The Democratic Process Works
The Vermont legislature has overridden the governor’s veto and legalized gay marriage in the state. This action may prove what I was saying earlier — that democratic processes of persuasion and reform may, while frustrating and halting, be more effective in securing gay rights than court victories.
Court victories have the effect of mobilizing opposition at the same time that the take-no-prisoners nature of legal rhetoric tends to alienate potential allies among moderates and persuadable opponents. This process can be clearly seen in backlashes against gay marriage rulings in Hawaii, Massachusetts, and California. Time will tell if Iowa will follow the pattern, but it seems likely that it too will suffer a lengthy and divisive political war over constitutional amendments and ballot initiatives.
Vermont legalized civil unions a long time ago. This served as a demonstration to skeptics that same-sex partnerships were in no way a threat to traditional marriages. Today, the fruits of this more moderate and deliberate process become apparent with a legislative supermajority that will prove much harder for anti-gay activists to break. Vermont’s legislative path to gay rights should serve as the model rather than the pursuit of Pyrrhic court victories.
This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.
Comments are closed.
PoliGazette Comments Policy
PoliGazette encourages comments from all viewpoints, especially those that disagree.
Comments submitted must, however, adhere to the following standards. Comments that violate
these standards may be edited or deleted without notice at the sole discretion of the editors.
Commenters who repeatedly or egregiously violate these standards or who attempt to argue
publicly with editors regarding the comments policy may be banned from commenting further.
(1) Comments should address the substantive content of the post. Comments that repeatedly
or blatantly misrepresent the content of the post or of others' comments are not welcome. Comments that
respond to something other than which the contributor or commenter may have said are irrelevant and should
not be posted.
(2) Comments should avoid vulgarity as well as racial, ethnic, religious, or sexual bigotry.
(3) Comments should not personally attack the character, personal integrity, or professional
reputation of any PoliGazette contributor or of other commenters.
(4) Comments should reflect the contributions of the commenters themselves and should not
include extensive cut-and-paste reproductions of others' words except insofar as necessary to supplement
the commenter's own arguments. Link spam, trackback spam, and propaganda spam will be instantly deleted.
(5) Public figures are considered open to all substantive criticism of their policies and statements.
Comments that present objectively false factual information about public figures (i.e. "Obama is a Muslim") or
that attack public figures by attacking their families are not welcome. Comments that merely repeat
slogans for or against a candidate without engaging in substantive comment are not welcome.
Questions or challenges to these policies or their application should be directed to the editors
by email only.
The victory through the legislature is definitely a sweeter victory than a Court victory– when it works. Vermont is the first of hopefully many states to enact same-sex marriage through the legislative process. However, we must continue our effort on ALL fronts. Some states will be won through the legislatures, others through the courts. It’s the nature of the beast, and I think both have their own advantages. The nice thing about winning in Court is the declaration that we are ENTITLED to our right to marry rather than permitted to marry, which is what a legislative victory is. Being entitled as well as permitted is the best of both worlds.
Good argument, Jason. If this is what the people of Vermont, so be it. Those who disagree strongly are free to move elsewhere. Similarly, citizens of other states should be free to set their own standards.
Before long they may have to move out of the US altogether, if that is such a contestable point. Whether by the acceptable but flawed Iowa method or the superior Vermont process, gay people are going to be equal.
I’m fully supporting gay marriage, but personally I feel the one undefined area is does the act of joining two persons together belong in a Church in front of your God or is it just another act like getting a drivers license. Although where you see a victory in Court as also a good thing I see the lack of ability to change the law in the manner the Constitution allows and I do not recognize the Courts authority in such a manner.