Why oppose Ref 71?

As our society investigates possible moon colonies, looks for water on Mars, and designs cars that run on corn oil, some people still can’t let go of irrational prejudice against other humans.

These prejudices have been more prevalent than ever as voters contemplated, and then approved Referendum 71, to allow domestic partnerships for same-sex couples and give them essentially the same rights as married couples.

While King county voters approved the bill almost 2 to 1, more rural eastern Washington stood predominantly opposed to it. As a presumably biased resident of King county myself, I can’t help but wonder about the thinking behind denying rights to people based on their sexual orientation.

The rights that were in question involve things like inheritances to spouses, attending to a partner’s affairs in the event of death or illness, or even just being allowed, by law, to be at their bedside in the hospital.

One of the largest campaigns against Ref. 71 is operated by a group called Protect Marriage Washington (PMW). In one campaign video, they talk about supporting “love” and “family,” and purport “facts” like “few homosexual relationships last longer than two years.” This “fact” in particular raised the hairs on my back and set off my journalist alarm that told me to dig deeper. When I followed their source back to the Family Research Council (FRC) website (a decidedly conservative, christian group based on my observations) however, I found some problems with their statistics.

Firstly, many gay rights activists defend against the argument that they have shorter relationships by pointing to current heterosexual marriage statistics. But before I even get to those, the FRC website handily discredits that defense by pointing to marriage statistics from 20-plus years ago. Using statistics based on marriages that began in the 1960s, ‘70s and ‘80s, they show that at least 70 percent of hetero marriages last 10 years or more. With information that old, this argument can hardly hold any weight. Current trends reported by the U.S. Census Bureau show that fewer couples are even getting married, which would suggest that statistics about longevity may be less accurate. And what does this have to do with giving same-sex couples the same rights as others? PMW says they’re “protecting the sanctity of marriage,” and even “the children.”

But the PMW campaign doesn’t stop there. In the same video, they go on to say that HIV/AIDS and suicide rates are higher among homosexuals. I have heard these kinds of statistics before, and my first thought is: wouldn’t a group that is historically marginalized, oppressed and ridiculed, for what to them amounts to their very nature, have a statistically higher suicide rate? So they have it a little rough, I get it, they don’t fit in, and in adolescence (the group that was surveyed to provide their stats contained only adolescents) they have a higher suicide rate. I would bet that other outcast groups have similarly high rates of suicide and depression. And once again I can’t seem to see how this would inhibit same-sex couples from enjoying the same rights as straight folk. In fact, I think this argument defeats itself; if gay people were treated equally by everyone, then perhaps these alarming statistics would fall dramatically.

Religious beliefs are also a big part of the argument against same-sex unions. Religious people point to the fact that homosexuals are deemed evil by some interpretations of the bible, or simply excluded from other interpretations. Articles on the PMW website, which, I should point out, have no authors listed (no doubt to avoid the same type of discrimination that same-sex couples face), report that same-sex unions pose a threat to religious liberties “for those who still believe that marriage...is between a man and a woman.” However, as the article drones on about traditional considerations and problems with child-rearing, they fail to pinpoint what these threats are. In one video of a politician (somehow unnamed throughout the video) I found, he said that rights are given by God, and any rights given by mankind are actually only privileges. Well, even if you don’t believe that same-sex couples are given the same rights as hetero folks, what’s wrong with giving them the privileges then?

Now, those who signed the petition that actually brought Ref. 71 to the ballot, since the bill allowing rights to same-sex couples was already signed into law on May 18 of this year, have asked the Supreme Court to prevent the release of their personal information “because of the ongoing threats, harassment, and intimidation supporters of traditional marriage are subject to.” Wait just a minute, this is exactly what those people have been doing to gay people for decades.

Most people I talk to about this feel like I do, that same-sex couples are no different than any other couple and why in the hell should they be denied the same rights? But 48 percent of Washington voters don’t feel that way, in fact, most of them probably feel that these people threaten them, their children and their good ol’ American way of life.

Despite all the misrepresented surveys, uneven statistics, or irrational religious arguments, I still can’t see any good reason to withhold these basic rights from those who choose a partner of the same sex. The fact is, they just aren’t that much different from you, me or anyone else.

The Duwamish and their tribulations

Just saw a presentation at SCC on the Duwamish tribe and some of their history. Here's a quick summary:

They occupied much of the greater Seattle area originally, from Des Moines to Everett, and from Issaquah to Elliott Bay. They greeted early white explorers and, later, settlers, but eventually were deemed to be taking up too much space. When Seattle began organizing, one of the first ordinances set forth in 1865, number five, to be exact, called for the "removal of the indians." This included not being allowed in the city past dark (despite being employed in the city in factories and such), and later led to the government ordering their longhouses burned. Many tribesmen refused to cooperate and suffered forced removal, the burning of their personal homes, and some were even shot.

As they were forced out of the city, many went back to their tribal villages along the Duwamish and Black Rivers. This proved futile, however, as progress continued. The construction of the Ballard Locks led to a 20-foot drop in the level of Lake Washington, which dried up the Black River, an historical home to the Duwamish tribe. Making things worse, there was great pressure to straighten the Duwamish River to give shipping traffic easier access. The effects of this were felt by the few stragglers and at least one couple starved to death one winter as they tried to maintain their lives on the riverbanks.

The tribe is still fighting for recognition by the government today, even though they won it under the Clinton administration, only to be overturned by the Bush administration.

Good presentation, very insightful, and a typical story of the Native American; courted, befriended, taken advantage of and then betrayed completely.

News Meetings

News meetings leave me tired and hungry. The stories are late, as usual, and yet somehow, the paper will come out on time again. My box will fill up by Wednesday night and I'll work long and hard to get it all cleaned up and ready to print. As if by magic, it will all come together and form a good paper by Thursday night.

But I'm still hungry and tired. So I guess I should just get something to eat, write a couple of pieces and call it a night. Ciao'