Obama & Hillary: Supporting 'Separate But Equal'
I had to write a political column for my Comm 221 class, thought I'd share it here, feel free to constructively criticize/comment.
Obama & Hillary: Supporting 'Separate But Equal'
Joseph R. Lisle
Mahatma Ghandi once said “A small body of determined spirits fired by an unquenchable faith in their mission can alter the course of history.” In 1967 the Supreme Court in the case of Loving v. Virginia, ruled all bans on interracial marriage as unconstitutional. In the case to repeal ‘separate but equal’ policies in Brown v. Board of Education, NAACP attorneys identified that racial segregation enacted into law was unconstitutional on the basis of inequality and separation. I stand here today alongside many others with the hope for a better tomorrow, for today a new injustice has emerged with the same form of discrimination as that perpetuated through Plessy v. Ferguson. Citizens are being denied civil marriage rights on nothing more than the basis of a religious agenda to maintain the ‘sanctity’ of marriage. There seems to be light at the end of the tunnel, however - Democratic presidential candidates Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton claim to support rights for same-sex couples - but just how valid are their claims?
LOGO, America’s gay-oriented television network, hosted a Presidential Forum for candidates to voice their views on various gay rights issues faced in this upcoming election. Both Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton support civil unions, but oppose same-sex marriage. When asked why she opposes gay marriage, Clinton responded with two statements that sharply contradict one another: “I prefer to think of it as being positive for civil unions, it’s very personal for me, and we have made it very clear that we believe in equality in this country.” Wait, if we believe in equality in this country, why are you supporting ‘separate but equal’ policy? Obama at one point states: “It is my strong belief that the government has to treat all citizens equal,” but when asked why he is not in support of gay marriage, he responded: “As I’ve proposed it, it [civil unions] would not be a lesser thing [than marriage]. Semantics may be important to some, but my focus is going to be legal rights for people.” Lead Supreme Court Justice Brown felt the same way in the case of Plessy v. Ferguson in 1896; Obama’s statement seems to be consistent with that of Justice Brown’s statement in the upholding of ‘separate but equal’ policy, in which Justice Brown states: “We consider the underlying fallacy of the plaintiff's argument to consist in the assumption that the enforced separation of the two races stamps the colored race with a badge of inferiority.” What the judge failed to realize was his own fallacy in perception: one race was indeed stamped with a badge of inferiority, and Justice Brown unknowingly endorsed discrimination by validating it into law. We know this today, so why is ‘separate but equal’ policy being supported today by our democratic presidential candidates?
Opponents of same-sex marriage claim that sexual orientation is a lifestyle choice. Yet both our democratic candidates believe just the opposite - that homosexuality is innate. If homosexuality is as innate as the color of skin and the democratic candidates believe so, why should homosexuals be denied equal rights of marriage? In a 2004 televised Senate debate, Obama clearly stated that he believes homosexuals “are born that way.” Logically, if one is born a certain way, how can the denial of full and equal civil rights be justified in any manner?
The voice of the gay population continues to rise and will play a key role in the 2008 presidential election. Could these claims of supporting gay rights be a ploy to gain additional votes? And many gay voters may be stuck wondering - who should I vote for?
While both democratic candidates fail to see the imminent doom of civil unions -- a 2007 study of Vermont civil unions already providing such evidence -- Obama has pledged to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) in its entirety. His opponent, Clinton, has only pledged to repeal part of DOMA. While many gay voters get caught up in the emotion of identifying more strongly with an empathetic woman, many fail to notice Obama preaching for gay rights in predominantly black churches where it is extremely risky to do so.
Will same-sex marriage ever be legalized in the United States by a democratic president or the Supreme Court? Yes, it will - but only after many years of failed civil unions, inequality and sexual orientation discrimination to reach that point. As Martin Luther King Jr. once said: “I have a dream that this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed: ‘We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal.’”
Obama & Hillary: Supporting 'Separate But Equal'
Joseph R. Lisle
Mahatma Ghandi once said “A small body of determined spirits fired by an unquenchable faith in their mission can alter the course of history.” In 1967 the Supreme Court in the case of Loving v. Virginia, ruled all bans on interracial marriage as unconstitutional. In the case to repeal ‘separate but equal’ policies in Brown v. Board of Education, NAACP attorneys identified that racial segregation enacted into law was unconstitutional on the basis of inequality and separation. I stand here today alongside many others with the hope for a better tomorrow, for today a new injustice has emerged with the same form of discrimination as that perpetuated through Plessy v. Ferguson. Citizens are being denied civil marriage rights on nothing more than the basis of a religious agenda to maintain the ‘sanctity’ of marriage. There seems to be light at the end of the tunnel, however - Democratic presidential candidates Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton claim to support rights for same-sex couples - but just how valid are their claims?
LOGO, America’s gay-oriented television network, hosted a Presidential Forum for candidates to voice their views on various gay rights issues faced in this upcoming election. Both Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton support civil unions, but oppose same-sex marriage. When asked why she opposes gay marriage, Clinton responded with two statements that sharply contradict one another: “I prefer to think of it as being positive for civil unions, it’s very personal for me, and we have made it very clear that we believe in equality in this country.” Wait, if we believe in equality in this country, why are you supporting ‘separate but equal’ policy? Obama at one point states: “It is my strong belief that the government has to treat all citizens equal,” but when asked why he is not in support of gay marriage, he responded: “As I’ve proposed it, it [civil unions] would not be a lesser thing [than marriage]. Semantics may be important to some, but my focus is going to be legal rights for people.” Lead Supreme Court Justice Brown felt the same way in the case of Plessy v. Ferguson in 1896; Obama’s statement seems to be consistent with that of Justice Brown’s statement in the upholding of ‘separate but equal’ policy, in which Justice Brown states: “We consider the underlying fallacy of the plaintiff's argument to consist in the assumption that the enforced separation of the two races stamps the colored race with a badge of inferiority.” What the judge failed to realize was his own fallacy in perception: one race was indeed stamped with a badge of inferiority, and Justice Brown unknowingly endorsed discrimination by validating it into law. We know this today, so why is ‘separate but equal’ policy being supported today by our democratic presidential candidates?
Opponents of same-sex marriage claim that sexual orientation is a lifestyle choice. Yet both our democratic candidates believe just the opposite - that homosexuality is innate. If homosexuality is as innate as the color of skin and the democratic candidates believe so, why should homosexuals be denied equal rights of marriage? In a 2004 televised Senate debate, Obama clearly stated that he believes homosexuals “are born that way.” Logically, if one is born a certain way, how can the denial of full and equal civil rights be justified in any manner?
The voice of the gay population continues to rise and will play a key role in the 2008 presidential election. Could these claims of supporting gay rights be a ploy to gain additional votes? And many gay voters may be stuck wondering - who should I vote for?
While both democratic candidates fail to see the imminent doom of civil unions -- a 2007 study of Vermont civil unions already providing such evidence -- Obama has pledged to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) in its entirety. His opponent, Clinton, has only pledged to repeal part of DOMA. While many gay voters get caught up in the emotion of identifying more strongly with an empathetic woman, many fail to notice Obama preaching for gay rights in predominantly black churches where it is extremely risky to do so.
Will same-sex marriage ever be legalized in the United States by a democratic president or the Supreme Court? Yes, it will - but only after many years of failed civil unions, inequality and sexual orientation discrimination to reach that point. As Martin Luther King Jr. once said: “I have a dream that this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed: ‘We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal.’”