North Texas Daily (Denton, Tex.), Ed. 1 Thursday, July 29, 2004 Page: 2 of 24
twenty four pages : ill.View a full description of this newspaper.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
N T D A I L Y
VIEWS
Thursday - July 29, 2004 - page 2
Calling all columists...
The North Texas Daily is currently
seeking students, faculty, staff and citi-
zens who want to voice solid, ground-
ed opinions on pertinent issues.
If selected, columnists will be
given the opportunity to convey
their thoughts on materials of their
choice through the North Texas Daily
and via the Web site, www.ntdaily.
com.
Columnists' view have the potential
to impact and spark change through-
out the NT campus and the com-
munity.
Seize the opportunity to defend
your stance on today's volatile
issues.,
Individuals who are interested may
contact the Editor in Chief by e-mail at
mandy_fry@hotmail.com or by phone
at (940) 565-3575.
Same-sex constitutional amendment not democratic
I write to dispel some com-
mon myths about the objection
to same-sex marriages. The
way I see it, the motivation for
pressing the issue lies squarely
on benefits, or societal accep-
tance. It's different for every-
one. Before my liberal friends
out there get upset, my objec-
tion has absolutely nothing
to do with religion. However,
it does have something to do
with federalism and judicial
activism.
Extending benefits can be
rectified easily enough, and
many companies have begun
to do so already, Southwest
Airlines, Wal-Mart, and other
Fortune 500 companies have
begun to give "domestic part-
ners" benefits. These compa-
nies don't extend these benefits
because the state or federal gov-
ernment forces them to: they
realize that to stay competitive
in the employment market,
they'd be wise to.
Even if states allowed "do-
mestic partnerships" to be
fair, then states would also
have to allow a partnership of
any two individuals residing
in the same household. Sib-
lings, roommates, relatives, etc.
would have to be included as
well. Homosexuality need not
be a requirement for a domestic
partnership.
Even without legal unions,
homosexuals may still receive
multiple benefits that mar-
ried couples do as long as the
proper legal instruments are
in place. Homosexual couples
are also able to, and often do,
adopt children. If the preced-
ing examples are true, then the
crux of the issue lies on societal
acceptance.
What many don't wish to
recognize is that the majority
of society is not willing to ac-
cept homosexual marriages or
behavior. Like it or not, many
feel this way because of their
religion, others may be homo-
phobic, while others just find
f
Phillip Stauffer
Political Science Senior
it repulsive behavior. Laws are
another way of showing what
is and is not acceptable in so-
ciety. Having a law that allows
homosexual marriage puts the
stamp of societal acceptance on
homosexual marriages and be-
havior.
This is evident in Hawaii
and New Hampshire, the only
states thus far whose citizens
have allowed domestic part-
nerships. In those states, homo-
sexuals are not legally married,
but they are reciprocal ben-
eficiaries, which legally, are not
marriages. These beneficiaries
share the same rights relating
to benefits as married couples
do but are not technically mar-
ried. Even states that are open
to domestic partnerships refuse
to call the practice marriage.
The truth of the matter is, no
homosexual is being "denied"
rights to marry. Every homo-
sexual can marry a person of
the opposite sex just as well as I
can. It would be a different sto-
ry however, if the state did not
allow homosexuals to marry
persons of the opposite sex.
The definition of marriage
has always been, legally, and
in every common sense of the
word, "The legal union of a
man and woman as husband
and wife." A homosexual mar-
riage doesn't fit that definition,
its existence something else
entirely. It would be like chang-
ing the meaning of vanilla ice
cream to chocolate ice cream
because solely because vanilla
wanted it that way.
Many are asking why there
needs to be a constitutional
amendment. The answer is
fairly simple: so that states
such as Massachusetts can't en-
act homosexual marriage by ju-
dicial fiat and in essence, force
other states to recognize that
marriage. The Full Faith and
Credit Clause of the Constitu-
tion mandates "Full Faith and
Credit shall be given in each
State to the public Acts, Re-
cords, and judicial Proceedings
of every other State." Judges in
Massachusetts have no author-
ity to force other states to rec-
ognize a "union" that their citi-
zenry is unwilling to accept.
Without an amendment,
say a couple gets married in
Massachusetts and moves to
Mississippi. Mississippi then
becomes forced to recognize
that marriage, despite the will
of the citizens of Mississippi. I
don't know what anyone else
calls that, but it certainly isn't a
democracy.
For the rest of the story
please visit ntdaily.com
Letters to the editor
Re: "Today's treatment of
women akin to slavery," July
22,2004
When I sit down to recall
what the summer of 2004 was
like, I will undoubtedly recall
how I exercised my freedoms.
I traveled, I campaigned, I
wrote, I earned money. I did
things that were not for anyone
but myself.
Imagine my surprise to open
a copy of the NT Daily and find
out that I have been deceived
- that I have no freedoms at all,
and am in fact a slave! Society
has been conspiring to keep me
barefoot, pregnant and in the
kitchen.
I looked around for this
mythical female slave and did
not find her. I saw women pre-
paring for higher education,
to fulfill their dreams and not
those of their fathers or future
husbands. I can only conclude
that the NT Daily columnist
was wrong.
Wake up, folks. Radical fem-
inism may not have convinced
every girl to stop shaving, burn
her bra and go through life with
her maiden name, but I assure
you, today's American woman
is not a slave.
It is truly a shame that be-
cause of partisan blinders,
so many truly accomplished
women go virtually unnoticed
or underestimated. Perhaps if
we stopped using only men as
the standard by which all hu-
man accomplishments are mea-
sured, we would recognize that
women have achieved a great
deal and come a long way. We
do not need anyone to tell us
that our lives are controlled
by an obscure patriarchy de-
termined to keep us down, be-
cause it simply is not true.
We are CEOs, church lead-
ers, mothers, homemakers, sen-
ators, lawyers, and one of us is
even National Security Advis-
er. We have run for vice presi-
dent and for president, and the
day is not far off when one of
us will win. Whoever said that
women are not making deci-
sions in this country needs to
look twice. Tell it to Senator
Kay Bailey Hutchinson, or to
House Minority Leader Nancy
Pelosi.
In recent history, power-
ful women have made signifi-
cant changes and decisions all
over the world - or were you
all asleep that day when we
learned about Eleanor Roos-
evelt, Golda Meir and Margaret
Thatcher?
We have the option of tak-
ing our husband's name when
we marry. There is no law that
says we must do so. It is not
about giving up our identity.
It is about declaring a union to
the world. Many traditions that
have lamentable roots have
been taken with a different in-
tent today, and this is one of
them. In today's society, men
even have the option of taking
their wives' names!
It is not about being prop-
erty anymore. I dare you to tell
Nancy Reagan that she was
Ronald's "property."
The media, especially wom-
en's magazines, have been
gotten away with objectifying
women and passing along a
message not only of subservi-
ence but also of false empow-
erment. This is unconscionable,
but women are being taught to
look for the traps. We are not
so ignorant as to fall for every-
thing lying between glossy cov-
ers promising self-fulfillment.
Please give women a little more
credit than that!
Violence against women is
still prevalent, and it is a horri-
ble trend that must be stopped.
However, the fact that there is
such violence is no indication
of our subservience so long as
we choose to fight back. Words
are worth nothing without the
actions to back them up.
It is not an ideal world for any
of us, but with the drive to suc-
ceed and the freedom to do so,
anything is possible. We have
these things in abundance. We
are not slaves. We are the real-
ization of the American dream,
with life, liberty, and the ability
to pursue happiness.
Michele Connole
Lewisville senior
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This issue can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Newspaper.
North Texas Daily (Denton, Tex.), Ed. 1 Thursday, July 29, 2004, newspaper, July 29, 2004; Denton, Texas. (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth145148/m1/2/: accessed April 27, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, https://texashistory.unt.edu; crediting UNT Libraries Special Collections.