Fighting gay marriage through ballot
G. Jeffrey MacDonald/Religion News Service
Issue date: 6/21/09 Section: Divine Intervention
Some argue that gay marriage is so unusual that it requires uncommon measures. "Some cases that the courts decide are not brought to the people because people can actually see a rationale that the courts give to decide a particular case," said Kevin Smith, executive director of Cornerstone Policy Research, a conservative advocacy group with a New Hampshire focus.
"I don't think the pro-marriage folks can see any rationale for saying that same-sex couples have the right to marry," he continued. "The courts haven't touched on the question of: `Why do we have marriage in society and what's the purpose of it?' We think it's just a really shallow argument from the courts."
The marriage issue is just the latest part of a broader critique of particular branches of American government. In Maine, Mike Heath, executive director of the Maine Family Policy Council, an evangelical Christian lobbying group, challenges the integrity of heavily-lobbied lawmakers.
In Iowa, charges center on a judiciary that critics say overstepped its authority and needs to be put back in its proper place.
"We don't have to follow the model that was set before" when abortion opponents accepted Roe v. Wade as law of the land and then "legislated around the edges," said Bryan English, spokesman for the Iowa Family Policy Center, a conservative Christian lobbying group. "The path that they took did not bring an ultimate end to abortion yet."
The strategy is not without complications, however, said David Woodard, a political scientist at Clemson University. Consistency might require conservatives to view "compromised" institutions as unfit to handle a whole range of issues, not just gay marriage, he said.
Otherwise, groups can appear opportunistic and only concerned with winning certain issues in certain ways.
Another risk: voters might actually support gay marriage in the voting booth. A recent Brown University poll found 60 percent of Rhode Island voters favor same-sex marriage in the only New England state that does not allow it. That's what leads Heath to fear that "we are probably going to lose and (gay groups) are going to get marriage at the national level."
Yet despite the risks, Woodard said gay marriage opponents can't afford to forgo a direct appeal to voters.
"The alternative is sitting there and sort of passively being dominated by a cultural minority that really can undermine your whole faith - not just your personal beliefs, but also your family and future generations," he said. "The alternative of being quiet is almost unthinkable in a context where you feel threatened and where, if you just sit there any longer, there's no telling what could happen."
"I don't think the pro-marriage folks can see any rationale for saying that same-sex couples have the right to marry," he continued. "The courts haven't touched on the question of: `Why do we have marriage in society and what's the purpose of it?' We think it's just a really shallow argument from the courts."
The marriage issue is just the latest part of a broader critique of particular branches of American government. In Maine, Mike Heath, executive director of the Maine Family Policy Council, an evangelical Christian lobbying group, challenges the integrity of heavily-lobbied lawmakers.
In Iowa, charges center on a judiciary that critics say overstepped its authority and needs to be put back in its proper place.
"We don't have to follow the model that was set before" when abortion opponents accepted Roe v. Wade as law of the land and then "legislated around the edges," said Bryan English, spokesman for the Iowa Family Policy Center, a conservative Christian lobbying group. "The path that they took did not bring an ultimate end to abortion yet."
The strategy is not without complications, however, said David Woodard, a political scientist at Clemson University. Consistency might require conservatives to view "compromised" institutions as unfit to handle a whole range of issues, not just gay marriage, he said.
Otherwise, groups can appear opportunistic and only concerned with winning certain issues in certain ways.
Another risk: voters might actually support gay marriage in the voting booth. A recent Brown University poll found 60 percent of Rhode Island voters favor same-sex marriage in the only New England state that does not allow it. That's what leads Heath to fear that "we are probably going to lose and (gay groups) are going to get marriage at the national level."
Yet despite the risks, Woodard said gay marriage opponents can't afford to forgo a direct appeal to voters.
"The alternative is sitting there and sort of passively being dominated by a cultural minority that really can undermine your whole faith - not just your personal beliefs, but also your family and future generations," he said. "The alternative of being quiet is almost unthinkable in a context where you feel threatened and where, if you just sit there any longer, there's no telling what could happen."
Viewing Comments 1 - 4 of 5
Andreas Lights
posted 6/22/09 @ 5:14 PM EST
Lawmakers and the courts have upheld the basic notion that equal means equal, and that same-sex partnerships are just the latest in a long evolution of marriage since the Biblical days when men owned as many wives as they could afford, and killed them without penalty for committing adultery. (Continued…)
Andreas Lights
posted 6/22/09 @ 5:40 PM EST
P.S. I failed to mention that Christians were once a persecuted minority. They were fed to the Lions for the enjoyment of the majority and killed for sport. (Continued…)
MarcoLuxe
posted 6/23/09 @ 2:58 AM EST
Kevin Smith and other conservative proponents choose not to see what the courts have clearly laid out for them when he says "I don't think the pro-marriage folks can see any rationale for saying that same-sex couples have the right to marry". (Continued…)
MTB
posted 6/23/09 @ 3:55 PM EST
Voting on Equal Rights, sounds like KKK mentality, we the mob, holding a bible, have based our dislike for you on scripture, and therefore burn this cross to take away your rights to freedom of choice. (Continued…)
Post a Comment