And the beat goes on

Commentary by Michelle Fitzhugh-Craig

The voices are getting louder. The crowds are getting larger. The movement is growing.
   It’s been two weeks since Proposition 8 passed with a 52 percent majority. The motion — which banned same-sex marriages in California — was a controversial issue throughout the campaign. Now, with its passage, couples who felt vindicated when on May 15 the state’s Supreme Court declared that a California law defining marriage as being between a man and a woman violated the state Constitution are now wondering if their desire to one day marry the person they love is again being denied. And the thousands of couples who wed over the past five months are wondering if their unions will remain valid.
    Gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender couples, families and their supporters are taking to the streets nationwide to protest “No on H8.” Protests, in part, are rallying against anti-gay legislation in this country, including constitutional bans on samesex marriage in Arizona and Florida and an Arkansas law that prevents gay and lesbian couples from adopting children.
    On Monday, California Attorney General Jerry Brown urged the state Supreme Court to decide the constitutionality of Proposition 8, after four lawsuits filed Nov. 5 argued a state constitutional amendment violates some provisions of the California Constitution by taking rights away from groups who historically have been persecuted and removing the power judges have to protect them. Two of the suits also contend that Prop. 8 actually creates a constitutional revision versus an amendment. A revision can only be placed on the ballot by a twothirds vote of the Legislature.
    Some say that the outrage being heard post-election wasn’t as loud during the campaign. Unfortunately, I have to agree. It’s not that the “yes” vote was any louder; it’s just the “no” vote could have done so much more to counter-attack the lies and misinterpretations being spewed. Did proposition opponents become overly confident?
    If this issue is again put before the voters, I hope that guards are never let down. I hope myths and lies are stopped dead in their tracks. And I hope that all understand the real issue behind allowing two people of the same sex to wed.
    In late October, I was invited to take part in a Prop. 8 debate sponsored by New America Media. The event brought proponents from each side to the table to offer their viewpoints on how voters should cast their ballots.
    As a media panelist, I asked the Yes on 8 representatives the following: In striking down the law banning same sex marriage, the California Supreme Court cited the landmark 1967 civil rights case Loving vs. Virginia that struck down the prohibition of interracial marriage — a union between two committed people in love. How, specifically, does allowing a union between any two people — who are in a committed and loving relationship — destroy the institution of marriage?
    Everyone in the packed room was amazed at the answers to this question and the ignorance of the comments made throughout the debate … sadly by the three of four “yes” panelists who were men of color.
    It amazes me that people who have personally experienced — or their race or ethnicity has experienced — any form of civil rights violation have the audacity to dictate what two other human beings choose to do.
    If the idea of equal rights was a reality, then no one — and I mean no one — in this country should have to demand something that should be rightfully theirs as a U.S. citizen.

   Michelle Fitzhugh-Craig is an award-winning journalist who resides in Oakland. If you have an individual, organization, issue or other topic that may be of interest to the Globe’s readers, contact her at talk2mfc@yahoo.com.
   Visit her blog at www.stpminute.blogspot.com.