Gay marriage ban is civil rights issue, activists say

On Tuesday, while many people tuned in to the battle between Barack Obama and John McCain, a battle was fought in California to ban same-sex marriage – a battle that left gays across the country feeling defeated when the state passed Proposition 8 and banned gay marriage.

Proposition 8, which is a constitutional amendment defining marriage as a union between a man and a woman, comes only months after the state legalized gay marriage in May. Since then, 18,000 same-sex couples were wed, and gays around the country saw a glimmer of hope for their own civil rights.

Doug Bauder, coordinator for IU’s Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual and Transgender Student Support Services, said the ban in California was disheartening but not entirely surprising.

“I’m saddened by it,” Bauder said, “The amount of money pumped into this from conservative religious groups from out-of-state nationwide was considerable. There were misleading ads and very low-spirited untruth.”

Proponents of the proposition argue that the amendment “is NOT an attack on gay couples and does not take away the rights that same-sex couples already have under California’s domestic partner law,” according to the Yes on 8 Protect Marriage Web site.

The Web site also states that legalizing gay marriage alters public school curriculums and “by saying that a marriage is between ‘any two persons’ rather than between a man and a woman, the Court decision has opened the door to any kind of ‘marriage.’”
Ron Prentice, chairman of the organization Protect Marriage, thanked voters in a press release Wednesday.

“This is a great day for marriage,” he said. “The people of California stood up for traditional marriage and reclaimed this great institution. We are gratified that voters chose to protect traditional marriage and to enshrine its importance in the state constitution. We trust that this decision will be respected by all Californians.”

But supporters for the proposition aren’t the only ones calling for the government to take action.

Helen Harrell, faculty adviser of OUT GLBT Student Union, called Proposition 8 alarming and disappointing but, like Bauder, said she was not surprised.

“I have always believed the federal government needs to enact a policy like a civil rights law and extend it to the GLBT community,” Harrell said.

Bauder, who is also a pastor, said the negative religious arguments made for the ban were bogus and left him feeling frustrated and even embarrassed as a religious figure himself.

He suggested there is a connection between the black community and the gay community in that both have fought for civil rights. He said Obama’s win could have an influence on connecting these two movements.

“There is an opportunity for these two communities to come together and start a dialogue,” he said. “Barack might be person to help enhance that dialogue.”

The Indiana Constitution currently defines marriage as union between a man and a woman.

Sean Lemieux, an Indiana attorney who serves gay, lesbian and non-traditional families, said Tuesday was a sad day for gays across the country.

Lemieux said he had hoped to be persuaded by what he considered a legitimate argument for Proposition 8 but has yet to hear one that is not religious.

“It illustrates how much more education needs to happen,” Lemieux said. “The ads were very deceptive.”

Lemieux and Bauder both said things were changing and that the fight for civil rights would always have setbacks.

“There’s work to be done,” Bauder said. “Tuesday’s election still gives me hope that change can come, but we need a different strategy.”

Bauder encouraged residents to share their own stories and work toward better communication.

“We need to get beyond media blitz and talk to each other. That’s what will win the day,” he said. “It’s going to be a while yet. But I’m still a person of hope.”