Two great letters on Salon.com today:
********
Having lived in the Netherlands for the past two years, I find myself continually amazed that, as a noncitizen, I have more rights as a gay man than I do in the United States of America, where I am a citizen. I can get married, I can gain residency based on that marriage, and I cannot be discriminated against in employment, housing or public accommodation based on the fact that I am gay. Many of the Dutch now take these rights for granted.
As an active voter, I have followed U.S. politics very closely while I have been here. I am perplexed by the fear that progressives express over the right-wing backlash to marriage rights for same-sex couples. The backlash would happen no matter how small the gains on same-sex marriage or any other progressive issue. The right wing and its minions have defined our debates for far too long. Now it is the progressives that are defining this issue. Is it possible that “domestic partnerships” would be considered by some conservatives to be a viable compromise if full marriage rights not been on the table as a real possibility?
It is appalling to think that those of us who have been fighting for these rights over the past decade would be intimidated into backing down now. Rather than criticize Gavin Newsom and other allies who have taken risks to advance this issue, we should lend them our full support and urge them not to back down. Same-sex marriage may be a key issue in the presidential election, but the economy, the deficit, and the motivation for the Iraq war also loom large in the minds of a majority of voters. George Bush stands to win or lose this election even if the issue of same-sex marriage evaporates into thin air. It would be pointless to back down now based on a false economy of political strategy, no matter how well intentioned. I believe that if we continue to define this debate by consistently raising the bar, then we will have the luxury of taking our rights for granted in the near future.
— Robert Earhart
While gays need to be realistic about a potential backlash on the marriage issue, I would like to see a few less nervous nellies on my side.
I remember reading that at the time of the American Revolution, only about a third of the population really favored a break from England. But that didn’t prevent the minority from pursuing the issue in the name of justice.
There is never going to be a perfect time for gays to demand marriage rights. While I agree that getting rid of the disastrous Bush regime is crucial on many levels, the right wing was going to push this issue anyway. And by taking a stand on a constitutional amendment, Bush has placed himself on the extreme, leaving the comfortable middle ground of “no gay marriage, but no constitutional amendment” all to Kerry. It’s not what I’d like Kerry to say, but it’s a winner with moderate and independent voters.
Gays used to describe themselves with the code phrase “friends of Dorothy” — a phenomenon stunningly appropriate for these days, when a little courage is in order. Like the Cowardly Lion, who was born to be a sissy, we’ll undoubtedly learn that we have a lot more courage than we ever thought.
— Bernard Gundy
********
Amen.
I love that second letter. I was thinking the other day on my horrible drive to work (but that’s another story) that we should be a little more organized as a voting block. We could really have a “voice.” I mean the DAV have a lobby and have a voice…we must outnumber THEM. Granted, at best we’re 1 in 10, but concentrated more in NYC, Boston, NY, Miami, LA and SF.
Let’s start today! We need a catchy acronym though. I can do the direct mail or email blast!