WHEN
DID
WE
START
PUTTING
PEOPLE
up
for
votes?
The
practice
predates
the
popularity
of
reality
TV.
Before
we
could
vote
for
or
against
Taylor
Hicks
or
“America’s
Next
Top
Model,”
we
could
go
to
polling
places
in
November
every
two
years
and
vote
for
or
against
gay
people.
Votes
have
been
overwhelmingly
against.
In
2004,
all
11
ballot
initiatives
on
gay
marriage
passed.
Time
and
again,
the
American
electorate
votes
against
gay
marriage.
Are
they
voting
against
gay
people?
Are
the
American
people
looking
for
a
way
to
vote
us
off
the
island?
On
one
hand,
elections
are
about
popularity.
They
are
about
voting
for
or
against
people.
The
people
we
are
voting
for
or
against,
however,
are
politicians
—
people
who
have
chosen
to
put
themselves
up
for
a
vote.
Politicians
have
said
we
can
vote
for
them.
We
can
vote
on
their
positions
on
issues
or
on
whether
or
not
we
liked
how
they
looked
and
talked
with
us
at
the
local
barbecue.
We
can
vote
on
whether
or
not
we
like
them
as
people,
whether
we
like
what
they
wear,
what
they
say,
how
they
look.
Or
we
can
vote
against
them.
Politicians
and
would-be
politicians,
however,
are
different
from
you
and
me
as
regular
folks.
We
aren’t
running
for
election.
Our
lives
aren’t
about
public
approval
or
disapproval.
Our
lives
are
ours
to
live
as
we
determine.
OUR
COUNTRY
ISN’T
“SURVIVOR”
OR
A
modeling
competition.
We
are
a
democracy.
Voting
is
a
tool
for
determining
our
representative
government.
When
that
tool
is
used
to
vote
for
or
against
groups
of
people,
we
poison
our
government
and
our
way
of
life.
When
as
a
community
we
fail
to
label
how
our
government
and
our
system
of
democracy
is
being
corrupted
by
ballot
initiatives,
which
embolden
others
to
vote
on
our
lives,
we
fail
to
speak
on
behalf
of
our
democracy.
So
instead
of
figuring
out
how
to
beat
anti-gay
ballot
initiatives,
I
think
we
should
be
figuring
out
how
to
eliminate
all
ballot
initiatives.
I
lived
in
Virginia
for
three
years.
I’m
glad
I
don’t
live
there
any
more.
This
November,
voters
will
be
casting ballots
on
a
marriage
amendment,
which,
if
passed,
codifies
in
the
state
constitution
—
one
of
the
oldest
in
the
nation
—
that
marriage
will
exist
and
be
recognized
only
between
a
man
and
a
woman.
This
week,
the
Washington
Post
reports
that
53
percent
of
likely
voters
support
the
amendment.
FOR
ME,
THERE
IS
NO
WAY
TO separate
Virginia’s
anti-gay
marriage
amendment
or
any
anti-gay
ballot
initiative
from
my
life,
from
my
relationship
and
even
from
my
body.
I
know
if
I
were
living
in
Virginia
today,
I
would
wonder
which
of
my
neighbors
are
going
to
vote
for
me
and
which
against.
I
could
tell
myself
there
is
a
difference
between
me
and
my
life
and
the
ballot
initiative,
but
I
wouldn’t
believe
it.
Depersonalizing
the
issue
is
exactly
what
the
right
wing
wants
us
to
do.
It
plays
into
their
paradigm
of
loving
the
sinner
but
not
the
sin.
What
we
need
is
a
paradigm
shift
away
from
the
individual
to
the
community;
an
end
to
the
notion
of
the
sinner
and
the
sin
and
a
dialogue
about
community,
government
and
the
rights
and
responsibilities
of
individuals.
We
need
to
speak
about
our
rights
and
responsibilities
as
gay
people
and
about
what
we
envision
for
our
community
and
our
government.
We
need
straight
allies
to
speak
as
well.
We
can’t
have
this
important
dialogue
about
our
lives
and
the
role
of
our
communities
and
our
governments
when
some
people
are
trying
to
vote
us
off
of
the
island.
We
need
to
remind
people
politely,
earnestly
and,
if
necessary,
vociferously,
that
this
isn’t
a
television
show.
Our
lives
are
not
subject
to
a
vote.
