Jon22: The Website of Jonathan Dobres

At what point does cynicism become a convenient cover for cowardice? I’ve been thinking a lot about this lately (as well as the oddly poetic qualities of the phrase “convenient cover for cowardice,” but this is beside the point).

In case you weren’t aware, Proposition 8 is in court. Perry v. Schwarzenegger, as the case is officially known, is exactly what you think it is. The plaintiffs are seeking to overturn the ballot measure that modified California’s constitution to define marriage as an institution between one man and one woman, which denies gay couples the right to marry (a right they had briefly enjoyed thanks to an earlier decision by the California Supreme Court). If you want a thorough overview of the case, the New Yorker has you covered. The plaintiffs are being represented by David Boies and Ted Olson, a notable pairing because Olson and Boies were on opposing sides of Bush v. Gore. Olson, a conservative who represented Bush in that famous case, has written eloquently about why he believes that gays have the right to marry.

Also worth noting, Olson and Boies are not affiliated with America’s defacto gay rights lobby, the Human Rights Campaign. This case is going to reach the Supreme Court of the United States, and the HRC wants no part of it. In fact, the HRC has usually done everything in its power to avoid exactly this situation. See, the HRC’s lawyers have long believed that a majority of the Justices on the Supreme Court would vote to defeat any measure that tries to grant gays the right to marry. Fearing that such a decision would greatly damage the gay rights movement, the HRC has decided that it would be more prudent to wait until SCOTUS liberals up a bit.

So, you know, bear with us, we’ll get you gay marriage some time in the next ten to thirty years. However long it takes Scalia and/or Alito to die and be replaced by moderates. If you’d like to help the HRC you can donate money, pray for a spontaneous embolism in the brain of your least favorite Justice, use your last wish from that genie to create a paradigm shift in the makeup of the Senate, or genetically engineer gay unicorns that fart Social Security benefits.

If the above paragraph was a little too heavy on colorful imagery for you, let me clearly state that I am not happy with the HRC. The HRC is the Comfortable Rich Gay, as a friend of mine put it. The HRC has tons of money, a couple of ounces of political capital, and it likes it that way. The HRC is happy to shepherd along incremental advances in gay rights and clap like a seal when a mainstream politician pays it five minutes of attention. Boat rocking is out. When the opponents of gay marriage spout Biblical vitriol and outright lies to defeat gay rights initiatives, the HRC simply turns up its nose and sniffs indignantly. The HRC says that gay marriage is a fundamental right, but treats even the most minuscule advance in gay rights as a watershed moment in history, rather than the frustrating, insufficient advances they really are. This position is nonsensical.

In its advertisements, the HRC prefers to let straight celebrities from gay-ish TV shows and parents with theoretically gay children do the talking for them, rather than show actual living, breathing, loving gay people. Meanwhile, Yes on 8 showed the world how terribly, terribly confusing gay marriage would be for the Nation’s children, as well as the educational dystopia that threatens to ooze forth from that land without God, Massachusetts. Mind-explodingly stupid, yes, but it worked. You know what else is mind-explodingly stupid? The HRC’s failure to release an unambiguous statement of support from Barack Obama. I know his popularity has taken a hit lately, but back in ’08 he was unstoppable. Probably wouldn’t have hurt to mention his name a few times.

Simply put, the HRC are a bunch of cowards, tiptoeing around anything even remotely controversial, terrified of entering into any battle that isn’t already a sure thing. Is this how the fight for civil rights works? Wait around until everybody feels comfortable treating you like a real person? Only fight when your victory is a foregone conclusion? Run around Washington in your neatly pressed business suit begging for a tip of the hat?

No. Gay marriage is a right. Anyone who believes otherwise is a bigot, pure and simple. I have said this before and I will say it again. There is no rational argument for the denial of gay rights, as Olson lays out in the aforelinked Newsweek article. He is currently making this same argument in a court of law, and if these pathetic depositions on behalf of the pro-Prop 8 side are any indication, Olson and Boies have a strong shot at making gay marriage a reality for the entire United States. I am optimistic.

Even if this case doesn’t turn out the way they would like, isn’t it worth trying? Don’t conservatives pull this kind of stunt all the time? A Constitutional amendment to define marriage as between one man and one woman? No one thought it would pass, and it didn’t, but that wasn’t the point. It got people talking. The marriage amendment has become a litmus test for a politician’s conservative bona fides. Most importantly, it set the terms of the debate; instead of talking in terms of gay rights, the argument was suddenly framed in terms of protecting straight marriage. Note to Democrats: make some noise, already. Throw some insane, doomed legislation into the pot and stir things up. Get people talking on your terms.

But I digress. I once again return to my original question. At what point does cynicism become nothing but a euphemism for cowardice? When does pragmatism give way to paralysis? When does caution become fear? I don’t think the HRC knows the difference anymore. I’m rooting for Olson and Boies.