THE two sides in the same-sex marriage dispute have finally found something to agree on - that I'm a biased blockhead. Pleasing nobody
on same-sex marriageSupporters of homosexual marriage have been after me since I wrote a few weeks ago that there is no established civil right to marry partners of the same sex unless the U.S. Supreme Court says there is. Until then, I pointed out, voters and legislators are free to override state Supreme Court rulings allowing it.
This drew megabytes of e-mail from advocates of same-sex marriage - mostly on the mainland - vilifying my "right-wing rhetoric."
"You are a bigot. Live with it," rebuked one.
"Perhaps Mr. Shapiro should try moving to Russia . . . oops, I forgot, fascism is out there," said another.
Then my favorite - a spam attack from more than 50 people forwarding the same message. It said: "I suggest that you familiarize himself with the established tradition of the courts in the advancement of civil rights."
Himself will ponder that. Meantime, theirselves should try writing their own material.
The column made me friends among opponents of same-sex marriage, who urged me to keep after "those that wish to defile marriage, disobey God and wreak havoc on society."
Then my new buddies turned on me over our series last week about domestic partnerships in Denmark. One accused me of plotting to foist a gay agenda on a helpless public. "We don't care what's going on in Denmark," he thundered.
When a reporter and editor pitched the series, I embraced it enthusiastically. Same-sex marriage is shaping up as a big issue in the Legislature again this year and, if legislators don't resolve it, gay marriage likely will be imposed by the courts. It seemed instructive to look at the impact in the country that comes closest to legal same-sex marriage.
When did we become so self-righteous that we don't want to even look at relevant information from all quarters?
The gay and lesbian couples we profiled touched some and repulsed others, depending on the biases they brought to the issue. That the series was fair is shown by the fact that both sides are using information from it to support their cases.
Advocates of gay marriage say it showed that the same-sex partnerships in Denmark have not led to the social and economic disruption predicted by opponents there and here.
Opponents say the series showed that Denmark does not allow homosexuals full marriage rights. Its partnerships are far less than what the Hawaii Supreme Court would impose and fall short of what already is allowed here on adoption rights. If the most liberal country in the world doesn't allow homosexuals full marriage rights, why should we?
I wish the homophobes would get their Bibles out of my face. If there's a God, we're all Her children. And I wish the upscale yuppie homosexuals I've been hearing from would stop flattering themselves and insulting history by likening themselves to black slaves and their descendants as an oppressed minority.
Just when I thought sanity had left us, Scott Makuakane gave me hope. He wrote: "It seems that our community should be big enough to tolerate differing private sexual behaviors involving competent, consenting adults without being compelled by the government - as a result of either the activism of an unelected branch or the 'inactivism' of an elected branch - to endorse behaviors that most of our people would not otherwise endorse."
Sounds like a plan.
