 |
 |
| Hundreds of supporters and opponents of a proposed gay marriage ban took part in vocal protests March 1 at the state Capitol. (Photo by R.O. Youngblood) |
|
|
| | |
|
| Matthew A. Hennie is editor of Southern
Voice. He can be reached at mhennie@sovo.com. |
|
| |
| |
|
|
| | |
HOME > VIEWPOINT > EDITORIAL
By: MATTHEW A. HENNIE
COMMENTS |
| 
Activist judges struck in Georgia this week. Twice.
And you won’t hear a peep out of conservatives.
The Georgia Supreme Court on Monday struck down the state’s four-year-old
hate crimes law, trashing one of the few legislative accomplishments scored
by the gay lobby in the last several years.
On Tuesday, that same court issued a 5-2 decision allowing the Nov. 2 vote
on Amendment 1, ruling that they can’t intervene until after voters have
their say.
After both decisions, there were no conservatives to be found ranting about
activist judges. The lack of commotion to the judicial action stands in stark
contract to the public hand-wringing conservative lawmakers started in January,
worried that Georgia’s conservative judiciary would suddenly OK gay marriages
once they became legal in Massachusetts.
And therein lies the irony: Anti-gay bigots want to constitutionally ban same-sex
marriage in the state, which outlawed the unions in 1996, so much that they
wasted an entire legislative session passing Amendment 1 to put before voters
next week. Conservatives, it seems, are afraid that judges will equalize the
marriage playing field absent any evidence that would ever happen.
It’s not so odd, then, that conservative backers of Amendment 1 aren’t
lashing out at the state Supreme Court this week. “Activist judges”
ruled in their favor — twice — and the hate-mongers lost their voice,
apparently content with the rulings.
Judicial activism is abhorrent, conservatives argue, unless those judges rule
in favor of their anti-gay causes. And then, well, they have nothing to complain
about.
And that is yet another example of why Amendment 1 is nothing but a political
ploy, a piece of legislative gay-bashing meant to turn out conservative voters,
push forward an agenda legislating a strict moral code, and lob a cheap shot
at gay Georgians. Amendment 1 is the conservative shibboleth of 2004.
The battle over Amendment 1 wasn’t sought by gay Georgians, or gay men
and lesbians in the other 10 states that face similar constitutional bans on
Nov. 2. Anti-gay conservatives brought the fight to us. We responded by flooding
the state Capitol for rallies, lobbying lawmakers and forming organizations
to oppose the measure.
While conservatives created a cause to rally around, some gay Georgians weren’t
sure (and still aren’t) that fighting Amendment 1 was worth the time,
effort and financial resources. The measure emboldened conservatives and, to
some extent, split gay activists — those who oppose the measure and others
who say it’s not a fight worth lodging.
But on Tuesday, Amendment 1 should motivate gay voters in the same way it will
conservatives. The trouble is, gay voters may be complacent, convinced their
vote won’t matter in the wake of polls that show the measure will pass
with more than 60 percent of the vote. Some gay men and lesbians don’t
want marriage equality and see Amendment 1 only through their marriage blinders,
uninformed about its far-reaching impact. Other voters may conclude that since
same-sex unions are already outlawed, the fate of Amendment 1 isn’t critical.
You’d be wrong on all three accounts.
Amendment 1 is about much more than activist judges or protecting the “sanctity
of marriage,” as sponsors of the legislation claimed when they first proposed
it last January. Section B, the portion that voters won’t see on the ballot,
would most likely ban civil unions, end domestic partnership benefits in municipalities
and businesses that already offer them, and put in jeopardy legal contracts
between members of same-sex couples that allow basic rights such as hospital
visitation.
Amendment 1 is about more than marriage.
If voters overwhelmingly approve the measure, it will further embolden conservative
lawmakers. Amendment 1 survived the General Assembly session only after a protracted
and bruising fight. But if the legislative gay-bashing is rewarded at the polls,
anti-gay lawmakers will push for more, aiming next at gay adoptions. They will
also use the results of Tuesday’s vote to justify their efforts at blocking
consideration of a new hate crimes bill that is gay-inclusive, or employment
non-discrimination protections.
Amendment 1 is about more than marriage.
The legislative fight over the measure split rural and urban Democrats, and
alienated some black lawmakers. It showed gay activists that we don’t
have many true friends in the General Assembly. But if gay voters don’t
show up at the polls, gay-friendly ...
| 
