As readers can tell from the number of letters published, the Editorial Board is being taken to task for not opposing Prop. 8, the ballot measure that would write into the state constitution the identical language that California voters passed in 2000. That earlier measure, Prop. 22, passed with 61 percent of the vote, and the latest polls show the vote to be close again this year.
Our decision not to make a recommendation on this item hardly puts us out of the mainstream; it would seem, indeed, to put us smack in the middle of public opinion, which is pretty evenly divided. So in fact, if “all the major newspapers” are together on the same side of this issue, then numerically, at least, it is they who are out of step with the voters.
A number of letter writers ask our reasons. For the record, here’s what we said on October 16:
8 – Same-Sex Marriage. Is it enough that same-sex couples in California presently can enjoy all the legal rights available to man-woman couples (California Code 297.5a)? For some people, it is not, and we recognize their authentic desire for the symbolic weight of the word “marriage.” Others see Prop. 8 as preserving to that word the heterosexual meaning that it has had throughout recorded history, and we recognize their authentic concerns about religious freedom. We on the Sun’s editorial board couldn’t agree on this one, and thus we make no recommendation. We expect likewise that the vote will be closer this year than it was in 2000, when 61 percent of voters wrote the man-woman definition into state law; Prop. 8 now would write it into the state constitution, putting it beyond the reach of the California Supreme Court, which recently overturned that law.
Some letter writers go so far as to suggest that we harbor ill will toward gay and lesbian members of our community. There’s nothing in what we’ve written to suggest that, including our earlier ponderings on the issue (Need not be a problem, July 31, 2008), and we certainly deny any such inclinations.
In fact, we strive consciously to understand differing opinions and to empathize with those who hold them. Failing to endorse one side or the other on any issue, all the while acknowledging the good intentions of people on both sides, hardly justifies condemnation.
We have read all the letters submitted to the editor, some in favor of Prop. 8 but mostly against, and we find advanced no new arguments that were not already considered in our earlier deliberations. Many writers might want us to capitulate to their view, regardless, but surely then we would be no better than politicians who “govern” by reading polls.
As Election Day approaches, let’s celebrate that in this country we can have political differences without fear of reprisal, unlike so much of the world, let’s discuss those differences with reason, empathy and respect, and then let’s vote next Tuesday. If we don’t like the outcome, well, there’s always 2010. But in the meantime, let’s – all of us with our differing political views –continue to work together in our local schools, churches, and nonprofits for the betterment of our community. In our view, that’s the best proposition of all.
