Before I begin, I want to state that the following post is not a challenge. It is a request.
And although it is an open letter addressed to Fitz (aka, Mr. "proponents of marriage equality are enemies of America") it is a message to anyone in favor of a constitutional amendment banning gay people from marriage.
You have previously bragged to your fellow anti-gay bloggers regarding your efforts in Florida to amend the state constitution to ban gay people from marriage; specifically, you described how you encouraged your friends living in the state to collect signatures for the petition that would put the marriage amendment on the ballot. You then ended with a joke to the effect of what a "good" friend you are for pestering your Floridian friends.
Oh wait. I'm not laughing. I'm too busy being disgusted at the world that you and your cohorts help to create every day.
Familiarize yourself with what happened to this family. The floor is now yours to justify your actions in the face of the very real human pain that this family has suffered due to bigoted people like you- people who have no qualms with marriage amendments that keep some states "anti-gay" and keep same-sex couples legal strangers with respect to each other.
No, really. Go ahead. (1) Tell us all if and why you, an alleged attorney, are in favor of a legal system that does not allow a woman to spend her last dying moments with her partner of 18 years. See, those are the consequences of the actions of people like you. Because even though Florida does not yet have a marriage amendment, it has DOMA (of course) and a state law banning gay people from marriage- which by themselves, led to a denial of a woman's basic right to visit her partner in the hospital and receive her partner's death certificate. Do you think about minute details like that, Fitz?
And yet, that isn't enough for you. In your Quixotic zeal to "save the family," you are in favor of making discrimination based on sexual orientation a permanent fixture of the legal system. The Florida marriage amendment will ban recognition on any form of union that is not between a man and woman who have been legally married. In the name of "saving families," you will in reality only be harming families.
And (2), if you can at least concede (thanks) that two people who have raised a family and love each other, perhaps the same way you and your wife (if you have one) love each other, should have the basic right of hospital visitation and receipt of death certificates that you do with your spouse, how would you restrict the marriage amendment accordingly? Specifically, if you, Fitz, would grant permission for same-sex partners to be reciprocal beneficiaries (thanks), what tangible steps are you taking to ensure that same-sex couples will still be able to have such benefits even if they can't get married? Are you "brow-beating" your buddies to sign petitions allowing this, or do you just "say" you're in favor of benefits (but not marriage) for same-sex couples and call it a day?
Because right now, the amendment is worded pretty broadly to render null any marriage-like or "equivalent" relationship which, of course, means domestic partnerships and civil unions and the corresponding benefits that go along with these marriage-like separate and unequal institutions. Surely you have thought about these details. Our side certainly has. But then again, we face these issues all the time. Your side, perhaps, is more concerned with making the abstract, psychic predictions of Great Harm to the Family than worrying about bothersome details like reality.
Or, perhaps I've given you credit where none is due. (3) Do you believe that in order to save the family, we must pass laws to ensure that gay couples have zero rights that are similar to the rights that husbands and wives have?
I have been working from the assumption that you do not believe that society will crumble if one woman is allowed to visit her partner in the hospital.
But maybe you do.
So, I guess this is all sort of a long-winded way of saying I want you to look other human beings in the eye, to look at real human pain, and tell people that they do not have the same rights, the same human dignity, that you do. So (4) Can you do that?
Ultimately, once more people begin to realize that the so-called marriage defense movement is mass gay-baiting that does anything but save families, situations such as these will be the downfall of your side.
Most Americans are good people, Fitz. That's why it's only a matter of time before they become disgusted with what marriage defense really is.
P.S.- Don't bring your Opine buddies here for a bait and switch gang-bang of bigotry. Live and uncensored, the floor is yours and yours alone.