RC
Articles
BB Network
BB eBooks
Lifted Hearts Links
NetworkOur
eBooks
Female to Female: The Ultimate
Guide to Lesbian Sex
Man to Man: The Ultimate
Guide to Gay Sex
Cunnilingus Academy: Curl her toes
with these tips and techniques
The Big eBook
of Gay and Lesbian Poetry
The Gay Man's Guide
to Getting Laid
How to Have a Successful
Same-Sex Relationship
Proud
member of
the
Network |
- |
The Rainbow Clause:
Giving us the right to choose who; where; when; why; and how.
The Trouble in Texas: A Look into the
Big Debate on Gay and Lesbian Marriage
As states scramble to pass initiatives banning
gay and lesbian marriage, and same-sex partnering - in any form - tempers
have flared on both sides. Conservative Republicans, and other supporters
of a constitutional ban on same-sex marriage in Texas, have recently had
their hands full. While the message is clear - gay marriage is not wanted
in Texas in their opinion - the question of whether heterosexual couples
will be affected by the constitutional ban is being raised by supporters
of gay rights.
The major issue with the constitutional ban
is that the wording for the initiative is open-ended. If it is passed it
could prevent heterosexual couples in co-habitat relationships from protections
generally afforded to them through something known as common law marriage.
If the constitutional amendment were to pass, opponents of the constitutional
ban on gay marriage claim heterosexual couples that have been together for
years, though they have not married, may not be entitled to benefits in the
event of the death of their significant other.
Ultimately, any will or other agreements between
unmarried couples, both gay and straight, would be nullified if the opposition
is correct in their assessment. It is clear they believe the chance of this
happening is significant enough to take action. As a result, they have called
up millions of homes throughout Texas. Their campaign includes an ad that
is so controversial the supporters of the anti-gay marriage ban are in a
tizzy.
Regardless of what the opponents are saying,
it is obvious the right wing conservatives will oppose and dispute everything
that is being said. However, they feel the left has taken it a bit too far.
In fact, the major issue the supporters have is the fact that the left is
using the words of conservatives against their own group.
Two statements by conservative law makers, Supreme
Court Justice Nathan Hecht and Attorney General Greg Abbot, are being used
within the telephone advertisements. The opposition group believes these
statements give irrefutable proof that a constitutional ban will affect every
couple that is unwed - not just GLBT (gay; lesbian; bisexual; transgender)
couples.
Though the initial quote by Justice Nathan Hecht
is not about gay rights, the fact that his words can be adapted to any situation,
especially one that involves constitutional amendments, is clear. When Harriet
Miers was being considered for a seat on the Supreme Court, Justice Hecht,
who is a close personal friend of Miers, stated that if she were to rule
on abortion that:
"When you're construing the Constitution or
statute, you're stuck with what's there."
In
the case of the Attorney General the quote was taken from his own ruling
in which he denied access to a booth for the Log Cabin Republicans at the
Republican Texas Convention in 1997.
Within his ruling Attorney General Abbot made clear
the fact that literal text within the constitution of any state (or nation
for that matter) is indisputable. However, on occasion historical context
may also be considered in relation to the literal translation.
Both the Attorney General's
ruling and the Supreme Court Justice's statements seem cut and dry in both
practice and principle - so why such a big debate? One might conclude that
the right side just likes being difficult in their incessant quest to get
their own way. However, the right does not see it that way.
Instead,
they see it as an attempt by their opponents to denounce their cause. Both
Justice Hecht and Attorney General Abbot have stated their words were twisted
falsely. Justice Hecht has gone so far as to claim that he has no official
stance on the amendment either way, but his stance is not the issue.
The true issue is whether the wording is open enough
to where heterosexual couples are at risk. There has been no official statement
on whether either man agrees with the fact that the wording could affect
how a judge or Justice would rule. The only statement they have released
has been that the left has put 'words in their mouths' by insinuating how
they would rule if the amendment were passed.
As a result, a complaint
was filed by conservatives to the FCC (Federal Communications Commission),
FTC (Federal Trade Commission), and FEC (Federal Election Commission). The
FCC does not handle political advertisements over the telephone so they dismissed
the claim. Meanwhile, the FTC and FEC have not reacted to the complaint as
of yet, though we give them time.
Regardless,
November 8 will be a moment that could change history. Whether Texas decides
to ban same-sex marriage, and whether heterosexual couples are truly at risk,
is anyone's guess. However, the fact that this is even an issue in any state
just shows how narrow-minded the world is becoming when inequality is more
important than the rights of the oppressed.
Back
to Articles |
