Friday, November 7, 2008

from the California NAACP

Here is an excerpt from the California NAACP's statement in support of same-sex marriage. The statement was about a resolution where the California chapter supported the national organization to mobilize in favor of same-sex marriage. I think this statement also deals very well with the issue of religious/moral view vs. legal concerns.

"According to the 2000 Census, there are over 600,000 same sex couples in the United States of which, 85,000 include at least one African American partner. Of that number more than 3,000 Black couples in the Los Angeles area and another 2,100 in the San Francisco, Oakland, and San Jose area self-identified as same-sex unmarried partners. These people are working, buying homes, paying taxes and, yes, raising families. Many have served their country in the military, and work in their communities as volunteers. I do know that many of the gay people I’ve spoken to are also loving parents and law abiding citizens.
The question of religion beliefs is also raised frequently. There is a separation between civil law and religious doctrine. Religious doctrine is sacred and cannot be legislated. AB 19 makes that point because no clergy is required to perform same sex marriages. Justices of the Peace, judges, legislators, ship captains and others in the secular world will perform civil marriages for gay couples.
While our freedom from slavery was a moral issue we did not win it on moral grounds but on legal interpretation of the US Constitution. The VII Amendment of the Constitution clearly states “To enforce the constitutional right to vote, to confer jurisdiction upon the district courts of the United States to provide injunctive relief against discrimination in public accommodations ….” It was not about the immorality of institutionalized discrimination and the denial of basic civil rights, but because these acts violated the United States Constitution, thus the term “Civil Rights."
by Alice Huffman, from "Why We Support AB 19, The Religious Freedom and Civil Marriage Protection Act

No comments: