Thursday, August 12, 2010

A great analysis of the meaning behind the ruling that Overturned Prop 8: "I'm not just a fag anymore" by David Pisarra

Okay, I admit it.

My reaction to Prop 8 being overturned was pretty subdued. I mean, I'm thrilled with the decision, but I was bummed that the judge still enforced a hold on any new same-sex marriages. I was bracing myself for the onslaught of prejudice, and I wasn't disappointed - conservatives started crying out that the ruling was unfair because the judge was Gay. By that logic, as one liberal pundit put it, you'd need to find a Eunuch to try the case! And I know this is going to take years wending it's way up to the U.S. Supreme Court, so it was hard to get too excited about it.

I guess I felt "cautiously optimistic," and that was all.

But then, I read this column my friend David Pisarra wrote in the Santa Monica Daily Press about the meaning behind Judge Vaughn Walker's ruling that overturned Prop 8.

And it's kinda changed my mind. David's take was fascinating, and I had to share a bit of it with you:

He says that Judge Walker...

"ruled in Perry v. Schwarzenegger that there is no rational basis for discriminating against gays and lesbians in the issuance of marriage licenses, and consequently he invalidated Proposition 8, which limited marriage to a man and a woman.

But his 136 page, extremely well thought out, thorough, comprehensive ruling said so much more. He said, in the language of lawyers, that gays and lesbians deserve to be treated no differently than anyone else in our society. This ruling is the hammer that will pound the nail in the coffin of institutionalized public discrimination. On trial in this case was not just Proposition 8, but the underlying belief that homosexuals are a threat to society. For that, is what was used to win passage of Proposition 8..."

It's a great article, and I urge you to go here to read the entire thing.

Because David's right.

Him, and me, and so many of the rest of us are, legally, not just fags anymore.

And that's profound.

1 comment:

Sarah Laurenson said...

The ruling on the stay is supposed to be today.

I've seen so many interesting articles on this from both sides, It's a fascinating time to be alive, my friend. I'd really like to celebrate an anniversary when our marriage is not in legal limbo though.

This particular case may not make it the Supreme Court. The ones pursuing the appeal do not have the standing to be heard by that court. And the government will not appeal. That may or may not change with this next election.