LIBERALS are often shrugged off,ignored or burned in effigy bymoderates for being too "condescending." Taking into consideration the liberal mentality of "how dare you be so intolerant, you ignorant hillbilly" that surfaces whenever people vote differently than they do, it is not hard to understand why moderates tend to side with Republicans. It is difficult for liberals to mask their disgust, however, for people who are so blinded by religious rhetoric that they end up making irrational decisions at the ballot box. If Virginia liberals hope to see the proposed Marshall-Newman marriage amendment fade into oblivion, they must first understand their public relations folly and then reframe the issue in a way that all people can see the amendment's idiocy.
By understanding the impetus for this bill, liberals and others concerned about gay rights will realize how ineffective -- albeit well-meaning -- some of their battle plans are. Del. Bob Marshall, one of the delegates sponsoring the marriage amendment, has been a member of the House of Delegates since 1992. On his official Web site, Marshall lists various forms of transportation improvement as some of his "Hot Issues." It seems either random or vindictive for him to cosponsor a bill ostensibly about limiting marriage to heterosexual couples. But it's not random: It's a response to liberal judges and politicians.
Ironically enough, most of the right-wing ballot initiatives banning gay marriage were in response to the civil rights successes in California and northern states. Three years ago, the Massachusetts Supreme Court ruled that the state constitution requires that same sex marriage be allowed, in the court case Goodridge v. Department of Public Health. Eliot Spitzer, the Democratic candidate running for governor in New York, has vowed to legalize gay marriage in the Empire State as well. From the conservative point of view, amendments like the one proposed in Virginia are not homophobic saber-rattling but a mere defense of tradition. These bills never would have been initiated by state legislatures had it not been for the precedents set in California and northern states like Massachusetts and New York. Moderate Southerners usually do not hate gay people -- they just don't like the idea of "activist judges" taking it upon themselves to redefine marriage.
Gay rights activists (including this columnist) need to learn how to reframe this debate in Virginia in order to persuade moderates to vote "no" on Nov. 7. For instance, we need to point out that gay marriage is already illegal in Virginia, so this amendment has a broader purpose and scope than these conservative politicians would have the state believe. Gay rights activists should not focus on the first sentence of the amendment, which is a direct blow to gay rights, but on the second, which has the potential to limit any Virginian's contractual rights. The amendment states that the Commonwealth will not "recognize another union, partnership, or other legal status to which is assigned the rights, benefits, obligations, qualities, or effects of marriage." Basically, this amendment would render unenforceable any agreement made between two unmarried people, be they gay or straight. What is the point of needlessly limiting our own rights? Where is the logic of Virginians? This amendment should be soundly defeated. Virginians will look comical if they consciously vote on Election Day to roll back their own contractual rights.
The student group Queer and Allied Activism is holding a Week of Action against the marriage amendment this week. These activists are tabling, chalking, and holding a rally on Thursday on the South Lawn. QUAA has exactly the right mentality in how to campaign effectively against the amendment. According to Seth Croft, co-president of QUAA, they are focusing on the "many unintended consequences" of the amendment, such as the limiting of both any couple's rights, whether they are gay or heterosexual. At this point, they're "not trying to change people's minds
Read More
PATEL: Personal development courses support students beyond the gradebook
By Heer Patel | 5 days agoThe University must rethink its approach to education beyond traditional major-specific requirements and mandate personal development courses.
EDITORIAL: Commercialization threatens U.Va.’s educational mission
By Editorial Board | 5 days agoAfter all, measuring the University’s worth in terms of accrued capital, operational efficiency and numerical rankings molds this space into just another cookie-cutter institution.
YOUNIS: Why every U.Va. student should say yes to English
By Ayat Younis | January 9, 2025Every student at the University, regardless of their primary field of study, can professionally and academically benefit from engaging with the English department.
