It’s a bitter irony that as the nation moved past hundreds of years of prejudice to send an African-American to the White House this week, Florida also put into its Constitution a law similar to those used for centuries to discriminate against blacks.

The Amendment 2 same-sex marriage ban passed with 62 percent of the vote Tuesday, slightly more than the 60 percent required for a state constitutional amendment. Brevard voters approved it by 63.4 percent.

It sanctions discrimination against gay Floridians simply because of whom they love, which is a backward step into bigotry.

That’s shameful enough.

But it also threatens to strip all nontraditional couples of equal protection under the law, because its language allows for court challenge of medical decision-making and hospital visitation rights and of benefits like health-care coverage or pension-sharing for domestic partners, straight or gay.

In states like Michigan that have passed similar same-sex marriage bans, that’s what has happened, with the unmarried partners of public employees having their benefits denied.

And why groups as diverse as the Florida Professional Firefighters, Broward County School Board and County Commission, Florida Education Association and Blue Cross Blue Shield of Florida all rightly opposed Amendment 2.

We hope attacks from narrow-minded groups don’t start cropping up in Florida courts against municipalities, counties or universities where domestic partnership benefits are offered to employees.

And that opponents of the measure regroup and mount efforts to erase the ugly intolerance from Florida’s Constitution in future elections.

Perhaps their motto should be “Yes, we can.”

The saga of finding a new home for the Daily Bread soup kitchen in Melbourne continues.

The latest problem comes from residents near a Melbourne International Airport site that could be used for the facility saying they don’t want it near their neighborhood, fearing it would be too close to a school and businesses.

And that Daily Bread’s clientele, which include the homeless, might cause problems.

Those are the same concerns that have prevented Daily Bread from expanding its downtown Melbourne location where business owners and residents have complained about crime and other troubles.

Daily Bread officials should address the worries quickly in a meeting with the residents to discuss their mission of mercy to feed the hungry.

Most of those who walk through its doors are working poor or people on fixed incomes. Their numbers are growing fast as the deepening recession makes it difficult, if not impossible, for more families to make ends meet.

For instance, Daily Bread is serving about 250 meals a day. That’s 10 percent above the daily average for last year.

The new concern has caused Daily Bread Executive Director John Farrell to lament that while “the majority of people realize we need to be here . . .There is only a limited number of ‘somewhere elses’ to go.”

We sympathize with his frustration but also understand the neighborhood’s uncertainty.

That’s why the sooner a meeting can take place the better.In the presidential election, Florida voters demonstrated how far the state has come toward embracing diversity. On two constitutional amendments, they signaled how far there is to go.

Amendment 1 was nothing but an attempt to delete outdated, unused language in the state Constitution regarding the power to ban foreign nationals ineligible for citizenship from owning land in the state. There was no campaign for it or against it. Yet it won only 48 percent of the vote, apparently because voters read the ballot language and concluded it had something to do with the current debate over immigration. It received more than half the vote in just five counties: Miami-Dade, Broward, Palm Beach, Pinellas and Sarasota. Clearly, there has to be a better voter education effort even for innocuous amendments.

While the Amendment 1 results are curious, the Amendment 2 outcome is particularly disappointing. Florida joined Arkansas, Arizona and California on Tuesday in approving ballot initiatives that ban gay marriage. In this state, it was entirely unnecessary. There already is a state law banning marriage between couples of the same sex. Yet Amendment 2 won 62 percent of the vote statewide and a majority in every county but one, Monroe. Voters who looked beyond race in the presidential election could not look beyond sexual orientation to grasp that the impact of this amendment could stretch far beyond gay marriage to ban state recognition of civil unions and domestic partnerships. It likely will be up to the courts to protect the rights of Floridians who have entered into legal agreements for financial and medical reasons.

As encouraging as the presidential election results are about Florida's evolvement in social attitudes, the vote totals on the constitutional amendments confirm there is more work to be done.

COMMENT:

RZekeFread wrote: 11/8/2008 9:55:14 PM

Amendment 2 is a giant step backwards in fighting bigotry, intolerance, prejudice and equal civil rights for all Floridians. It's despicable a majority of Floridians continue to embrace such ideals and voted to include them into our state constitution.

Florida's Constitution is intended to protect and preserve citizens rights, never should it be used to deny, prevent or strip existing rights from anyone, group or minority. When a majority dictates laws denying rights of any minority, this is not democracy at it's best, it's anarchy at it's worst. It's disappointing voter statistics show the oppressed have become the oppressors and this directly lead to Amendment 2 passing.

So much for Gods love and equal treatment for all his children. Say good-bye to live, let live, life, liberty, pursuit of happiness and "NOT" enshrining religious beliefs into our Constitution. When domestic partners benefits are stripped away, know your vote was responsible for this, shame on you for this.

Depending on Pop-Up Blocker: Use Browser Back Button or Close Window to Return to Pride Tampa Bay's Website