Keyword
in
Collection
Date
to
Houston Voice, No. 1018, April 28, 2000
File 009
Citation
MLA
APA
Chicago/Turabian
Houston Voice, No. 1018, April 28, 2000 - File 009. 2000-04-28. University of Houston Libraries. University of Houston Digital Library. Web. October 19, 2019. https://digital.lib.uh.edu/collection/montrose/item/1889/show/1868.

Disclaimer: This is a general citation for reference purposes. Please consult the most recent edition of your style manual for the proper formatting of the type of source you are citing. If the date given in the citation does not match the date on the digital item, use the more accurate date below the digital item.

(2000-04-28). Houston Voice, No. 1018, April 28, 2000 - File 009. Montrose Voice. University of Houston Libraries. Retrieved from https://digital.lib.uh.edu/collection/montrose/item/1889/show/1868

Disclaimer: This is a general citation for reference purposes. Please consult the most recent edition of your style manual for the proper formatting of the type of source you are citing. If the date given in the citation does not match the date on the digital item, use the more accurate date below the digital item.

Houston Voice, No. 1018, April 28, 2000 - File 009, 2000-04-28, Montrose Voice, University of Houston Libraries, accessed October 19, 2019, https://digital.lib.uh.edu/collection/montrose/item/1889/show/1868.

Disclaimer: This is a general citation for reference purposes. Please consult the most recent edition of your style manual for the proper formatting of the type of source you are citing. If the date given in the citation does not match the date on the digital item, use the more accurate date below the digital item.

URL
Embed Image
Compound Item Description
Title Houston Voice, No. 1018, April 28, 2000
Contributor
  • Hennie, Matthew A.
Publisher Window Media
Date April 28, 2000
Language English
Subject
  • LGBTQ community
  • LGBTQ people
  • Gay liberation movement
Place
  • Houston, Texas
Genre
  • newspapers
Type
  • Text
Identifier OCLC: 31485329
Collection
  • University of Houston Libraries Special Collections
  • LGBT Research Collection
  • Montrose Voice
Rights In Copyright
Note This item was digitized from materials loaned by the Gulf Coast Archive and Museum (GCAM).
Item Description
Title File 009
Transcript VOICES AND ECHOES APRIL 28, 2000 • HOUSTON VOICE EDITORIAL Gays may ruin 'traditional marriage' STAFF Associate Publisher Mike Fleming mikeQhoustonvoice.com Editor Matthew A. Hennie editorQhoustonvoice.com Production Bethany Bartran - Senior Graphic Designer Contributors Rich Arenschieldt, Kay Y, Dayus. Trayce Diskin, Earl Dittman, D.L. Groover, Robert B. Henderson, Kathreen Lee. Gip Plaster, Ella Tyler Photographers Dalton DeHart, Kim Thompson, Terry Sullivan Advertising Sales Ken Burd Tom Robbins Office Administrator, Classifieds & Directory Marshall Rainwater Administration ft Sales Support Carolyn A. Roberts National Advertising Representative Rivendell Marketing Company, Inc. 212-242-6863 A WindowM6ui3 Publication Publishers Chris Crain Rick Ellsasser 7| National rCay Guild MEMBER 3 CHARTER MEMBER GREATER HOUSTON GAY 8, LESBIAN CHAMBER OF COMMERCE Established 1974 as the Montrose Star. 500 Lovett Blvd., Suite 200 Houston. Texas 77006 (713) 529-8490 (800)729-8490 Fax:(713)529-9531 Contents copyright 1999 Office hours: 9 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. weekdays To submit a letter Letters should be fewer than 400 words. We reserve the right to edit for content and length. We will withhold names upon request, but you must include your name and phone number for verification. Please send mail to Houston Voice. 500 Lovett Blvd., Suite 200, Houston, Texas 77006; fax (713) 529-9531 or e-mail to editor©houston- voice.com. Opinions expressed therein do not reflect those of the Houston Voice. In all the fuss over our demand that government recognize our freedom to marry, the retort that always leaves homosexual heads scratching is that we somehow pose a threat to "traditional marriage." As a literal matter, of course, it's true. "Traditional marriage," by defini^m, has not included same-sex couples. But that's only an argument against change. Before a landmark Supreme Court decision in 1969, "traditional marriage" in many parts of this country did not include interracial couples. Now that the Vermont legislature has chosen to follow the considered judgment of that state's Supreme Court, and not the cowardly example set by legislators in Hawaii and Alaska, the voices alleging a homosexual threat to "traditional marriage" will only get louder. it's difficult to see how winning recognition of our relationships would discourage happy heterosexual couples from taking the marital plunge. So long as these opposite- sex couples are actually heterosexual, a climate more welcome to gay relationships shouldn't undermine their will to be wed. But our fight for legal recognition—any sort of legal recognition—has, in fact, already undermined "traditional marriage" for heterosexuals, though the result may have been mostly unintentional. In every place it's come up around the planet, efforts to win full-fledged gay marriage rights have fallen at least somewhat short of the mark. Conservative resistance has prevailed, and gay couples have won some variety of second-class recognition. In the English-speaking world, the faux marriages have been called "domestic partnerships." In France, they're called Pacte civil de solidarity, or "PACS." And because most gay rights leaders and their friends in government are socially progressive, they've put up little resistance to the argument that gays seeking inclusion in THE VERMONT LEGISLATURE HAVING OKAYED CIVIL ONIONS FOR SAME-SEX COUPLES, MR. 8 MRS. JEDEOIAH UNDERWOOD VttJT PATENTLY FOR IT TO DESTRCr/ THEIR 48-VEAR MARRIAGE. marriage rights shouldn't exclude anyone from these domestic partnerships. So in most places, heterosexual couples have also won access to the newly created institution of almost-but-not-quite-marriage. The effect on "traditional marriage" has been dramahc. In France, where PACS were first available last year, some 14,000 couples have signed up, half of them heterosexual. In a fascinating April 18 report by the Ntnv York Times, these straight couples talked about how happy they were to enter into PACS, rather than marriage, which they saw as "a burdensome institution, weighed down with religious connotations, and likely to end badly and at enormous expense." Some described their PACS as a "trial run" for marriage, but many said they had no desire to fully tie the knot. In France, as in many Roman Catholic countries, divorce can be difficult and expensive. Dissolving a PACS often involves merely giving notice Vermont passes 'civil unions,' Page 1 to the other party. Meanwhile, "PACS-ed" couples can file jointly for taxes, be eligible for each other's work place benefits, and automatically obtain joint ownership of new property they acquire. Back in the States, many heterosexual couples are also choosing domestic partnership over marriage for many of the same reasons. In almost every jurisdiction where DP status is available, straight couples far outnumber gay couples on the sign-up sheet. This threat to "traditional marriage" as an attractive relationship option comes at the same time that some states are purposefully making it harder to enter and exit that venerable institution. In Florida and Wisconsin, for example, heterosexual couples are encouraged by a marriage license discount to go through premarital counseling before they legally wed. In other states, including Mississippi, couples wishing to marry are offered the option of entering into a separate marriage scheme that does not permit "no fault" divorce. To exit such an arrangement, one partner must prove willful misconduct- abuse or infidelity—by the other. So far, it isn't working. Very few straight couples—fewer than 15 percent—have opted for the souped-up, ultra-traditional marriage. The counseling option is still too new, and according to another Times report, the results are decidedly indecisive. These ineffectual attempts at bucking up traditional marriage are losing the battle to a popular and easier alternative that is increasingly available. There's your threat to traditional marriage. That may well be a good thing, but it is ironic that the short-term resistance from some quarters to recognition of gay marriage has contributed significantly to the very harm that our foes fear the most—the piecemeal destruction of traditional marriage.
File Name uhlib_31485329_n1018_008.jpg