IGF CultureWatch

IGF contributing author David Boaz, who wrote the book on libertarianism, provides an astute and provocative look at how anti-libertarian the government of Virginia was, is and likely will remain, in a new article posted at Reason Online.

As evidence of the state's century-long heritage of interfering with love and marriage, Boaz cites - among other examples - Virginia's former law barring mixed-race couples from marrying (only struck down by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1967) and its current fixation on nixing even private contractual relationships that might smack of gay unions. All of which adds up to, in Boaz's words, "an arrogant desire by the state to control private relationships." Old habits, apparently, die hard in the Old Dominion.

Microsoft is drawing fire for withdrawing support for proposed Washington state legislation that would ban discrimination against gays and lesbians in employment, housing and insurance. The company, which supported the bill last year, has changed is stance to neutral, citing conflicting views among its employees and shareholders. Others cite a boycott threat by a local religious rightist minister, whose Seattle congregation includes many company employees.

Microsoft was one of the first to provide domestic partner benefits, and has long included sexual orientation in its own anti-discrimination policy. Those internal policies will not change, and both chief executive Steve Ballmer and chairman Bill Gates say they personally support the bill. Nevertheless, the L.A. Gay & Lesbian Center called on the company to return a prize it received from the group in 2001.

The libertarian in me has always felt that the gay movement placed too much emphasis on anti-discrimination laws targeting the private sector, as opposed to fighting discrimination by the government, whose military gay ban creates exponentially more "job discrimination" against gays than the few hidebound private employers who might want to keep gays out. And I'm not sure shareholder-owned companies ought to take positions on social policy issues, thus becoming the targets of social-issue advocates on both sides (as, apparently, has happened to Microsoft).

But for several years now anti-discrimination laws have been the key item on the movement's political scorecards, and nothing is likely to change that. Given this dynamic, the company's flip-flop, even if only to a "neutral" position, can only seem like a loss to "the other side." So Microsoft -- whose exemplary internal policies would otherwise set it apart as a model for others -- has stumbled into a position where its likely to receive only scorn from both sides.

Update: Mr. Gates goes to Washington. I think he wanted to keep his lobbying activities focused on already controversial issues like opposing new immigration limits, and was caught offguard by the brouhaha over his firm's shift into "neutral" on the statewide gay rights bill (which failed in the state senate last week by one vote).

One of the first official acts of the Ratzinger papacy, as reported by the BBC:

The Vatican, under the new leadership of Pope Benedict XVI, has condemned a Spanish government bill allowing marriage between homosexuals.... A senior Vatican official described the bill - which is likely to become law within a few months - as iniquitous. He said Roman Catholic officials should be prepared to lose their jobs rather than co-operate with the law.

The fact that Spain will shortly not only allow gay couples to wed but also to adopt has particularly enraged the pontiff.

Julian Sanchez weighs in over at Reason's Hit & Run, and also comments on a Texas bill that seeks to ban gays from becoming foster parents (in the words of Texas state rep. Robert Talton, "if it was me I would rather [leave] kids in orphanages as such....At least they have a chance of learning the proper values"). A statement with which the Vatican would no doubt concur.

More Recent Postings
4/17/05 - 4/23/05

Not to be overlooked, Connecticut's Republican Gov. Jodi Rell has signed civil unions legislation for her state. "Today Governor Rell becomes the first governor in history to sign civil union legislation without being forced to do so by the courts," said a news release from the Log Cabin Republicans. Proponents of the broad domestic partnership bills passed in New Jersey and California may debate the point, but nevertheless the significance of a victory achieved through elected representatives sends a powerful message.

Governor Rell had signaled her support for civil unions by stating, "I don't believe in discrimination of any sort, and I want people to have equal rights and equal opportunities." Those are words too rarely heard within her party, at least with regards to gay people.

After a bit of reflection, it may be that worse (Ratzinger) may turn out to be, well, if not "better," at least the best of a lot of bad options. After all, it's not as if any of the leading candidates could have been expected to embrace a role for openly gay people in the Roman church. And a 78-year-old German characterized universally for his rigidity exerts a lot less charisma than a (relatively) younger, third-world, ground-breakingly black or Latino pope would.

According to Ratzinger's biographer John L. Allen Jr. (as quoted in the New York Times), "Having seen fascism in action, Ratzinger today believes that the best antidote to political totalitarianism is ecclesiastical totalitarianism," which won't sit well with the broad swath of American Catholics. Moreover, Ratzinger's frequent condemnations of "relativism" (the belief that other denominations and faiths lead equally to salvation) could eventually create a breach with those on the Protestant religious right, which is now having orgasms over his election (just when did conservative American Protestantism become so enamored of popery?).

Decidedly not part of the religious right, it was fun to see Rev. Frank T. Griswold, presiding bishop of the Episcopal Church USA, offer this "congratulatory" note to Ratzinger:

I offer my prayers for Pope Benedict XVI as he takes up the august responsibility of his office. I pray that the Holy Spirit will guide him in his words and his actions and that he may become a focus of unity and a minister of reconciliation in a church and a world in which faithfulness and truth wear many faces.

Take that, Ratzo.

More Recent Postings
4/17/05 - 4/23/05

A vile, vile selection, but no surprise. The former anti-aircraft gunner for the army of the Third Reich labels gay sexuality a tendency toward "intrinsic moral evil." And that's one of his kinder statements. Here's the Washington Post's capsule profile.

Given the mindless mass media's festival of popery over the last two weeks, let's see if they keep it up for a man who shares JPII's archly reactionary politics, but lacks his charisma.

A not-bad feature in the Times about gay Republicans and conservatives. A couple of interesting points: The number of gays who identify themselves as Republican is growing, "with gays saying that they want to influence a party that is (a) theirs and (b) politically ascendant"; and gay conservatives use a lexicon that conservative politicians understand. As Chris Barron of the Log Cabin Republicans notes, in many places "it's conservative voices - gay conservative voices - who can best lead a fight" against anti-gay discrimination.

Also of note: Martin Duberman, a leading gay academic and author, can't resist cracking that gays who support the administration (presumably speaking here of foreign policy) "are militaristic, they are jingoistic." That's it, Martin, keep broadcasting the message that the gay establishment is united with the Michael Moore/Move On wing of the Democratic left. That's the way to expand support for gay equality among red state Americans!

More Recent Postings
4/10/05 - 4/16/05

In Oregon, Democrats and moderate Republicans are being encouraged to create civil-union legislation following Thursday's state Supreme Court decision rejecting gay marriage (and nullifying nearly 3,000 marriage licenses issued to same-sex couples last year in Multnomah County). Senate Majority Leader Kate Brown said the court's silence on the constitutionality of marriage benefits for gays, "leaves the door wide open" for a civil unions law, which is supported by Gov. Ted Kulongoski.

In Connecticut, the state House approved a bill to provide same-sex couples with the same rights, benefits and obligations of married couples on Wednesday, but added an amendment that defines marriage as between a man and a woman (Connecticut has been one of only nine states that have not passed a Defense of Marriage Act limiting marriage to opposite-sex couples). Gov. M. Jodi Rell will likely sign the bill, although the Family Institute of Connecticut has declared that civil unions are same-sex marriage by another name.

Both these examples highlight continuing advances on the civil unions front via popularly elected state legislatures and governors, and continuing defeats when it comes to same-sex marriage - except in the nation's super-liberal districts. But when a few judges have ruled in favor of gay marriage, it's triggered renewed efforts to change state constitutions (and the U.S. Constitution) to prohibit this, and often sneaking in a constititional bar against civil unions as well.

If it hadn't been decided to make the perfect the enemy of the good, I believe we'd be seeing a civil unions groundswell, much to the chagrin of the religious right.

Update: In the comments area, Alan notes that even moderate, often Democratic-voting states such as Michigan and Ohio have passed amendments barring civil unions - a bad sign for those pushing the judicial strategy. He further observes:

As for comparing marriage suits with classic civil rights suits like Brown v Board of Ed, I think others have suggested that it's a matter of whether the country is near the "tipping point" on an issue, in which case judicial activism can supply a final thrust.

I'd submit that the country was ready to banish Jim Crow in the 1950s (even if the deep South wasn't), and thus Brown did not result in a federal constitutional amendment protecting segregation. But the country is nowhere near ready to embrace gay marriage, and so judicial activism may well result in a federal amendment (as it has already resulted in so many state amendments).

That's certainly the worst-case scenario, but we shouldn't dismiss the risk.

Openly gay GOP Congressman Jim Kolbe is co-sponsoring a bill that would scrap the 12-year-old "don't ask, don't tell" policy. It's a long shot, of course, but glad to see an effort is being made.

And speaking of "puritans" new and old, the death of feminist anti-porn crusader Andrea Dworkin is a reminder of the period when Dworkin, Catharine MacKinnon and Gloria Steinem sought to pass ordinances banning pornography (until the Supreme Court struck these down), and placed themselves on the same side as Phyllis Schlafly in supporting the censorious efforts by then-Attorney General Ed Meese's Commission on Pornography.

That unholy alliance showed the truth in the old cliche that the far right and far left do, in fact, mirror each another.

Note: For those who were wondering, I am not the Stephen Miller who writes for the New York Sun (and penned this Dworkin obit), though we are both cursed with an extremely common name.
-- Stephen H. Miller