Conversation | 05/28/2008 9:58 am

Liz Smith: Gays Don't Have the Same Rights as People on Death Row

With Candice Bergen, Lesley Stahl and Liz Smith

Editor’s Note: Featuring Kathleen Jamieson, director of the Annenberg Public Policy Center, a professor of communications and the former dean of the Annenberg School for Communication at the University of Pennsylvania.

LESLEY: This month, the California Supreme Court struck down a ban against homosexual marriage. They say things happen in California first and then spread across the country.

LIZ: But isn’t it likely, Lesley, that this California ruling does not mean very much? That it could be rescinded before we even get used to the idea?

LESLEY: Do you think that if they do put this to a vote that the public will overturn it? Go the other way? Ban homosexual marriages?

LIZ: I don’t know.

LESLEY: Candice, you …

CANDICE: Well, it happened already.

LESLEY: Yeah, that’s right. They voted against it. So we think this could easily be overturned?

LIZ: I think the marriage struggle for gays is going to be a long time coming. But eventually it’ll happen because just as with movements in women’s liberation, a lot of positive things have already taken place. Let’s consider this: A gay woman named Ellen DeGeneres has the most popular talk show in America. She even outstrips Oprah Winfrey. Doesn’t this say something? I think people are really kind of conflicted. Sometimes they’re sneaky and fuzzy when it comes to homosexuality. They go crazy over one demonstration of it, and then they’ll ignore another. And TV and entertainment – now you see they use gays as come-ons, lively examples, for emphasis. They use gay characters the way the movies sort of used the black comic Stepin Fetchit. The networks get a lot of bang for their gay buck.

LESLEY: This is definitely an issue that is generational. No question about it. People under a certain age are ho-hum on this issue. They don’t understand the controversy, and if they come out in large numbers to vote in California, I think that could have a huge effect on how it goes, if it’s put up to a vote this time.

CANDICE: If that’s true, it could also have a huge effect on McCain.

LESLEY: That’s right. What are you picking up on this, Kathleen? Anything?

KATHLEEN: It puts the position that candidates have taken on the Defense of Marriage Act into play in the presidential election. And I think that’s the way we’re going to see it play out. We’re going to see the discussion happen indirectly in relationship to that previous vote, or that previous position.

LESLEY: Are they different?

KATHLEEN: Yeah. The question is, do states have to recognize a marriage from another state or not? That’s one of the issues. And I do believe McCain and Obama are different.

LIZ: Do you remember that a lot of people felt that the Republicans brought up the gay marriage issue and that it helped defeat Al Gore, even though he won the popular vote? So I’m wondering if this was brought up this time to make it an issue again. Or did it just happen?

LESLEY: Well, the Supreme Court of California made the ruling, so it would be hard to see how it was done deliberately to affect the campaign.

LIZ: I had a gay kid say to me the other day, "Men and women on death row can marry people on the outside. They’re allowed to get married. And gays want the same rights as people on death row." I thought that was pretty good thinking.

LESLEY: I didn’t know that. Is that true?

LIZ: Well, women and men on death row are allowed to get married. Sure.

LESLEY: Oh, I see. They’re allowed to get married … not to each other.

226 Reader Comments (so far…) Sign In or Register to comment

The problem I have, Arlene, is that you are not only calling my choices “sinful” but you are judging me according to your religion, which also violates my freedom of religion. Your business stops at my door. You have no right to determine how I conduct my life, any more than I have a right to judge how you conduct yours. It is good that you are tolerant of others, but you see the “difference,” when in fact most people are far more alike than they are different, as someone recently reminded me.

By Mugsy Peabody on 05/29/2008 4:07 am

e-mail alert

Mugsy, I am not judging you or anyone else and surely not trying to tell you how to live your life. Being a christian, as much as is in me possible, I try to pattern my life after Jesus, who loved everyone and condemned no one. Peace.

By Estimada C on 05/29/2008 1:58 pm

e-mail alert

Chef Zee ((((APPLAUSE))))) I praise your strength to tell us about your choice. And good for you in helping children. I was raised in a very bigoted family. I am a religious person but I believe in the right to love who you want and to make the choice of your partner regardless of sex. The rights of persons on death row have always bothered me. About 8 years ago, a murderer lived in my subdivision. Prior to being caught, he stealthfully entered some people’s houses in our subdivision and was seen running when someone came home. But nothing was done. He kept making appointments with women real estate agents and then raped them (he did this to one woman who worked in my office building). He got away. Real estate agents were scared to death. Then he kidnapped a woman and her baby. He raped her and tied her to the bumper on her knees and shot her in the head and strangled the baby then slit the baby’s throat. Yes, he was finally caught. But before he was caught, I was so scared. He had occassionally followed me. I just knew it was him. To make matters worse, he had purchased the gun he used at my dad’s gun shop before my dad died. I knew all about the investigation before he was finally arrested. Investigation traced the gun to him and the sheriff had come to my house for the gun sale records in order to prove ownership. This same man was on death row. He has lots of rights. The death sentence he received was commuted to life upon the act of a Governor who was later put in Federal prison. If you have never been involved in a murder case you might say…..he should have rights and the death penalty is wrong. Maybe at one time I felt that way but now I don’t think that way. He should have no rights. He didn’t grant the woman and baby he killed any rights. Eventually maybe the gay community will have more rights than someone like this man. I certainly hope so. They deserve it much more than he does.

By doll lady on 05/28/2008 2:31 pm

e-mail alert

Chef Zee, One of your last comments, “I don’t want the insipid civil union status” is the question to be answered this Fall in California. The recent court ruling changed nothing in regard to the Domestic Partnership Agreement that is in force in California and grants that gay partners have the same rights as heterosexual couples. It is only the term “marriage” and the State marriage ceremony versus the Domestic Partnership Agreement that are in conflict. No other rights are at stake and I am glad that California has at least reached this point of progress. But that word “marriage” is the key. Chef Zee intimates that even with the same rights, she remains a second class person unless she too can have the word ‘marriage’ applied to her and her partner. Gay partners often have a ceremony to honor their union but they do not have a marriage license and that is what is at issue in California, not the struggle for equality of rights. The question is will the word “marriage” be redefined to include not only the union between a woman and a man but also the union of a same sex couple? No “rights” are in dispute. It is only one little word. Chef Zee says she needs that word and deserves to have it. But, does she? An interesting fact is that the Proposition which will appear on the Fall ballot is not retroactive. Therefore, any marriages that occur between the Court effective date in June and election day in November cannot be affected by the new Proposition/Lawl. The marriages will remain as “marriages” unless legislation is proposed and passed by the Legislature; and that, of course, will be challenged.

By Bonnie Oliver on 05/28/2008 3:03 pm

Bonnie - if it passes, are you sure that it won’t be retroactive? I didn’t know they made that decision.

By Frannie Em on 05/28/2008 3:25 pm

e-mail alert

Hi Frannie, It is my understanding that the Proposition does not include any language that would effect existing marriages. The Proposition had already been written and submitted to the Secretary of State prior to the State Supreme Court ruling.

By Bonnie Oliver on 05/28/2008 3:53 pm

Bonnie Regarding retroactive. That is so ridiculous. There will be this group that is married and then the rest can’t get married? To tell you the truth though, that may kill the bill because it is stupid, so it may work well for gay rights - crazy. Does everyone think that homosexuality is just going to disappear if they don’t let them get married? People are so afraid of something that isn’t their business. I just don’t see how heterosexuals can dictate homosexuals rights. What if they were a majority and dictated our rights? We would be stomping and shouting about it.

By Frannie Em on 05/29/2008 12:07 pm

e-mail alert

Frannie, I still find it hard to believe that many States apparently have not passed some sort of legislation regarding spousal rights for individuals….regardless of sex. And yes, that ‘retroactive’ phase will cause not only confusion if the law passes this Fall. I do not know if a Proposition once accepted by the Secretary of State can be amended. Doubtful, I would think.

By Bonnie Oliver on 05/30/2008 12:03 am

Bonnie I know - why haven’t other states passed spousal rights legislation for individuals - regardless of sex? For me the issue is that as an American, I don’t have the right to deny anyone else the rights that I have. It is not my business to have opinions about other peoples sexual preferences. What does that have to do with me? Nothing. My sexual preference is my own and that is no one else’s business. I don’t want government in my bedroom, or in my hospital room. They don’t even run government very well. And if people think that it will change that much after the next election - that will take a long time. The culture in Washington is not just run by the White House - special interests are not going to let go of their hold on our government. Anyway, I think you are right about about once a prop is accepted by the Sec of State if it can be amended. I will have to read up on that. But at another time. My son may be back from Iraq next week, so I may be taking off to see him.

By Frannie Em on 05/30/2008 10:33 am

e-mail alert

I agree wholeheartedly. I am so happy for you that you will soon have your son back home. I am smiling for you…. a great big grin. Marvelous!

By Bonnie Oliver on 05/30/2008 4:39 pm

Bonnie: Of course rights are in dispute no matter how clever the argument. The one little word you refer to doesn’t mean a hill of beans to me. And certainly not as much as it does to those of you who claim all that it implies belongs to you alone. What I fight for is equality under the law. I will never be satisfied with the veiled implication of “civil union”. Not the words, but the notion that I am less than any other sector of humanity: less entitled, less deserving, less than fully and sanely human. You seem to question whether I have earned the right to seek marital status. And believe me it is the status I’m after, not your precious m-word. May I ask why you believe I do not? Full equality for me means I will be referred to, both under the law and societally, in the same way as any legally committed couple. If you can figure out a way for that to happen, I’ll happily accept “civil union” as the label for my relationship. That is, if you will accept it for yours.

By Chef Zee on 05/28/2008 5:36 pm

e-mail alert

Chef Zee, I am not your enemy and your diatribe is most unfortunate. You are not content with a “civil union” nor a “Domestic Partnership Agreement” and that is your right. If you fine discrimination in those documents as compared to a marriage license then you have every right, in the State of California, to bring forth litigation to correct the discrimination. However, if you want society to think of a gay union as the same as a heterosexual union then I fear you will not find resolution in the law. The law can only provide you with equality and rights of a spouse. If you want societal approval than you must attempt to change the hearts and minds of Americans who see a difference between the two unions. Your personal attack against me was unnecessary. You see discrimination where none exists. And that is most unfortunate. I understand both sides and as long as the law is equal to all then I am for the use of persuasion and not vitriol as you seem prone to do.

By Bonnie Oliver on 05/28/2008 8:42 pm

I meant to add a postscript to Chef Zee. I am not unsympathetic to your personal struggle which is so clearly manifested in the tone of your first comment.

By Bonnie Oliver on 05/28/2008 9:02 pm

Although with your obvious intelligence and powerful vocabulary you are able to portray my comments as a diatribe, I cannot see where I have launched a bitter attack against anything or anyone. What is it with this country lately? Any time one speaks out in defense of something they believe in, they are accused of attacking. What’s next? Am I going to be called unpatriotic because I’m fighting against the majority. You also accuse me of not being content with a civil union or domestic partnership. What I have said, in every post, is that I don’t care how we are identified as long as it is the same as any other legally committed couple. I do not wish to be part of a fragmented group who have special laws and labels created for them. I say again: I want and deserve the rights granted to every other couple married under the law. Call the union what you will, but call your union the same. I am truly sorry you see my lively discussion with you as an attack. I thought I was sharing opinions with someone who was worth the effort. I still feel that way. You also claim that I am vitriolic. I take that to mean caustic, malicious, acrimonious. Where do you see that in my responses? I am sorry my true feelings haven’t come across to you. I am frustrated, confused, and saddened. I know the value of our relationship, of our life. I only look forward to the day when we need not defend it.

By Chef Zee on 05/29/2008 9:31 am

e-mail alert

I stand with Chef Zee. “Straight people” have no idea in hell what it is like to listen to the bullcrap each and every day about gays and lesbians in this society. Yes, I have been fired because I am gay, and was told that was why in so many words when I was fired. I have had ignorant bigoted people tell my bosses “I am not paid to have to work with someone like that.” (She was ‘counseled,’ bless ‘em, that time.) I had years of one of my brother’s wives insulting me to my face (“Doesn’t she ever wear lipstick?”) and attacking me to my parents, who told her, simply, that I was there first. I had to bribe a hospital worker to get in to see one girlfriend after a surgery. On and on. It never ends. We pay for straight people’s kids to go to school, and often teach them when they get there, and have to go to court to fight for visiting rights for our own kids. We doctor and nurse your sick, and have to threaten, plead and beg for the right to sit with our own. We teach, we write, we sing, we make you laugh, but we do not have the rights you have and you act as though you are “giving” up something to “allow” us our rights. Well, guess what, straight america? This time? Not so much. We are going to be recognized as full citizens of this country, and that’s the end of it. You have no understanding of us if you even have an inkling that we will shut up and go away. We know more about hanging in there and being who we are in spite of any opposition than you have any idea. Yes, people are murdered in this country for being gay. People are fired. Evicted. Raped. And getting the crap beaten out of us on the streets by ignorant thugs? All the damn time. You know absolutely nothing about courage until you have seen a lesbian paint nuclear submarines alongside a bunch of ignorant straight men, as my daughter did when she was young. And, trust me on this, you do NOT want to rile up a bunch of nellie queens! Because they are smarter, wealthier, more street wise, and bitchier than you will ever be! So you need to understand, we’ve now put up with all we’re going to put up with. That’s it. So get used to it.

By Mugsy Peabody on 05/29/2008 4:10 pm