Anti-gay amendment shameful discrimination
Hey savvy news reader! Thanks for choosing local.
You are now reading
1 of 3 free articles.
Editor,
Montana could learn something from Utah. Although both states passed similar anti-gay marriage amendments, Utah’s is falling off the cliff early. A recent federal court ruling overturned its initiative as unconstitutional. Not alone, numerous other states have similar court rulings or attorneys general who concede the gay marriage debate is over.
Utah is in a challenging position as it faces the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals in April. In deep denial, states originally presented similar arguments in favor of their amendments ranging from irrational to absurd — arguments Utah is now obligated to defend.
Examples included threats to child rearing, marriage sanctity, responsible procreation or, astonishingly, risks of a drop in birth rate and “inevitable” polygamy. Such amendments are solutions in search of a problem. Over the past decade, the sanctity of exactly how many marriages were jeopardized — or birth rates plummeted — in states where a small number of gays have been able to wed?
Both amendments were supported by large majorities. But the right of majority rule always yields minorities who have rights, too. “Liberty” is freedom from oppression by a heavy-handed majority.
Many Montanans perceive the only Constitutional amendment that matters is the 2nd. But try the 5th and 14th with their mandates of “equal protection” and “due process.” Recent court decisions have been based on one or both, as states are not free to preempt the Constitution.
Montanans should get real. Our anti-gay amendment was nothing more than a veiled effort to empower bigotry with the force of law — ergo the heavy-handed majority. Driven not by morality but ignorance and fear, good people betrayed family members, neighbors, colleagues and friends who, through no fault of their own, were hard-wired to be gay.
A faulty enterprise from the outset, Montana can no longer claim a compelling interest in enforcing such shameful discrimination.
Bill Bennington
Polson
