I have to admit that I have not been paying much attention to the upcoming election. The whole thing sickens me a bit, and I am turned off by the political melodrama, especially now that the economy appears to be tanking. Blech.
While I don't yet know if I will throw in my vote for presidential candidate A or B -- I am hard pressed to think it will matter very much either way -- I was recently reminded that my vote has the power to impact state politics more significantly.
In 2000, Proposition 22 was passed by 61% of voters. While California's constitution had been changed in 1977 to define marriage in California as a union between a man and a woman, Prop 22 went further and denied that same-sex marriages, performed legally in other jurisdictions, be held valid in California. Man. Woman. Period.
Maybe my view of the state is clouded by too many years living in San Francisco, but it is hard for me to believe that 61% of California's residents would agree that same-sex partners should be denied the rights of their legal commitment to one another. It seems clear that this proposition's passage was based largely on a certain demographic mobilizing and voting.
Over the last eight years, gay marriage has been embroiled in much political controversy. There have been lawsuits and appeals and legal and illegal marriages in San Francisco and elsewhere. Currently, because of an appeal to the State Supreme Court this year, gay marriage is legal in California. Proposition 8 aims to change the constitution to make it illegal again.
Proposition 8 will get me to the voting booth on November 4th. Here's my attempt at mobilizing a different group of voters than the ones that had their way in 2000. The economy may be scary. Gas prices may be too high, and home prices too low, but I am doubtful that any candidate chosen this November will change that. There is, however, a chance for us to make a difference locally. There's chance for us to minimize manipulation of our state's constitution. There's a chance for us to earn our reputation as "free-thinking," "liberty-minded" Californians. Why the hell should someone's sex organs determine whether he or she should be allowed to enter into a legal contract with another person? Why are some people so concerned with what other people do in their bedrooms and with whom they choose to build a family? Isn't it those same people who are running around crying about sex out of wedlock and unwed mothers? Wouldn't they rather children be raised inside a loving, two parent home? What's the big deal about "slot A or tab B"? I believe in equal rights, and I will vote accordingly.
So I whine and balk at the gross and ridiculous injustices in this country: it is illegal to buy a vibrator in Texas; porn actresses are legally forbidden to show their nipples at porn conventions in the United States. I am outraged and amazed and flabbergasted that such things could happen in this day and age. And then I hear the international news. Holy crap!
On January 13, 2008, four men in Cairo were convicted under Egyptian Article 9(c) of law 10/1961 of the “habitual practice of debauchery.” According to Amnesty International, this law exists to “penalize consensual homosexual conduct.”
These latest convictions are part of a larger Egyptian crackdown on men suspected of being HIV-positive. Over the course of the last five months, the Egyptian government has subjected some of its citizens to forced anal examinations to “prove” their homosexual behavior. Others were made to take HIV tests against their will and chained to hospital beds when their results came back positive. Some of the suspects (the men suspected of having the “wrong” kind of sex) were, according to their lawyers, beaten by police when they refused to sign statements the police had written for them. According to Amnesty International, a prosecutor told one of the men who had tested positive, “People like you should be burnt alive. You do not deserve to live.”
Is it still wrong that I can’t buy a Pearl Rabbit in Texas? Hell yes! That said, my relative sexual freedom, when juxtaposed with the gross injustices that human beings suffer in other parts of the world, makes my complaints seem like trifle. I am disgusted that what someone does in the privacy of his or her own home with a consenting partner (or two, or seventeen) can result in abuse by the government and time in jail. Although the men appealed, on February 2, 2008, the January 13, ruling was upheld. Four men who may have put their penises in a spot or two not approved by the government, are faced with year-long prison sentences. As if the sexual discrimination, forced HIV testing, and anal probes weren’t enough! Talk about the government being a pain the ass!
