No on Prop 8, yes for equality

By Emma Nagengast

If Proposition Eight, the "California Marriage Protection Act," passes, it would constitutionally mandate inequality.

This proposition defines marriage as a union between a man and a woman. This restricting definition excludes same-sex couples.

We live in a society that promotes justice and equality for all, yet this proposition is the exact opposite.

Even if same-sex couples had equal rights (which they currently do not) this proposition would not allow homosexuals to participate in the social institution of marriage.

By denying homosexuals this right, Proposition Eight deprives them of equality, and this is a serious injustice.

Proposition Eight is defended in the California Voter's Guide by arguments such as "We need to protect our children's education" and "The traditional term marriage is defined as a union between a man and a woman." These arguments are faulty, untrue and extremely problematic.

The idea that our children need to be protected from being educated about homosexuality is completely homophobic. There is no reason anyone should be protected from love and sexuality.

The argument is also misleading because Proposition Eight is in no way related to education.

The state superintendent of public instruction and the president of the state board of education have both spoken against the absurd notion that if Proposition Eight is not passed, public schools will begin teaching students about same-sex relationships.

Proposition Eight will not affect the manner in which schools teach about relationships and sexuality. It will, however, define the term marriage as only a union between a man and a woman.

Many people support this idea because, while they may support same-sex couples' equal rights and unions, to them, using the term marriage is problematic.

They argue that marriage has been traditionally defined to describe the relationship between a man and a woman, and should remain as such.

Some argue that a union between a same-sex couple needs to be defined by another word. But, because the union of two people has already been defined as marriage, inequality exists when we deny the use of the term (and therefore that right) to same-sex couples.

If you were a child of same-sex parents and your parents were not allowed to be married, you would see that there is a difference in the way society treats heterosexual and homosexual couples.

Categorizing people into two separate groups does not promote equality in any way. There would be inequality rooted not only in the state constitution, but also in California society. If Proposition Eight passes, I think it will set a tone for the rest of the nation.

California is viewed as one of the most progressive states in our country, and for our state to constitutionally deny people a basic right, we would be taking major steps backward.

Imagine if you were a closeted 16-year-old gay boy and you heard on the news that in California Proposition Eight did pass.

How would you feel knowing you could never be married?

But, what if it did not pass?

Wouldn't you feel proud of yourself and reassured that there is nothing wrong with your sexuality?

Before election day, I challenge everyone to become thoroughly educated on the issues. Vote no on Proposition Eight.

Emma Nagengast is a senior history and women's and gender studies major.