Defenders of marriage shouldn't be conned by President-elect Obama's selection of evangelical pastor Rick Warren to deliver the invocation at the inauguration. Although Obama claims to be against same-sex marriage, his opposition to California's Proposition 8--which overturned the California supreme court's invention of a state constitutional right to same-sex marriage--shows that he is content to acquiesce in judicial imposition of same-sex marriage. Further, it's a safe bet that Obama's appointees to the Supreme Court will support the invention of a federal constitutional right to same-sex marriage. (As illustrations, consider the records of two of the leading contenders for appointment, Harold Koh and Deval Patrick.)
Glad to see you've let the excesses of the primary wars fade into history. I can't speak for the rest of DD, but I'm certainly looking forward to much more of The engels' deep insights on the transition & every aspect of the exciting new Obama administration.
In response to the words of Shaiman, Egan, Whitty and numerous individuals who contacted the theatre company, Eckern released an apology and has donated $1,000 to the Human Rights Campaign, which works to achieve equality for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender Americans.
"I understand that my choice of supporting Proposition 8 has been the cause of many hurt feelings maybe even betrayal. It was not my intent. I honestly had no idea that this would be the reaction. I chose to act upon my belief that the traditional definition of marriage should be preserved. I support each individual to have rights and access and I understood that in California domestic partnerships come with the same rights that come with marriage," Eckern said in a statement.
He continued, "I definitely do not support any message or treatment of others that is hateful or instills fear. This is a highly emotional issue. I have now had many conversations with friends and colleagues and I now have a better idea of what the discrimination issues are, how deeply felt these issues are and I am deeply saddened that my acting upon my religious convictions has been devastating to those I love and admire... I am deeply sorry for any harm or injury I have caused."
If this guy didn't register how discriminatory this is, he's a bloody idiot. But it also speaks to a no campaign that failed to explain just what the amendment meant to those affected. If the Artistic Director of the California Music Theatre (and Circus!) didn't "get it" are we really surprised that it didn't register as ugly discrimination to some of the older voters?