Frank Rich can be the Best Man at my Marriage

(OKLAHOMA CITY) As the time draws near for the final arguments of Perry v. Schwarzenegger, aka the Prop 8 trial , we'll come to the close of chapterfour in the ongoing saga of America's love-hate relationship with diversity, be it based on skin color, gender, or sexual orientation.

*

I've numbered this as chapterfour because there've beenthree previous chapters in our gay/lesbian history that have been decided by the United States Supreme Court, the first one going against us, with the subsequent two keeping us in the game.

Bowers v. Hardwick (1986) ruled 5-4 against us,claiming " ... a right to engage in such conduct is 'deeply rooted in this Nation's history and tradition' or 'implicit in the concept of ordered liberty' is, at best, facetious." ( http://tinyurl.com/jus3e )

*

Romer v. Evans (1996) reared its ugly facein an attemptto further keep gay citizens away from full inclusion in the political and social fabric of the country. In a 6-3 ruling for us, Justice Kennedy wrote that thepassage of Colorado's Amendment 2 disallowing any recognition of gay people under the laws of Colorado was unconstitutional.

*

He wrote in the majority opinion that "laws of the kind now before us raise the inevitable inference that the disadvantage imposed is born of animosity toward the class of persons affected." The Court implied that the passage of Amendment 2 was born of a "bare...desire to harm a politically unpopular group". ( http://tinyurl.com/49m9er )

*

Turning the page we get to the decisionstriking downsodomy laws with the Supreme Court's decisionin Lawrence v. Texas (2003) thathelped immensely in removing the uncharged felon status every gay man and woman carried with them as these laws were selectively enforced to intimidate us in our public and private lives. ( http://tinyurl.com/br2tj)

*

The Prop 8 ruling, regardless of whichgay or homo-hatingparty it favors, will eventually make its way to the Supreme Court where for many yearsthe decisions have been 5-4with the 5 going mostlytothe regressive sides of the arguments, bethey social justice or economic equality questions.

*

I was tickled pink when Olson and Boies took up the clarion call from the Equal Rights Foundation (equalrightsfoundation.org )tomake a full court argument on our behalf for civil rights in marriage. Even as the purpose of thetrial has been to reverse the unconscionable passage of California's Prop 8 that disallowssame gender marriage after a favorable California Supreme Court ruling, there's no doubt in my mind that the extensive media coverage and social conversation of thenearly four-year history of this latest action to remove gay/lesbiandiscriminationhas been effective in diluting the homo-hating potions and superstitious invectives thrown at us.The echos of previous court decisions that have been heardacross the countrywill prove too powerful for the cobwebs of prejudice and animosity to resist.

*

Frank Rich, op/ed columnist for the New York Times, has written an optimistic essay (linked below) thatI recommend foranyone down in the dumps over our on-again/off-again progress for civil equality.Mr. Rich writes thatapproval of same-gender marriage is higher nowthan the approval for inter-racial marriage a year after it wassupported by a Supreme Court ruling in 1967, I thinkthanksto the vastly easier modes of communication now available with social networking and the Internet.

*

If Limbaugh can have Elton John sing at his fourth marriage can my first marriage be far behind?

*