Prop 22 - the religious thing to do??

Tomorrow in the great city of San Francisco the California state supreme court will heart oral arguments concerning the (lack of) constitutionality of Proposition 22. The courts will hear arguments from both sides: " same-sex couples and the city of San Francisco, challenging the marriage law, and the attorney general's and governor's offices, defending the law. Also participating will be lawyers seeking to intervene on behalf of two organizations opposing gay rights." Starring in the hearings is non-other than Kenneth Starr who is best known as the impeachment prosecutor of Bill Clinton who will be shaking his fist in favor of the Proposition. Raoul Kennedy, a prominent SF lawyer, will be doing the lawyer stuff on the other side.

Religious groups on BOTH sides of the issue have stepped in- In the far right corner - The Mormon church (picky are we?), the California Catholic Conference, the National Association of Evangelicals and the Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations who have said that marriage, but just male-female marriage is "the lifeblood of community, society and the state" Not a fan of that word - lifeblood or that reasoning ("reasoning"). On the other side are the Unitarians, the United Church of Christ, the Union for Reform Judaism, the Soka Gakkai branch of Buddhism, and dissident groups of Mormons, Catholics and Muslims - oh and dissident, if you don't know, is basically another way of saying the Cool Kids. They say their faiths as well as many historical traditions honor same-sex marriage and 'the current law puts the state's stamp of approval on "the religious orthodoxy of some sects concerning who may marry."' - We do it, back off. Amen!

However, this "respect our privacy" argument is almost nullified by the doublespeak and hypocritical non-sense that people like Kenneth Starr "preach" - He wants to make it seem like it's all a fight for the children and for family and nothing against homosexuals - nothing against privacy but think of the kids! He makes sure to reminds us that "we have also witnessed the substantial adverse consequences for children that often flow from alternative household arrangements." I'm sorry Ken, but you obviously haven't seen "My two Dads"



He knows that it needs to stay as an issue about family values for all intents and purposes - it is after all just a provision in the FAMILY CODE, but as soon as religion comes into play then so too does that damn'd "freedom of religion" and the need to respect the practices of all churches - even those pesky dissidents. I mean - where does the freedom end???? If people are allowed to chose their own religion then they could chose anything.....

However Starr tries to keep it in the family at tomorrows hearings, the religious groups in play have flooded the courts with briefs on both sides of the argument that outline the social impact of the decision. The argument that Prop 22 infringes upon the orthodoxy of certain religions is a compelling one, and the prospect of tainting the "lifeblood" in a community is frightening. The groups will not be present, but their arguments have been heard and will undoubtedly play a part in the outcome of the hearings... fingers crossed.



For San Fran kids and anyone close:

Justices will hear arguments on March 4 on the constitutionality of California's law defining marriage as between a man and a woman. The hearing will be at 9 a.m. at 350 McAllister St., San Francisco.

for more info:
http://www.courtinfo.ca.gov/courts/supreme/highprofile/
http://www.calchannel.com/carriage.htm .
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4081999.stm