Why Conservatives Should Have Supported Maine Gay Marriage « Kevin Tracy

Why Conservatives Should Have Supported Maine Gay Marriage

Posted By Travis Gearhart at 8:20 pm on November 7, 2009

gay marriage

The political divide over the issue of gay marriage is…disheartening, to say the least. As a conservative who really doesn’t take offense or particularly care about this issue, I find myself talking about gay marriage both on my show and in political conversation much more often than I feel I should or even care to. First of all, I’m in favor of gay marriage: IF it is passed on a state by state level. My reasoning, you ask? While I certainly don’t want to equate homosexuality to sexual exploitation of minors, the sad fact is that if an amendment is added to the constitution, groups like the North American Man Boy Love Association (more commonly referred to as NAMBLA) will try everything they can to secure their own rights by using the gay marriage amendment as a precedent. If you don’t believe me, all you have to do is use Roe v. Wade as a case study. However you feel about abortion, nothing in the Constitution specifies one way or the other the founding fathers’ beliefs on the subject. Therefore, the lawyers literally threw every amendment at the Supreme Court until one stuck, and somehow the Supreme Court found that our freedom of speech is in the same category as abortion. The lawyers admit to this fact, and the statements are found in Roe V. Wade: The Abortion Rights Controversy in American History (Landmark Law Cases and American Society) by N. E. H. Hull and Peter Charles Hoffer. Now, I know what you’re thinking: Come on, Travis! That’ll never happen! And perhaps it wouldn’t immediately, or even in the future. However by opening that Pandora’s Box just a hair, I worry about a future where a 40 year old man can have a sexual relationship with a 13 year old boy, and with lawyers getting better and better at manipulating the law I don’t want that box opened at all.

                However, I am straying from my thesis. Last week, Maine had the opportunity to be the first state to pass gay marriage at the ballot box. The initiative lost, however narrowly, and anti-gay marriage conservatives rejoiced. I don’t know off hand the amount of money that was raised to campaign against this initiative, but I can imagine it was substantial. While religious conservatives who don’t believe in gay marriage as a matter of faith were celebrating, more moderate conservatives (at least on this subject) are now becoming worried. If some states, especially the more liberal ones like Maine and Vermont, don’t pass this, we may see politicians trying to jam legislature through on a national level not only to appease gay rights groups and other liberals, but because they truly feel that they are doing the right thing. If history is anything else, it is an example of what a government with one party in the majority, whether it’s Democrat or Republican, will do. When the federal income tax was struck down by the Supreme Court with a 5-4 decision, the states simply added the Sixteenth Amendment to the Constitution in 1913 in order to impose the tax.  Democrats are less likely to believe in states’ rights as an answer, and with a liberal Democratic majority I don’t foresee too many more failed initiatives before they decide to go around the Supreme Court by means of an amendment.

                I understand the view of some religious people that gay marriage is wrong, and I respect that view even if I disagree with it. I don’t consider these people bigots, and by all means it is their right to voice their own concerns. But to those conservative and libertarian folks out there that share my own viewpoint (this includes Dick Cheney, who has a lesbian daughter), I hope that you will all be a little more vocal the next time that a ballot initiative like this comes around. And more than that, I hope you all realize the consequences of voting against initiatives you claim to support just to make a point.

Originally written for the IUN Phoenix.

7 Comments »

  1. Pingback by Tweets that mention Why Conservatives Should Have Supported Maine Gay Marriage | Kevin Tracy -- Topsy.com on November 8, 2009

    [...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Axel Hotels and Mike Smith , Mike Smith . Mike Smith said: Why Conservatives Should Have Supported Maine Gay Marriage | Kevin … http://tinyurl.com/ya9ypbr [...]

  2. Comment by Clay Barham on November 8, 2009

    My ancestry dates back to 19th century Maine where libertarian Democrats were the ones inheriting the Pilgrim’s view of individual freedom and responsibility, soon to start to fall under the Whigs, my family, to Republican interventionists up to the “moderates” like Dole and McCain, and now the Rousseau and Marx led Democrats and liberal republicans (see THE CHANGING FACE OF DEMOCRATS on Amazon and claysamerica.com) who say community interests are more important than are individual interests, the latter having given America its free market and great prosperity. So, yes, why not interfere with personal responsibility and vote for how we label, not our Creator, individual anatomy for the feel-good generation who have rejected responsibility.

  3. Comment by Travis Gearhart on November 8, 2009

    I’m not sure you understood the point of the post, clay. I’m not saying that if you are personally against it, that you should vote in favor of it. Thats fine and dandy, your opinion, your vote…great. However, in order to soften their stance, many say that they are in favor of gay marriage but then don’t follow up at the polls or speak up when it doesn’t pass. That, to me, is hypocrisy. I hate to paraphrase Beck here, but I’m ganna: Say what you mean and mean what you say.

  4. Comment by briand on November 8, 2009

    A well written piece Travis. I would prefer to see states revoke all laws concerning marriage. Then churches will have the right to bless the definition of marriage that they see fit, and not feel the danger of loosing their tax exempt status. Which is a reality seeing that ministers are agents of the state as well as God when they pronounce marriages. If couples would like to make their marriage a legaly binding obligation then they can draw up contracts. It would seem that many people take more time picking out a house or car than considering what marriage is. In much of western Europe the institution of marriage is disapearing, people just live together. To expand the fanchise to homosexual couples may be more likely to save it. It insures that the institution has a greater place in our culture rather than a lesser.

  5. Comment by Travis Gearhart on November 9, 2009

    I’m actually in favor of just that, as well, however there hasn’t been much momentum for such an idea and so the next best thing for me is keeping gay marriage a state issue.

  6. Comment by CB on November 10, 2009

    I’m actually in favor of just that, as well, however there hasn’t been much momentum for such an idea and so the next best thing for me is keeping gay marriage a state issue.

  7. Comment by Travis Gearhart on November 11, 2009

    Hey Kevin, some spam managed to leak through (see up one comment). Just lettin’ ya know.

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL

Leave a comment

Facebook YouTube My Space Flickr Twitter Zannel Digg KTracy.com RSS Feed

Powered by WordPress