Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
When Florida, Like New York State, Joins the Ranks of the Civilized on Gay Marriage
In the early morning of June 28, 1969—just after 3 a.m.—a posse of plainclothes cops raided the Stonewall Inn, a gay bar at 53 Christopher Street in Manhattan’s Village. The cops’ pretext: the bar was selling liquor illegally. That was bogus. It was just another night of gay harassment. There were 200 people in the bar. They were evicted. On the street, they grew to 400. They’d had enough. They threw bricks, bottles and garbage at the cops. They rioted again the next night. Cops charged the rioters several times, beat and clubbed them as if Manhattan’s Sheridan Square area had turned into a Bull Connor corner of Alabama. The Stonewall Inn’s shattered windows were boarded up and covered in graffiti: “Support gay power.” “Legalize gay bars.”
The gay movement was born.
It's not complicated. (Brocco Lee)
At 10:30 p.m. Friday, the Republican-majority New York Senate voted 33 to 29 to legalize gay marriage, making New York the largest state by far to ratify the most important and belated civil right since the Voting Rights Act of 1965. New York joins Connecticut, Iowa, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Vermont, and the District of Columbia in that minority of civilized states where gays and lesbians are no longer treated as second-class citizens, and where the religious establishment is no longer allowed, hideously and unconstitutionally, to dictate doctrine and discrimination.
There’ll be a time in the future when people will look back at the barbed-wired bans on gay marriage in place today and wonder how this nation, so big on liberty and rights, could have suffered idiotic bigotry on such a scale for so long. Then again, this same nation was founded as much on the pretensions of the Declaration of Independence as it was on the repression of slaves, the genocide of Indians and the marginalization, until 1920, of women. American enlightenment has at times had the DNA of carob molasses.
So the question isn’t when will Florida and the rest of the union join the ranks of the civilized regarding gay marriage. That’s bound to happen. The question is how unnecessarily late Florida will choose to do so.
In 2004, 14.3 million people in 11 states, with combined majorities of 67 percent, voted in constitutional bans of one sort or another against gay marriage. Florida already had a ban in place in statute. Not content with that much explicit discrimination on the books, voters enshrined their intolerance in the constitution when 62 percent approved Amendment 2 in 2008, putting this medieval verbiage in a 21st century constitution: “Inasmuch as marriage is the legal union of only one man and one woman as husband and wife, no other legal union that is treated as marriage or the substantial equivalent thereof shall be valid or recognized.”
Where can such baseless assertions as marriage being the “legal union of only one man and one woman” have so much as a throb of credibility other than in the harebrained fictions of scriptures and other codes of cults that have, or should have, absolutely no bearing on the civil laws of civil society? Since when do scriptures dictate to constitutional principles? And how long will the U.S. Supreme Court allow these unconstitutional state amendments to fly in the face of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution? Civil unions aren’t the answer. That’s the separate-but-equal standard in play these days that gives gay-marriage opponents cover the same way Plessy v. Ferguson gave institutional racism a half century’s boost with its separate-but-equal slam on blacks. Astoundingly, Barack Obama still clings to the gay version of Plessy v. Ferguson, though he’s retreated from enforcing the crock of the federal Defense of Marriage Act and abolished the folly of the military’s don’t-ask-don’t-tell.
New York State is celebrating. We should celebrate along. There is nothing in gay marriage that offends anymore than straight marriage does, marriage itself—not the sexual nature of its participants—having its issues, often because of the religious shackles imposed on it: if there is a problem with marriage, let’s start with, for example, some churches’ and mosques’ and synagogues’ revolting impositions on women to submit to their husbands, to endure their violence, to defer to their judgments, to persist in the superstitious beliefs in patriarchy, which have as much validity as inherited or divine right.
But let’s also remember that in gay matters, Florida remains closer to Iran than to New York State. Florida pioneered the anti-gay movement with the likes of Anita Bryant and her war on gay adoption, a war finally ended only when Charlie Crist put an end to the charade last year. As the 2008 vote shows, Floridians revel in putting down en entire class of people behind the cloak of religious authority and its sickly, opportunistic twin: tradition. If it’s traditional to discriminate, to hurt, to hate, oppress, and in Florida it still is, it’s also just as traditional, in the American sense anyway, to revolt. New York State just did. Florida will, too, one day, though like a brigand clinging to his loot, Florida won’t do it willingly: the Supreme Court will drag it out of its backwardness, if it can still read the 14th Amendment.
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...


6 Comments so far
Show AllFlorida? Not gonna happen. Never. As with anti-miscegenation legislation, SCOTUS will have to strike it down before the Confederacy accepts it -- and even then, some of them will leave their illegal laws on the books for "historical" and "cultural" reasons.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nz8omkCTvQA
Standing on the side of love.
Good news!
The complaint that "gay rights" is a peripheral or "boutique" issue is so short-sighted, ignorant, and backasswards that it's not worth a substantial rebuttal.
It would be exactly like taking the position during the Eisenhower Administration that given the Cold War, nuclear proliferation, and other mega-issues that impact on global stability and survival, black Amerikans should damn well suck it up and just be glad that they have access to a "colored" water fountain and the seat of their choice in the back of the bus.
I'm just so "done" with shallow conceptions of civil liberties that border on imbecilic.
It's not traditonal to hate. That's just the bigot and other weirdos' fiction and propaganda. Evolutionary psychology has shown that only when hierarchy came into being 10 to 12 millennia ago did people behave in anything but an egalitarian manner.
Since modern humans came into being 100 to 200 millennia ago, it's not in the least natural let along traditional to hate or to be aggressive as people weren't then as all the evidence shows. All the talk about Neanderthals is pure BS right in there with cave man bull. Give it a rest. We live in the dark ages which began with all hierachies 10 to 12 millennia ago. We must return to tradtional and egalitarian and plain normal human values in order to survive or we can go the way of the dinosaurs.
People 12 millennia going back to 100 millennia ago were renaissance people. They did a little bit of everything. We have never had the talent that they had. We're not nearly as healthy they were. We have too many people due to surpluses which the agricultural/urban complex created which have made us the savages we are today with the exception of a few indigenous people in some areas of the Pacific and some areas of sub Saharan Africa uncontaminated by Western savagery.
But today even people on the dark continent of Europe are rebelling against Western savagery as even are some in the USA. Even those brainwashed by constant lies and propaganda of the Star Spangles school house and the lying mainsteam US media have seen a light and have risen up in rebellion against hierarchy.
Excerpt from "When Florida, Like New York State, Joins the Ranks of the Civilized on Gay Marriage" by Pierre Tristam, June 25, 2011 by FlaglerLive.com:
Florida pioneered the anti-gay movement with the likes of Anita Bryant and her war on gay adoption, a war finally ended only when Charlie Crist put an end to the charade last year. As the 2008 vote shows, Floridians revel in putting down en entire class of people behind the cloak of religious authority and its sickly, opportunistic twin: tradition. If it’s traditional to discriminate, to hurt, to hate, oppress, and in Florida it still is, it’s also just as traditional, in the American sense anyway, to revolt.
* * * * *
My Comment:
Less than a year ago I temporarily moved from Vermont to Florida having lived for many years in Massachusetts. Hearing that the prohibition against gay couples adopting children was finally ending in Florida along with a number of other things about the state gave me the distinct impression I had gone back in time some twenty-five to thirty years.
Gay marriage in New York? It's about time!
Questions...
Why should any government have any say in gay, non gay, or any other kind of marriage?
Should this be a governmental issue - or a religious/cultural issue?
The legal rights given through marriage are estimated to number approx 2000. Why should those who are NOT married be denied these rights? Marriage to anyone is not a choice for all. There are many reasons why some cannot/do not marry. By marginalizing those who are not married, we all suffer an injustice. (In Vermont, the advocates for gay marriage specifically stated in their literature that they did NOT want to include non gay who were not married in the quest for justice.)
All who are not married are now just a little more marginalized. Justice for some does not equal justice for all.