Pedestrian

The Maine Yes on 1 (I’ll call them the anti-marriage crowd) campaign has released a new ad with some of the exact same footage used by the California Yes on 8 anti-marriage campaign in 2008.

Do they think that by voting Yes on these anti-marriage amendments, propositions, questions, referendums that then we’ll just fade and disappear and not exist in schools?  (Note: in Washington state, it’s a “No” vote on Referendum 71 that is anti-domestic-partnerships — if you vote in Washington state, be sure to vote Approve for Referendum 71 to be voting Yes for domestic partnership rights for senior citizens and gay/lesbian couples)

The message of the ads are that children will be forced to learn about gay people, and about gays and lesbians being married, in school, if marriage rights exist.  The example is Robb and Robin Wirthlin who sit on their couch holding the book King & King and talk about how their son came home from school and said he learned at school that boys can marry boys.

The message is that all children will learn that boys can marry boys and girls can marry girls if marriage is legal.  What puzzles me is that their kids are going to learn about us regardless of marriage laws because the children of gays and lesbians are in schools.  There’s nothing illegal about a child talking about her/his family and mentioning that s/he has two dads or two moms (or 3 dads and 1 mom).

If our daughter was in the same school class as Robb and Robin Wirthlin’s son, then their son would still learn about gay and lesbian parents and married lesbians simply because our daughter was in his class. She would probably mention her parents every once in a while, and we would show up at class and school events with her.  What would they do? Try to pretend we’re “roommates” or “just friends” and lie to their son?

Our daughter goes to a very family-friendly public school in San Francisco where they pledge allegiance to the world at morning circle in the morning.

Harvey Milk Civil Rights Academy, San Francisco

Even if she was in a different school, where they pledged allegiance to the United States of America, and where there wasn’t a focus on civil rights and social justice education, and where the school wasn’t named after a gay civil rights leader, and where maybe even she was teased early in life (she hasn’t been yet) for having two moms … she’d still be in class and attending school functions with her two moms and talking about her family from time to time and “infiltrating” and “exposing” the idea of two women being married.

We’re not going away or ceasing to exist simply because our rights are stripped away.  The children of gay and lesbian couples (married legally or not) will still be in schools and classrooms with the children of people who voted yes on prop 8, yes on question 1, and so on.  Plenty of us live in states and towns and counties where we, the gay and lesbian couples and parents, still have no legal right to each other or to each other’s children.  We still exist and participate in our communities.

I hope that Robb and Robin Wirthlin’s son grows up with more graciousness than his parents, and I hope he has a friend like Sam Putnam who helps him learn that the world is not nearly as narrow as his parents want it to be.  Maybe Charla Bansley will also eventually stop demonizing us.  One of the children she teaches (or one of her beloved teenage sons) might “grow up to be gay” after all. We queers are everywhere. We’re nice. We even sometimes make good cocktails and throw fun parties and attend church.

If you’re in Maine, please vote No on 1 and end this ridiculous farce of pretending we aren’t just as married and family as everyone else.