The Disconnect Between Gay Marriage and the Civil Rights Movement

Even before the historic U.S. Supreme Court decisions last week on DOMA and Prop 8, many, if not most, gay marriage supporters have seen the movement as a continuation of the black civil rights movement. Justification to do so has a problem (among others). To understand this particular logical problem, we must consider the specific things African Americans and other minorities were denied access to leading to the racial civil rights movement and contrast those things with "marriage" as generally understood in our civic and religious culture.

 Rosa Parks, for example, was denied access to the front of the city bus. She and other black people were forced by authorities to sit at the back. In the ensuing protest for racial justice, the issue at hand was the right for blacks to sit where they wanted on the bus. No one needed to redefine what exactly it meant to "sit where one wants on a bus."

 Another example would be blacks not being allowed to use public facilities, such as water fountains and restrooms (at least not use the same ones as whites). Civil rights leaders had no interest in redefining what it meant to "drink from a public fountain" nor to reinterpret "using a public restroom." The same logic applies to affirmative action initiatives such as the meaning of "consideration for a good job" and the definition of "acceptance into a good college."

The gay marriage movement, on the other hand, is grounded in an effort of redefinition. The movement is fundamentally about society agreeing that marriage should be explicitly redefined in a way that differs starkly from how it has been understood throughout western (and perhaps even non-western) history--both civil and religious. Exceptions have been perfunctory, until now. History has advanced with the overwhelming definitional understanding of marriage as being between one man and one woman. Religious polygamous anomalies such as in Islam are more provisional than normative.

Whether there are any merits to such a redefinition is, of course, another discussion and is perhaps the discussion of the modern era. But the gay marriage movement has been logically weak in binding its nuptials to the black civil rights movement, and the fact that this weakness keeps getting lost in the discussion is unfortunate.

Bureaucracy, Lawyers, and No Light from Ky Dept of Ed

This is another letter to the editor I sent to the Glasgow (Ky) Daily Times. This was published in the June 8-9, 2013 edition under the heading "Parents Need Answers from KDE on Standards." Page A-5.

Dear Glasgow Daily Times Editor,
I have a very precise question about the goals of the Kentucky Department of Education (KDE). They say they don't have to answer my question, even though it directly relates to what and how your kids are being taught. The question is about the exact person or persons who crafted much of the most important language stated in the Kentucky Core Academic Standards. This is the authoritative document that determines the minimum knowledge and abilities our public school kids must have to graduate high school. (Much of it is based on the 2006 Program of Studies).

After many discussions with interested Glasgow/Barren County parents, teachers, and school administrators, they suggested that the answer probably lies hidden somewhere amidst the bureaucracy of Frankfort at the KDE, so there I turned.

I realize my question below is "razor thin" in specifics, but I think it's the kind of question concerned parents and citizens should be asking the KDE all the time:

“My query should be focused on the team responsible for writing the revisions and/or development of the High School level, Arts and Humanities, Big Idea statements for the 2006 Program of Studies. No team of two or more persons can conceivably conclude how such language would be specifically worded without a committee chairperson, of sorts, making the final decisions for exact composition. So two questions: First, if you do not have the name of such a committee leader on record for public access, could you direct me to who would? It would be surprising that the names and specific process for such a team would not be on record somewhere. And secondly, do you have names of these different team members? I realize this might involve many individuals, but the individuals most closely involved with the final 2006 Program of Studies, Arts and Humanities, Big Ideas, for High School level draft--and such a team's leader(s)--would be of most interest.”

After fruitless discussions with multiple KDE standards bureaucrats, the inquiry process finally drug me to the mercy of--you guessed it--the lawyers. Do you think they were any help? In a nutshell, they painstakingly explained that the answer to my question is not documented on record. Does it make sense to you that there's no public record at the Kentucky Department of Education of who exactly writes standards that your kids must be taught? So, since apparently no one wrote this information down, case law says that they do not have to answer me.

Government transparency is a recurring theme, not only in the national news, but now also regarding our own families more and more. It proves to be difficult to shine sufficient light in a place that directly affects our kids--the Kentucky Department of Education. Whether or not the KDE is intentionally hiding important information from our light is a question that every public school parent should ask incessantly. But do any care at all? Surely our action--or lack of action--will quickly tell us a lot about ourselves and the kind of hope--or lack of hope--lies ahead for our kids.