Protestors on Beacon Hill voiced their opposition to a great many things today—gay marriage, a proposed (and soon defeated) ballot question on gay marriage, Nazism, and even specific sexual positions:
As pleased as I am that equality triumphed in this whole "defining marriage by exclusion" thing, I'm a little miffed that every news source, from NPR to Boston Now, is saying that the ban on gay marriage has been defeated. That's not what happened: the attempt to place the issue on the ballot was defeated. Though this does de facto "defeat" the attempts of some lawmakers to (use the voters to help) preserve inequality in the letter of the law, the vote wasn't on the ban--it was on the ballot question--and I think that's an important difference. It's important because opponents of equality have a very strong argument that their representatives are not acting as their elected agents--that the voters should be given the chance to have their opinions heard through a vote. This is a principle with which I agree, and if this weren't a civil rights issue, I'd want the question on the ballot. Because it's a civil rights issue, though, we need our representatives to be forward-thinking "activists" who press the state--and the country--ahead, despite the retrograde beliefs of some citizens. History bears this out.
Anyway, I just feel like it's a distinction to be made: what got defeated today was the attempt to put the question on the ballot, not the question itself. It will come back in future sessions and lawmakers will have to correct their constituents again.
Historic Boston: Things to Do on the 4th
OddBlotter: Ain't That America
Bite Size News, July 3: Cars and Crashes Edition
Sports Redux: Bottoms Up For Seattle
add to digg
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
email this
add to facebook
add to del.icio.us
As pleased as I am that equality triumphed in this whole "defining marriage by exclusion" thing, I'm a little miffed that every news source, from NPR to Boston Now, is saying that the ban on gay marriage has been defeated. That's not what happened: the attempt to place the issue on the ballot was defeated. Though this does de facto "defeat" the attempts of some lawmakers to (use the voters to help) preserve inequality in the letter of the law, the vote wasn't on the ban--it was on the ballot question--and I think that's an important difference. It's important because opponents of equality have a very strong argument that their representatives are not acting as their elected agents--that the voters should be given the chance to have their opinions heard through a vote. This is a principle with which I agree, and if this weren't a civil rights issue, I'd want the question on the ballot. Because it's a civil rights issue, though, we need our representatives to be forward-thinking "activists" who press the state--and the country--ahead, despite the retrograde beliefs of some citizens. History bears this out.
Anyway, I just feel like it's a distinction to be made: what got defeated today was the attempt to put the question on the ballot, not the question itself. It will come back in future sessions and lawmakers will have to correct their constituents again.
duly noted, and corrected.