The fine people of Arkansas approved a measure that prevents any cohabiting sexual couple from adopting children or becoming foster parents. The bill was made to stop the “gay agenda”, but really the bill was passed to stop the advancement of American families.

The backers of the bill cited study after study that shows that the best way to raise happy children was in a family headed by a heterosexual marriage. So legally speaking now, that’s the only way that you can raise adoptive or foster children in that state.

I’m all for state’s rights, and if people are stupid enough to put things like this on the ballot, then even stupider enough to pass it, you pretty much deserve what you get. But I have two major issues with this bill (and those like it) that just don’t sit well with me.

First, the arguments in the measure just don’t hold up to logic.

I don’t disagree with the findings that children in the homes of married parents are happier than those in unmarried or gay households. What I don’t agree with is the logic that says we must pass a law that only allows that situation to occur. You can love marriage and hate the “gay agenda” all you want, but won’t you agree that for a child in need of adoption or a foster home, being adopted by a loving couple, no matter their orientation or legal status, is better than the likely alternative.

You must remember what children need foster parents or adoption. They are children that have either lost their parents, been legally taken from them for safety reasons, or were not wanted. There are many options outside of “valid heterosexual marriage” that can provide that child more happiness than they had.

Surely you’d admit that being adopted by a gay couple or a happy heterosexual couple who chose not to get married is a better option than some things. And if it is, why would you pass a law that bars it. From what I understand, it is tough enough to find good adoptive or foster parents sometimes. Why legally discriminate against people that are willing to do what no one else might want to do.

Does this bill actually suggest that gay adults and unmarried adults can not be good parents? It sure seems like it is. This is a far cry from the studies they cited, and draws a different conclusion from what they established. They established that children are happier in marriages of heterosexual couples. Those studies did not say that it was impossible for a child to be happy in the household of anything else.

This type of incorrect logic is how this country got where it is now, with the social and domestic partisanship tearing apart the foundations of an otherwise great nation.

To think that gay marriage, abortion and adoption will do to the United States what the British, Japanese, Mexicans, Spanish and Germans couldn’t do. Sad, isn’t it?

The second issue I have with this measure is the “majority rules” voting that is making all too important decisions. There is a reason that this country is a Republic and not a Democracy. There is a reason that the winner of the popular vote does not automatically become president.

Holding votes on measures of importance is a bad idea. First of all, the majority of people voting are not well informed on most of the things they are voting for. Second, majority rules could pass many laws that are not good to be passed.

Imagine, if you will, an initiative being put on the ballot nationally that would bring back slavery. I know, it would never happen. But that’s why I can use it as an example. Suppose for some strange reason, this got put to a national vote. The United States is 75 percent white. If voted on a majority rules system, there is the possibility (although quite unlikely) that Americans voted to re-institute slavery. Does this mean that is should become a law? No.

There are times when the government of a nation or state have to suck it up and do what is best for the people, not what the people vote to do. The majority is not always right. The majority, quite often is wrong.

If you put it to a poll and asked who was the second president of the United States, I would guarantee that over half of American voters got it wrong. But that doesn’t change the fact that it was John Adams. Trusting the majority is the wrong way to do politics.

If there was a measure on the ballot in Alabama in 1968 about civil rights for blacks, what do you think would have been the result?

The majority often doesn’t want to afford to the minority the rights that they already have. We’re seeing that now with gay marriage. You know what made gay marriage propositions pass in Arizona and Florida? Blacks. The large number of blacks voting for Obama also voted against gay marriage. The irony that those who fought so hard for their own civil rights just 40 years ago, don’t want to allow the same basic equalities to a different group.

You can argue all you want about being born gay or choosing to be gay. I don’t really care. I do know that it’s not illegal to be gay, so why shouldn’t it be legal for those that chose to live their life that way to have the same legal rights. I don’t care what you call it, but gay partners deserve the same hospital visitation rights, health care benefits, and everything else that comes with “marriage” that a gay couple can’t legally partake in. I’m not gay, nor do I have many gay friends, but this doesn’t seem like it should be that big of a deal.

But I promise you this: If you keep putting gay marriage to a vote, it will keep getting banned. Just like if you had put civil rights to a vote 40 years ago, nothing good would have come from it.

Some laws are beyond the reach of votes. States need to do what’s right. The people running state and federal government were elected to make important decisions, whether they are actually qualified or not.

Use these ballots to ask the people what they want, but don’t make it legally binding. Then, when you see that there are only a few percentage points differentiating between the options, you understand that, while not a majority, enough people back a measure to do the right thing.

In California, 5 million people said no to Proposition 8. They lost the vote, but that’s a lot of Californians who don’t want this bill to pass. Since they are slightly less than the yes votes, is it really fair to say that this is a black and white issue. Five million people’s voices should be heard, no matter what percentage they are to the total voters.

This is why majority rules voting by the general population is not the way to make laws. Arkansas, California, Florida and Arizona took some big steps back in the rights of their people.

Discussion

No comments for “Arkansas Adoption Act Show How Far America Has Not Come”

Post a comment