So, those who don't want to vote on this referendum don't have to. But to insult and silence those who might not agree? The frequent bigotry of gay marriage supporters cannot be denied.
"What is needed now is a truce — temporary, perhaps, but better if extended — between the two opposing factions that are at war over the word "marriage."
What a bizarre perspective.
One of the major problems (of the many) with editorialists on this paper is an inability to be forthright.
This paper wants a "truce" because gay-marriage proponents have gained 99 percent of what they want, and this paper does not want the Prop 8 scenario to play out here, since they rabidly support gay marriage as much as they rabidly support the I-5 bridge replacement/loot rail debacle.
For those who demand gay marriage, just like for those who oppose it, there can be no such thing as a "truce..." Advocating that those opposed to this development remains silent, particularly when this "truce" would represent a victory for the side this paper represents and a crushing defeat for the side this paper loathes, is an underhanded way to demand that the anti-side just accept it.
Gay marriage has NEVER been voted into place by the people. As a result, this sorry effort just serves as yet another in the series of Columbian hypocrisies, where in they're all ABOUT the "will of the people" when it suits them or they want it, but are violently opposed to that same will if there is a risk where, as is typically the case, the people ignore the collective "wisdom" of this newspaper and go in another direction.
Once again, they PICK the issues where they fear our will... and make every effort to tell us that what WE want doesn't matter... when they don't happen to like what that might be.
Instead of saying "truce," this paper should have just come out and said something to the effect of "OK, we've got most of what we want, now... so it's time for those opposing this to shut the hell up, and end any effort to find out if the PEOPLE want this."
This is the rank hypocrisy of this publication that keeps me from buying it. This is the double-standard that is editorial policy by social engineers who think we're too stupid to think for ourselves.
Yup. These morons are ALL about getting our "will" when and WHERE they want it. But when we MIGHT oppose them?
They don't want to hear it where it counts... at the ballot box.
No "truce" (which this despicable waste of pulp uses as a euphemism for demanding acceptance of what THEY want) is in the offing. And one can bet that had this bill died in the legislature, you can damned well bet that these morons wouldn't be asking for a "truce" THEN, would they?
In our view, May 21: Discrimination Fades
Governor signs bill that expands rights of domestic partnerships; it’s time for a truce
Thursday, May 21 1:00 a.m.
When discrimination dies, it doesn't always go quickly or quietly. Sometimes, prejudice passes incrementally. Although a judicial ruling might serve the same purpose of kicking down a door, the legislative process often unfolds in stages.
One of those seemingly small but profound steps occurred Monday when Gov. Chris Gregoire signed a bill that grants domestic partners all of the rights and privileges enjoyed by married couples. The measure often has been called the "everything but marriage" bill. We'll get to the semantics debate a little later.
First, though, we'll point out that the bill is significant because it accords long-overdue equal rights to more than 5,300 domestic partnerships that have been registered in two years. Domestic partnerships of gay or lesbian couples were recognized by the Legislature in 2007. The law also allows unmarried, senior heterosexual couples to register as domestic partners. That's more than 10,000 people, representing all 39 counties, who have gained virtually all of the rights of married spouses. As Gregoire said at the bill signing, those rights "will make for stronger families, and when we have stronger families, we have a stronger Washington state."
Among the latest rights granted to domestic partnerships are those related to sick leave to care for a domestic partner, unemployment and disability insurance benefits, business succession rights, adoption and child custody. In recent years, rights were accorded relative to hospital visitation rights, beneficiaries, the right to refuse to testify against each other in court and public assistance provisions.
What is needed now is a truce — temporary, perhaps, but better if extended — between the two opposing factions that are at war over the word "marriage." The day might come when that word applies to gays and lesbians. But it's not here yet, and for now, the best strategy is for everyone to calm down, recognize marriages and domestic partnerships as they are recognized by law, and save the semantics war for another day.
More, if you can stomach this rank hypocrisy.
No comments:
Post a Comment