[Vision2020] love and marriage

Sun Feb 19 12:10:53 PST 2006

Bill London posed the questions regarding the Anti-Gay Marriage Amendment, "What does this mean to our gay   neighbors?"

  Sadly, it means not a damn thing. The City of Moscow and our leaders  have provided NO RIGHTS or protections to Gays and Lesbians in our  community. The University of Idaho, a state run institution, even  provides protection against discrimination against Gays and  Lesbians--But not the Moscow City Council.

 If the Moscow City  Leaders were real leaders in human equality and anti-discrimination, it  would have at minimum the same protections the State of  Idaho  provides toward sexual orientation.

 If the City of Moscow  wanted to make a difference in the lives of Gays and Lesbians in our  community they would do at minimum four things;

  1) Make discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation illegal in the city limits of Moscow.

  2) Provide benefits to same sex partners as married couples and their dependents that work for the city .

  3) Promote private businesses that provide benefits to same sex couples. 

  4) Provide factual information about Gays and Lesbians to reduce ignorance, discrimination and violence against them.

  But sadly, our City Council does not care about our "gay neighbors",  the proof being that they have not done anything for them, except ask  for their votes in November and provide lip service about how they  REALLY do care and they have a Gay friend named Bob that they hang out  with on Tuesday.

  _DJA

Bill London <london at moscow.com> wrote:              The  Idaho Legislature has now decided that we will be able to  vote to add an anti-gay marriage provision to the state  constitution.  What does this mean to our gay  neighbors?  Please read Rebecca Rod's essay from the Friday Daily  News.
  BL

  --------------------------------    

  Daily News, Friday, February 17, 2006

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            COLUMN: To have and to hold: Rites and rights of gay                           marriage
                          Rebecca Rod
In  the midst of this year’s Hallmark hubbub of hearts and flowers and  other symbols of love and commitment for sale, I found myself  reflecting back on Valentine’s Day of February 2004. My  partner, Theresa, and I spent most of that weekend glued to the TV,  watching reports of breaking news showing some 2,000 gay and lesbian  couples making history by getting legally married in San Francisco. We  saw pairs of men and men, and women and women lined on the grand  granite stairs of City Hall, their numbers spilling onto the open plaza  and stretching down the walkways for blocks. Old and young, dressed up  and dressed down, holding hands, holding the hands of their children,  their friends and families, all ages, colors, sizes, and shapes – all  looking so naturally “normal” like anyone and everyone, that even some  protesters in the crowd seemed taken aback enough to stop and have to  remind themselves now, who were they protesting against, and for what? 
One  man with a protest sign who was interviewed said he’d actually changed  his mind once he’d gotten down there and seen all these regular happy  people who just wanted to get married. 
Then  the camera showed us inside City Hall where the marriages were taking  place. Mayor Gavin Newsom’s first act was to marry two  80-something-year-old women who’d been “together” already for more than  50 years – and not far off, another city official was “tying the knot”  for a male couple decked out in twin tuxedos, pronouncing them “spouses  for life” – with everyone beaming and crying at the same time. 
Meanwhile,  Theresa and I were beaming and crying right along with them from our  couch in front of the TV, bearing witness with the rest of the world to  these historic marriages. 
Of  course, now we know the rest of the story, don’t we? Those few thousand  people (more than 4,000 marriages were registered in San Francisco from  February to March) and other gay and lesbian couples who got married  during that same time in cities west and east, had their marriages  revoked or voided within about six months. 
Then,  in desperate efforts to guard against future bouts of marital  terrorism, individual states began crafting constitutional amendments  to define marriage as only between a man and a woman, by God. In fact,  a group of worried Idaho legislators (worried about votes in an  election year) have brought this amendment idea up yet again in our  Statehouse. The amendment passed both the House and Senate and will be  placed on the ballot to be voted on in November. 
Why  does extending this right to marry pose such a threat to some people?  As humans, we celebrate so many of the most meaningful times of our  lives in the presence of our loved ones. Family and friends gather  around us for these special “rites” – namings, baptisms, confirmations,  graduations, and yes, marriages. We are held up and blessed,  congratulated, kissed, and wished well with plenty of hugs and tears  all around – as well it should be. During these times, the love of our  family, friends, and community is not only most evident, but most  wanted and needed to help guide us through life’s passages from one  landmark to the next. We not only gain meaning and direction for our  lives from these events, but the outpouring of love and support we  receive gives our lives a certain shape and quality. And what quality  is of more importance in the life of a human being than his or her  capacity to give and receive love? Why anyone would want to  intentionally deny his or!
  her son
 or daughter, relatives, friends, or e  

ven  strangers the legal human right to live a full life of open, supported  commitment to a loved one is beyond my understanding. Talk about a  basic “Right to Life” issue! 
Well,  I have faith that our day will come. Love is gaining ground in cities  and states and countries here and there every day. Like water wins over  rock with a steady trickle over time, or sometimes in the fury of a  flash flood, love will find its way. Weak and self-serving  constitutional amendments will not block the power of love. And history  will be made again. 
*  Rebecca Rod has lived in Moscow for more than 20 years, the past 14 of  them with her life partner, Theresa. She has a master’s degree in  library science but has been self-employed as an artist/potter for more  than 10 years. Last fall she was hired as a program advisor for the  University of Idaho Women’s Center. 

_____________________________________________________
 List services made available by First Step Internet, 
 serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.   
               http://www.fsr.net                       
          mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯

---------------------------------

 What are the most popular cars? Find out at Yahoo! Autos 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20060219/d80e9cf2/attachment.htm