“Logically, it would be difficult to deny same-sex couples the right to have their relationships officially recognized through marriage.”
These are the words of Dan Walters in his political column for the Sacramento Bee. But apparently, little “objective” logic was used in the writing of this piece. Like many amoral political pragmatists, he clearly ignores the facts.
Homosexuality has been part of the human experience for countless centuries, even though only rarely acknowledged, and contemporary science has amassed considerable evidence that a substantial number of people are simply wired by genetics to prefer those of the same gender.
True, homosexuality has always been apart of the human experience. But at no time in history has it ever been honored and celebrated as it is today. As a matter of fact, it speaks against centuries of religious tradition, moral beliefs, human anatomy, and societal foundations. But I guess they are all wrong.
And for every study that says that homosexuality is genetic, I find it interesting that Mr. Walters does not site any of these studies. So in the interest of intelectual honesty, I will.
The most prominent study sighted as proof of the “gay gene” was done in 1995 by Dean Hamer of the U.S. National Institute of Health. But this study would later be refuted by Dr. Alan Sanders, also from the National Institute of Health. He replicated Hamer’s study in order to verify his conclusions, and Dr. Sanders found no evidence to validate Hamer’s findings or his theory. The study by Dr. Sanders did not reproduce Hamer’s results. It’s a well-known scientific law that a finding must be replicated by other researchers before it can be considered valid. And on this one, Hamer’s claim was not replicated.
In addition to Dr. Sanders findings, another study at the University of Western Ontario by neurologist Dr. George Rice has been published in the April 1999 edition of the Canadian Journal of Science. Dr. Rice also tried to reproduce Hamer’s study and researched homosexual brothers from 48 families. He found that they were no more likely to share similar genetic patterns than would have been the odds from pure chance.
Walters continues:
It is, however, not an issue that lends itself to rationality or logic. Those who oppose gay marriage see it in religious, or at least moral, terms.
Is he saying that religion and morality are devoid of rationality and logic? As hard as it is for me to believe that a usually thoughtful writer would make such an assertion, that is exactly what he is saying; at least as far as the argument over same-sex marriage. Clearly Walters made no attempt to even look into arguments made by Pro-marriage advocates. Instead, he chooses to get his information from press releases.
I would encourage Mr. Walters to read an article published in the January 2004 edition of Crisis Magazine entitled, “The Case Against Same-Sex Marriage” by California Assemblyman Tim Leslie. This is a well reasoned, factually based argument for protecting traditional marriage. It is not a religious diatribe and sites numerous academic and sociological studies.
California has been edging toward gay marriage for several years. A number of recent laws recognize "domestic partnerships" and the like, and most governmental and corporate employers offer full family benefits to same-sex couples - along with employees' partners of the opposite gender.
…California has moved so far in its recognition of same-sex relationships, in fact, that no other partial steps may be possible, and full marriage may be the only remaining barrier. A San Francisco judge has ruled against California laws barring same-sex marriages, which means the issue will make its way to a state Supreme Court…
Don’t you love the way he completely dismisses the fact that voters overwhelmingly chose to protect marriage? As a matter of fact there is no other hot button issue that has received such a wide array of support. 59% of Asians, 63% of Blacks, 65% of Latinos all voted to keep marriage between a man and a woman. Almost every county in California voted for traditional marriage, even the ultra-liberal Los Angeles County. The people have been resolute and clear about their opposition to redefining marriage. It is the liberal legislature and out of control courts that have sought to undermine marriage.
It is the ultra-left legislature that passed AB 205, creating counterfeit marriage by another name. They did so in an obvious effort to get around Prop. 22, and the will of the people. This measure gave all the rights and benefits of marriage to domestic partners. And it was signed into law by a desperate Governor Gray Davis who was trying to shore up his liberal base to stave off being recalled.
In San Francisco Judge Kramer ruled that AB 205 created an institution so like marriage, that there was no rational reason not to legalize same-sex marriage. On the other hand, Jude McMaster in Sacramento ruled that AB 205 did not make domestic partnerships significantly like marriage, therefore it doesn’t violate Prop. 22 and doesn’t need to go before the voters. HOW CAN BOTH OF THESE AGRUEMENTS BE TRUE?! In a rational and logical court system they couldn’t.
Dan Walters is however, right on one point.
Gay marriage is likely to be a burning political issue for years to come - unless, of course, the Supreme Court does the unexpected.
_________________________
Dan Walters Can be reached via email at dwalters@sacbee.com or by phone at (916) 321-1195. I encourage you to let him know what you thought of his “rational and logical” analysis of those of us to support traditional marriage.
Craig DeLuz
Visit The Home of Uncommon Sense...
www.craigdeluz.com
No comments:
Post a Comment