Settling for Second Best... or NOT!

In the Advocate essay, Rosen compared gay marriage to “a noisy red Ferrari speeding down quiet Main Street. . . there is no question that this issue played some role in the overall mood of the country, and it is just not possible to deny so many their instincts.”

“The strategy has to change,” she wrote. “Let’s stop looking a gift horse in the mouth. If there are ways to get gay and lesbian couples some access to benefits now, we ought to be more aggressive in pursuing them.”

Her statements have worried other longtime activists, however.

“Everybody else has a Ferrari,” said Fred Kuhr, editor of In Newsweekly, New England’s largest gay newspaper. “I have money for a red Ferrari, but the dealer doesn’t want to sell it to me. Why? Because I’m gay. I don’t think it makes much sense for the activist voices to be saying, ‘OK, Bush won, and we have this feeling that the anti-gay right is in control, so we‘ll scale back our goals.’”

Vin McCarthy, who founded HRC in New England, said he was worried HRC, which lobbies on Capitol Hill, chose political pragmatism over ideals in ousting Jacques.

“If we lose, let us lose the whole war,” he said. “If Hilary tries to pull the movement back to civil unions, there will be a revolution.” (source)

I couldn’t agree more with Vin McCarthy. If we lose, let us lose the whole war. We have nothing now. I am, at this time, wondering if I should call HRC and cancel the monthly payment I make to them each month. It seems that they are now talking about civil unions, and are entertaining talk that the gay community should settle for something less than marriage.

Personally, I would rather have what I have now (nothing), than settle for a watered down version of marriage. That is degrading to our marriage. HRC changed it’s strategy after the November elections when they fired Cheryl Jacques as head of HRC.

The abrupt resignation of Jacques, head of the nation’s largest gay and lesbian advocacy group for just 11 months, unfolded a heated debate in the broader gay rights movement, which has seen its dramatic victory of legalized gay marriage in Massachusetts in May fuel a backlash that led 11 states to ban gay marriage in November.

When Jacques resigned Nov. 30, she and the HRC board released a joint statement citing “a difference in management philosophy.”

But friends of Jacques, a former Massachusetts senator, have said the difference was more substantive. Jacques was a casualty of the debate over whether the gay community should lower its sights, said her friend and former colleague Scott Harshbarger, who has spoken with Jacques since her departure.

“She made the decision that the most important issue for HRC was marriage,” said Harshbarger, former Massachusetts attorney general. “It is what HRC is all about. She had every right to think that would be accepted by the board. Then they take action to eliminate [her] tenure. . . .I’m afraid all the wrong lessons got learned by HRC. To walk away because you interpret the results of an election to mean [marriage] is not a winner for the community you represent is very sad and misguided, and Cheryl was a victim of that internal power play.” (source)

I think the truly sad thing in this post-election time is that, even the gay organizations in this country are all over the place in what we should ask for. Some, like HRC seem to be pulling back to ask for less than marriage. They say we should push for some rights, and work on the rest later. I’ll tell you what will happen. If we settle for less, that will send a huge message to all those people who don’t want us to ever see marriage. It will tell them that we will concede. It will tell them that we truly are second best. And, they would be right. If we go down this road of settling for what we can get now, we will never see marriage as a reality for gay couples. That’s my prediction.

I guess I can’t say it any better than this:

The marriage license sits in a picture frame in the Bend dining room of Judy Jordet and Cat Finney, and their two sons.

It is a piece of paper, but it is so much more.

The partners of 14 years rushed to buy their license the first day Multnomah County started issuing them to same-sex couples. They exchanged vows on that rainy day in March, not wanting to risk losing what they knew was a fleeting opportunity.

Marriage isn’t just about solemnizing a relationship, Jordet said, but about gaining access to rights and protections that come with it. Legal rights. Hospital visitation rights. Parental rights.

“It was not about being rebellious,” she said. “It was about protecting our family. We have to protect our children.” (source)