30-50 years from now, one will wonder why such strong opposition existed, similar to those who look back now to 1967, when finally the Supreme Court declared interracial marriage to be constitutional. One will wonder why such a big deal was made over it fifty years ago!