It was a sad week for Ace and Gary in America. With President Bush's endorsement of a same-sex marriage amendment, firm institutional resistance against homosexual love has been exposed starting from the very top. It appears the Ambiguously Gay Duo will have to keep their love for each other oblivious to the law.
The civil rights movement has come a long way, but Bush has made it clear that gays are the last minority group whom it's OK to marginalize.
For one thing, those who advocate the banning of gay marriage because of biblical commands seem to miss the other parts of the bible regarding marriage where man is encouraged to take multiple concubines in addition to his multiple wives. Or how about the instructions that a man can only take a virgin wife, and if a woman is not a virgin she is to be executed? Textual literalism of any kind (especially religious fundamentalism) is absurd.
But that's not the point. Before you write me informing me that John Kerry's position is also the same on this issue, believe me I know. But it is one thing to be uncomfortable about the thought of same-sex marriages. It's another thing entirely to start altering the Constitution to discriminate against a minority group.
Polls reveal that though most Americans are still uneasy about gay marriages, they favor some kind of civil gay union. The same polls reveal the majority of Americans are against changing the Constitution for such an inane agenda. In fact, that glorious document even tells us exactly what to do at this point -- anything not specified in the Constitution should be left to the states to decide. (10th Amendment anyone?) So, now our President wants to create another significantly intrusive government act (true conservatism has long ago ceased to exist). Yes, I know his position still allows for civil unions, but then what is the point of an amendment in the first place?
Vice President Dick Cheney, whose daughter happens to be gay, also advocates the civil unions position. But since Bush's daughters aren't gay, I guess he can't relate to that. As liberal author Eric Alterman asks on his blog, "Why are you [right-wingers] only reasonable when it affects you personally?"
The only reason an amendment banning same-sex marriages might be necessary is because any law of the same type would clearly be unconstitutional, so the last resort is to change the Constitution.
But more importantly, something is suspect about the timing of this issue. Whether same-sex marriages are "right" or "wrong" is an emotional and compelling issue, but it should not be at the forefront of government policy.
A united conservative coalition featuring the likes of Billy Graham and Jerry Falwell sponsored a full-page ad in USA Today on Friday, declaring their support of the President on this issue. In their worlds, there is "no greater concern for the United States than preserving the sacred institution of marriage."
I guess health care, education, social security and even national security are minor concerns.
By placing such a focus on gay marriages, President Bush is reaching out to his base. Lately, the Bush group has lost many followers. The controversy surrounding the movie "The Passion of The Christ" combined with Laura Bush's support of it has ignited a spark among the Jewish conservatives, angry with the implicit anti-Semitism. Now, Bush has also managed to alienate gay conservatives.
Election time must be coming around, because all Bush has left now is the far-right, morally conservative, evangelical Protestant, honk-if-you-love-Jesus crowd. His decisions last week show us that he wants to appeal to the culture wars again in 2004, and he needs to win his base because there ain't much left.
By going out of his way to alienate a huge group to appease the moral majority, President Bush has made his position clear. It is the act of a desperate man in a desperate situation.
Ishtiaque Masud is an economics junior. You can reach him at ishtiaque.masud@asu.edu.
