We Don’t Vote

Other People’s Rights Away

To the Editor:

Last week you printed a letter from a fellow citizen, John Karlson, who was kind enough to reply to a previous letter of mine in which I suggested bigotry was not an ideal form of first amendment expression. He apparently disagrees. Mr Karlson believes there should have been a vote on civil unions and that his freedoms were taken away by not having such a vote. Neither the federal nor the state constitution provides for each piece of legislation being put to a statewide or national vote.

The objections Mr Karlson cites in his letter are nonspecific dangers to his marriage vows from gays involving “first cousins, underage children, polygamy and any of the other boxes Pandora is holding.” These are the justifications for his self admitted bigotry.

 Vermont has had civil unions for five years now and my extensive research indicates a distinct lack of damages in any of the above categories. There have been no reports of any kind of damage at all to the social, religious, or family structures in the State of Vermont due to civil unions.

Until 1967 there were 16 states in this country that did not recognize the right of certain other of our citizens to marry. It was in fact a felony punishable by a prison term. Black and white citizens were forbidden to marry each other. In 1967 the Supreme Court ruled in Loving vs Virginia that those laws were unconstitutional. It didn’t go to a popular vote. The outcome may have been very different if it had. The Alabama law wasn’t formally repealed until a special election in the year 2000; 40 percent of the Alabama electorate voted against the right of black and white citizens to marry each other. We live in a constitutional democracy. That has real significance. We don’t get to vote other peoples rights out of existence.

Bigotry stems from fear and ignorance and hatred. It can have some truly terrible consequences. A young man named Matthew Sheppard was beaten, tied to a fence, and left for dead. He died because he ran into a couple of bigots who didn’t like the fact that he was gay.

In last week’s letter I was asked what I would tell my child about where I stand:

Well Mr Karlson, civil unions in Connecticut are to ensure civil rights for gay people, they do not reduce your rights, they do not take away your freedoms in any way. It simply has nothing to do with you. It’s just none of your business. You trying to stop it because you have some irrational  fear is just wrong, and its not going to happen if I can help it. I stand opposed to bigotry of all types and my daughter stands with me.

I hope this answers any questions you may have had.

Respectfully,

Robert Karnoff

66 Great Ring Road, Sandy Hook                                  May 18, 2005