Sure-fire ways to help out the independents

OrlandoSentinel.com

COMMENTARY TAKING NAMES

Sure-fire ways to help out the independents

Scott Maxwell

TAKING NAMES

November 27, 2007

More and more people seem to dislike politics nowadays -- or just tune it all out. And both major parties seem to be doing their best to make sure that trend continues.


GOP and the gay-marriage fight

We start with the Republicans, who are feverishly fighting to ban something that's already banned: gay marriage.

At first, this would seem silly. But if you start to think about how Republican lawmakers have failed at fixing big things like insurance and taxes, it makes more sense. Fighting to outlaw something that's already outlawed is harder to screw up.
What they really want is a constitutional ban, which requires an amendment.

But for some politicos, this issue is more of a devious trick than it is a genuine concern. It's about hyping up a spectacularly divisive issue so that the most conservative voters will come to the polls and theoretically boost the chances of conservative candidates everywhere.

Now technically, this isn't an official GOP issue. It's a petition effort. But the group pushing this constitutional amendment, The Florida Coalition to Protect Marriage, says it has snagged endorsements from everyone from the Republican governor of the state, Charlie Crist, to GOP state legislators aplenty, including locals such as Orlando's Andy Gardiner, Eustis' Carey Baker and Kissimmee's Frank Attkisson.

And don't forget the chairman of the whole state party, Jim Greer, who had barely gotten acclimated to his new office before he started talking about how eager he was to make sure gays can't get hitched.

Compare all this hubbub among Republican muckety mucks -- who sometimes seem more obsessed with gay issues than gay people themselves are -- to real Floridians, few of whom would list this as one of the state's most pressing issues.

Don't get me wrong. There may be legitimate debates among thinking people about their beliefs when it comes to issues like homosexuality and the institution of marriage.

Supporters of the ban talk of the "sanctity of marriage" and wanting to ensure that more children have both mothers and fathers for role models. And opponents argue that it's legally unnecessary and simply unfair to deny people things such as health insurance just because of their sexual orientation. They also question how one person's marriage is threatened by another's.

Somewhere in the middle are the many Americans who don't think much of gay marriage, but who also don't think much of politicians wasting their time, money or constitutional ink trying to fight it.

But if you're looking for a thinking-man's debate, don't bother trying to find it with this amendment.