How momentous is the election of the first African-American President of the United States? Never mind what it says about how far we have come since slave traders brought millions of unfortunate souls across the Atlantic, or since the Constitution brokered what William Lloyd Garrison called a "covenant with death" and an "agreement with hell." Consider this: When Barack Obama was born in 1961, twenty-one American states still banned interracial marriage.
-- Michael Dorf
Today, Barack Obama is hope for a better tomorrow for all Americans. He stands on the shoulders of all those people who have incessantly prayed for a day when "justice will run down like waters and righteousness as a mighty stream" (Amos 5:24).
-- Peggy Wallace Kennedy [daughter of segregationist, George Wallace]
The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.
-- Amendment XV, Section 1.
I have lived long enough, if not too long relatively speaking, to know that life brings us new things that eventually seem par for the course. Not THAT long ago, I went on-line by going to a library downtown, or signing on to a campus bulletin board. Now, I can do so within minutes a few feet from my bed. The fact there is a big pit in lower Manhattan where our biggest building use to be is also regular business as is having a criminal President voted in with less than a majority of the vote, if you do not count the Supreme Court. And, now we will have a black President, one who is not only younger than any one since the 1960s, but with a name like "Barack Hussein Obama."
[I know someone with my basic politics, if not as into obsessing about it as much as I am, who basically had no hope that a black guy would be President. McCain in his concession speech noted that he realized how proud African Americans were yesterday. Don't be so limiting, Mr. McCain. The election yesterday made us all raise our heads a bit higher, our ideals a little more real, a little less pie in the sky.]
It will at some point not be so shocking; in fact, we got used to it somewhat already, since -- let's be honest (my sports section gave him 1-12 odds yesterday, 1-8 in mid-October) -- few thought Obama was going to lose by the end. This surely became clear after he won Ohio and Florida (as with a ball game where the team had to win, I did not check the results early), it not likely the West Coast was going to be lost. Still, this is rather amazing. OTOH, it is like winning the lottery after your house burns down -- you had to win to even had a shot to get to the status quo ante. Thus, sadly, there is a somber side of things too. "Yes, we can." But, will we?
A few things led things to be difficult even on Election Night,* even if you were not the host of the Colbert Report. It is true that anti-abortion ballot measures were unsuccessful, marijuana friendly ones successful and New York now has a Democratic State Senate (though the balance of power seems to be a quartet of independents). Washington passed a "Death with Dignity" law akin to Oregon, while another state (less ideally, perhaps) passed an affirmative action ban. But, with help of blacks in California (who was more homophobic than whites and Hispanics), it was not a good day for all:
Gay rights activists had a rough day Tuesday. Ban-gay-marriage amendments were approved in Arizona and Florida, and gay rights forces suffered a loss in Arkansas, where voters approved a measure banning unmarried couples from serving as adoptive or foster parents. Supporters made clear that gays and lesbians were their main target.
Though Lawrence v. Texas was sure underline that the case did "not involve whether the government must give formal recognition to any relationship that homosexual persons seek to enter," it promoted a regime of equal security of privacy rights. The homosexual "relationship" was honored. The opinion cited the Casey abortion ruling in support of this end, even if yesterday's election only went half way:
These matters, involving the most intimate and personal choices a person may make in a lifetime, choices central to personal dignity and autonomy, are central to the liberty protected by the Fourteenth Amendment. At the heart of liberty is the right to define one’s own concept of existence, of meaning, of the universe, and of the mystery of human life. Beliefs about these matters could not define the attributes of personhood were they formed under compulsion of the State.
This includes allowing same sex couples to adopt, raise children together and marry. Courts in various states, including those that only secured the rights and benefits of marriage, was right to see these words apply here as well ... "sex" or "gender" easily replacing "racial" as need be:
Marriage is one of the basic civil rights of man, fundamental to our very existence and survival. To deny this fundamental freedom on so unsupportable a basis as the racial classifications embodied in these statutes, classifications so directly subversive of the principle of equality at the heart of the Fourteenth Amendment, is surely to deprive all the State's citizens of liberty without due process of law. The Fourteenth Amendment requires that the freedom of choice to marry not be restricted by invidious racial discriminations. Under our Constitution, the freedom to marry, or not marry, a person of another race resides with the individual, and cannot be infringed by the State.
Loving v. Virginia, cites removed. A state, or the people therein, cannot pass discriminatory laws “born of animosity toward the class of persons affected,” including in the area of same sex or bisexual relationships. Romer v. Evans. But, they continue to do so, this still deemed a legitimate area of bigotry. The fact that the necessary 60% in Florida and California (particularly cruel) did so taints yesterday's success. I also wish things went different in the Senate races in Minnesota and Alaska, though they still might be too close to call. Still, Al Franken clearly dislikes Sen. Coleman, and it would be really hard for him to concede, especially with such a narrow defeat. And, the guy is a convicted felon, Alaska! Oh well.
As a comic strip recently noted, only a wizard could get us all we wish for on Election Day. None running, we got enough to give us a hope that we will prevail. Such is the best we probably deserve, or at least, can honestly expect. Such forced humility is reflected by the absence of a filibuster proof majority in the Senate. President Obama cannot rely on that ... and since his message includes reaching out to the other side, this is only fitting. If a lot harder.
As it is for those who still don't enjoy equal rights. There was one victory on that front, the majority of voters in Connecticut telling the nation that it does "not want to use the state constitution to take away people's rights."
---
* When I went to the polls, I for the first time realized there was some technical ballot question involving editing the rules for disabled veteran benefits. More evidence why local papers should supply a copy of what will be on the "ballot" (here a lever machine) to inform the voters. This would be perfectly simple as well as a useful educational device.