Tag Archives: gay marriage

Mozilla boss done in by intolerance

Brendan Eich was under some illusion, apparently, that the First Amendment means people are free to express their political beliefs without retribution.

I guess not.

Eich was canned by Mozilla, the Internet browser, because he gave some money in 2008 to political organizations that favored a ban in California of gay marriage. Proposition 8 became a battle cry for those seeking “marriage equality.”

I do not care to comment on the merits of Prop 8. I do care, though, to suggest that Eich got the shaft by his company.

Whatever this man thinks of gay marriage, Prop 8, or whether the moon is made of green cheese has zero relevance to the company he runs.

Is he smart enough to be chief executive officer of a multi-bazillion-dollar Internet company? Apparently so. The company reportedly is in good financial shape in the cut-throat world of big business and matters relating to the Internet.

The most troubling aspect of this man’s dismissal — to my way of thinking — is that it suggests an intolerance of views that don’t comport with progressive thinkers. My understanding of the term progressive, which is synonymous with “liberal,” is that one should keep an open mind and judge everyone’s views on their merits. An unwritten element here is that the view should be relevant to something broader and more far-reaching than merely the individual who has expressed that view.

So what if the guy gave money to Prop 8 supporters? Does that make him less qualified to run his company? The link attached here suggests that his view restricts Mozilla’s ability to hire first-rate engineers and other geeks who might be dissuaded from working for someone who believes as he does about gay marriage.

Come on!

It pains me to say that we have a case of political correctness running amok. The U.S. Constitution’s First Amendment has been stomped on in the process.

Texas gay-marriage ban struck down

Was there ever any doubt that the federal judiciary would catch up with Texas’s ban on same-sex marriage?

It did so in equally conservative states such as Oklahoma and Utah. Now it has happened in Texas.

The sea change is now lapping at our front door.

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/federal-judge-strikes-down-texas-gay-marriage-ban-n39466

U.S. District Judge Orlando Garcia struck down the same-sex marriage ban — which voters approved by an overwhelming majority in a 2005 election to amend the Texas Constitution. Garcia ruled in favor of a gay couple that wanted to be married in Texas, but couldn’t given the state’s prohibition.

The ruling has been put on hold pending a sure-fire appeal by the state. Gov. Rick Perry vows to fight the ruling, as will Attorney General Greg Abbott (who wants to be the next governor).

It seems increasingly inevitable that the federal courts are going to uphold citizens’ rights, under the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, to “equal protection of the laws.” By “equal,” gay-rights advocates and their political allies argue persuasively that bans on gay citizens’ right to marry the person they love deprives them of the rights of full citizenship granted to them by the Constitution.

Governors such as Perry, however, argue that the 10th Amendment carries greater weight, that the states have the constitutional right to enact their own laws that aren’t in direct conflict with federal law.

Let’s have this debate.

Setting aside my own personal qualms about redefining the term marriage — which my American Heritage Dictionary says is “The legal union of a man and a woman as husband and wife” — I totally understand why this issue is turning the nation upside-down.

Judges are looking at this issue from a constitutional standpoint and determining that the Constitution is unambiguous about who gets all the rights of citizenship. There cannot be a separate standard for people of certain sexual orientations. In a way that I am still trying to understand more clearly in my head and my heart, I get how the judges are ruling on this matter.

What’s more, the radio talk-show blowhards and others on the right and far right should not even try to suggest that we elect the federal judiciary, or that we put term limits on these individuals, or that we somehow water down the power of presidents to appoint these jurists. The system works just fine the way it’s set up. Leave it alone and debate these issues on their merits.

So now the fight has come to Texas. The state is going to take this matter to the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

Stay tuned. This fight is going to get very interesting.

Being gay isn’t a lifestyle choice

Arizona’s state Senate has approved a bill that allows people to use their religion to deny services to gay people.

Just the other day, 2012 Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney was asked whether he thought gay marriage posed a threat to heterosexual marriage. He expressed concern about that so-called potential threat.

And throughout the nation, all these discussions seem to rely on the assumption that homosexuality is a decision that people make.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/02/19/ariz-senate-oks-bill-boosting-service-refusal-based-on-religion/

It’s as if they awaken one day and decide: “I think I’m going to ‘become’ gay and start being attracted to people of my own gender.” Were that the case, wouldn’t it follow that straight people would make the same conscious decision?

In the interest of disclosure, I now will stipulate that at no time in my life did I ever decide to date girls. My attraction to people of the opposite sex was wired into my DNA the moment I was born, or so I always have assumed. I accepted the notion long ago that others are wired differently, and that their DNA wiring resulted in an attraction of a different kind.

I want to tell you a brief version of a long and moving story involving a friend and former colleague of mine.

His name was Tim. We worked together for several years at a newspaper in Beaumont. In the late 1980s, Tim’s appearance began to change. He was losing weight and his skin color was looking a bit pallid, but he kept working as an education reporter for the newspaper. Then, in 1988, my phone rang at home; it was a Sunday afternoon. Tim called and asked to meet with me at the newspaper. He had something he wanted to tell me.

I drove downtown and Tim and I met privately in my office.

He disclosed at that moment that he had contracted AIDS. He wanted my advice on how he should disclose that news to others. We talked about him writing an essay for the paper. He agreed to do it. He asked, “You know, of course, that I’m gay, right?” I didn’t know how to answer him. I said that I didn’t know it because we never discussed it. I, along with our other colleagues, only assumed it.

We published Tim’s essay. The response was overwhelming in the kindness expressed by those who read it. And from that moment in my office, when he revealed his medical condition, our conversational candor changed dramatically. We talked about private matters.

Tim said something later that stuck with me. “Why would I choose a lifestyle knowing I would be scorned and ridiculed?” he asked, rhetorically. That was his way of saying he was born gay and that there was nothing he could do to change that part of his life.

Tim died in 1994 of AIDS-related complications.

And I think of him often these days when current discussions turn to issues of whether gay marriage would have an adverse effect on the more traditional version of marriage and of laws lawmakers approve that give people the right to discriminate openly against people simply because of who they are.

The Arizona Senate has dishonored itself with its cold-hearted measure by allowing people to scorn others because of who they love.

 

 

Liz Cheney ends her Senate campaign

Liz Cheney isn’t as obsessed with political power as some of us thought, apparently.

The Republican candidate for the U.S. Senate from Wyoming ended her campaign early today, citing undisclosed family health issues. I wish her and her family well, of course.

http://www.politico.com/story/2014/01/liz-cheney-wyoming-senate-race-101767.html?hp=f1

Another part of me, though, is glad she’s bowing out, if only to restore some sanity to the political process in one of our 50 states.

Cheney is the outspoken daughter of the outspoken former vice president, Dick Cheney. She challenged long-time Wyoming Republican Sen. Mike Enzi for reasons that continue to escape me. She claimed, I guess, that Enzi — one of the Senate’s most conservative members — isn’t conservative enough.

Her candidacy drew immediate fire from the state’s GOP establishment. GOP powerhouses lined up in Enzi’s corner.

Then things turned bad.

Cheney was accused of being a carpetbagger, given that she moved to Wyoming in 2010 after growing up in Washington, D.C. I don’t hold that against her. Two of my favorite carpetbaggers have been Robert F. Kennedy and Hillary Rodham Clinton, both of whom represented New York quite nicely in the Senate. In this age of intense media scrutiny, though, Cheney’s opportunism was drawing unusual attention.

Of course, then we had Cheney getting into that public tiff with her openly gay sister, Mary, over the issue of same-sex marriage. Mary is married and is a mother. Liz opposes gay marriage. The sisters got into a spat that only served to embarrass the entire family.

As Politico.com notes, Cheney’s campaign never got “traction.” Enzi continued to poll far ahead of his upstart challenger.

What this means for the health of the national Republican Party, though, remains to be determined. Liz Cheney is just one challenger to establishment GOP incumbents to drop out. Other insurgents are out there, including a few throughout West Texas, who are mounting challenges to long-time Republican incumbents.

Liz Cheney, though, is out of the game. Good. Her voice, though, won’t be silenced. She’s got her Fox News Channel job waiting for her.

Cheneys learning terrible lesson about fame

The Cheney family is being schooled on the terrible price famous clans must pay at times.

Their family feuds become public spectacles. The exposure goes with the territory.

New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd brings it all home with her latest essay.

The story has been told and retold many times in recent weeks. Liz Cheney, daughter of former Vice President Dick Cheney and his wife, Lynne Cheney, wants to be the next U.S. senator from Wyoming. She’s challenging a long-time fellow Republican, incumbent Mike Enzi. She’s trying to outflank Enzi on the right, which is a hard thing to do, given the senator’s impeccable conservative voting record.

But in doing so, Liz has managed to offend her sister, Mary in the deepest way imaginable. Liz says she opposes gay marriage. Mary is gay and is married to Heather Poe. They are the parents of two children.

Daddy Cheney has declared his support for gay marriage. He also supports Liz’s campaign for U.S. senator. The Cheneys also used to be pals with the Enzis. Then we have another prominent Wyoming pol, former GOP Sen. Alan Simpson, who is mortified at what’s transpiring with his friends the Cheneys — and the Enzis.

Why should anyone beyond this tight circle of family and friends care? Because Dick Cheney served for eight years as vice president of the United States. Before that he was secretary of defense during the George H.W. Bush administration. Before that he was a congressman from Wyoming and before that he served as White House chief of staff to President Gerald Ford.

He’s a public man. His business becomes our business, even if it involves his daughters — both of whom have been in the public eye themselves.

Fame at times exacts a terrible price from those who seek it.

Family feud mirrors larger GOP split

Two women from one prominent political family are sparring publicly over one of the nation’s most sensitive social issues.

It involves gay marriage.

One of the women is gay; the other is straight. The gay sister, Mary Cheney, is married to her wife and is the mother of two children. The straight sister, Liz Cheney, is running for the U.S. Senate seat from Wyoming against a long-time incumbent, fellow Republican Mike Enzi.

Cheney Family Airs Gay-Marriage Feud on Facebook

Liz Cheney has come out strongly against gay marriage. Her sister Mary has challenged Liz’s views, saying she is out of step with history.

Oh, have I mentioned these women come from a prominent political family? Their dad is former Vice President Dick Cheney, who supports gay marriage; their mother is Lynne Cheney, who’s served as top adviser to GOP presidents going back to Ronald Reagan.

The women’s differences over gay marriage — or “marriage equality,” as proponents like to call it — serves as an interesting metaphor for the divisions that exist within the larger political party. The right wingers are unwilling to compromise on this or any issue with the “establishment wing” of their party.

No one can accuse the Cheney family of being squishy on their conservatism. They all come from sturdy right-wing stock.

The sisters’ split reminds me a bit of a similar split within Ronald Reagan’s family, particularly between the two sons — Michael and Ron. Michael Reagan is a star on the conservative talk-radio circuit; Ron tilts considerably to the left and is a frequent guest of liberal TV talk show hosts. The third surviving Reagan child, daughter Patti, is aligned with brother Ron.

Has anyone seen the Reagan brothers in the same room lately?

Back to the Cheneys …

If anyone needs a lesson on the split among Republicans, they can look no further than the strain developing between two strong-willed women.