Bigotry Hurts People And The Pocketbook

[boztopia]

http://boztopia.com/?p=405http://boztopia.com/?p=405#comments
San Francisco mayor and Prop 8 opponent Gavin Newsom makes a point that many others have, but few have listened. Not only do same-sex marriage bans marginalize communities and dehumanize

Comments

[serendipityhoo]

I think the money argument is the wrong discussion to have - it doesn't pertain to the true issue. Neither did the For Prop 8 ads (which were insulting in my opinion). The Against Prop 8 ads were a mixed bunch - some parts reflected a counterattack/defense and others actually hit on the fair and equitable treatment under the law aspect.

I'd rather discuss the ethical implications or the unconstitionality of Prop 8, or the question of whether a simple majority of voters should be sufficient to change a constition.

I'm sorry it passed (I voted against), but I'm happy to have the onslaught of all (prop 1-9, legislature, etc) the political commercials GONE.

Well, you don't always get what you want

[boztopia]

The economic issue can't be ignored any more than the cultural issues behind it. It's the same as people pointing to Nate Silver's post and saying "See? Black people weren't responsible for Prop 8 passing," when that's not actually what he said.

Economics and culture are the drivers that people respond to--the engines that shape their behavior. Ethics and constitutionality are the higher ideals that we all aspire to follow and understand, but as the last eight years have shown, we'll happily trample our Constitutional rights if a gut-level fear of The Terrorists is sufficiently stoked. This is no different.

Re: Well, you don't always get what you want

[secret_stuff]

True, but the problem with the economic argument is there are other ways to respond to it. They might turn around and say "Fine, I'm willing to pay higher taxes to preserve marriage" or something similar.

I think the fundamental fairness angle is the best approach for what actually has to happen - win hearts and minds.

Fundamental fairness doesn't play

[thewrongcrowd]

... with folk who are convinced that they are on God's side. They basically don't give a shit about fairness, especially since they don't consider practicing homosexuals to be God's people.

Only when they are faced personally with the discrimination, through a son, a daughter, a sister or brother, will they be forced to re-examine their belief. And in far too many cases they will trash the relationship with the family member than with their ersatz righteousness.

[pragma_x]

The problem with the involvement of the Mormon Church of LDS is that they have distinguished themselves from their polygamous roots, and wrapped themselves in righteousness in the process. So they clearly see nothing wrong with forcing others to abandon their beliefs, as they were forced/led/coerced, if it doesn't fit with the proper order of things.

Jesus didn't petition the Romans to ensconce in law his views on right and wrong. He hit the bricks and did it himself. It was a good message that was right for the times and it stuck with a strong minority, that took hundreds of years to gather numbers. IMO any religion that conducts itself otherwise is just being greedy in some respect or another.

[secret_stuff]

Yeah, I agree that is the LDS "best" argument/excuse -- they had to conform so should everyone :-p

Ultimately there is no good reason for opposing gay marriage, it is just one of those arbitrary lines in the sand that will take awhile to totally wash away.

Eventually, yes

[boztopia]

Slavery and Jim Crow weren't beaten in a day. It took the Holocaust to make people see the logical conclusion of anti-Semitism, but see it they did. This is no different.

It's depressing to see it still in place in what I (perhaps naively) consider an intellectual, cultural world, but we will wear it down eventually. It's just a matter of patience, persistence, good argument, and the courage to keep on truckin'.

[thewrongcrowd]

...may discourage gay singles or couples from settling there

Yeah, D. and I were considering California as an option. Not any longer. Instead, Connecticut and Massachusetts moved up the list. So that's an M.D. and an M.A. that could have been contributing to the economy there that won't be.