While driving around on errand today I heard a rather interesting blurb over the air on KFWB 980 AM, my local 'all news, all the time' radio station about this matter:
"Same-sex marriage proponents in San Francisco are hoping for a home court advantage..."
I damn near screeched to a halt. Did I really hear that? It's certainly no secret that San Francisco is known as a gay-friendly city, but it got me to thinking. You certainly hear that term used all the time for sporting events and quite often for political matters, but is it really appropriate in this circumstance?
(Full disclosure: I am not gay myself, and since my name isn't Larry Craig that actually means something, but I do support same-sex marriage)
Suppose you heard a television or radio announcer state the following:
"Proponents of lynching in Alabama are hoping for a home court advantage..."
(Of course, now I'll be accused of comparing homosexuality to racism and murder, so I'll use another, more innocuous example)
"Proponents of Intelligent Design in Kansas are hoping for a home court advantage..."
You wouldn't, right? Because it reinforces a stereotype, that all of San Francisco is gay or wants same-sex marriage legalized, that all of Alabama is racist or supports lynching, or that all of Kansas believes in Intelligent Design.
Worse than this, it implies a certain level of bias in the court system, and that this level of bias is rightfully expected. After all, it's just like those liberal activist judges to go against the will of the God-fearing people of California and overturn an established law, right? Never mind that this challenge happens on a regular basis and has to date been unsuccessful. Now it's happening in SAN FRANCISCO, so teh gay will become so overpowering that Chief Justice Ronald M. George will suddenly feel a level of kinship he never has before with Associate Justice Carlos Moreno and overturn the current ban.
It's subtle, yes, and I'm probably overreacting, but it's little things like this that I hear every single day that are slowly driving me nuts. It's about the discourse in our country and how certain things are acceptable or overlooked for one side of an argument but not for the other, and how slowly but surely certain labels and ideas are drilled into our heads until we no longer recognize them as such.
When do we respond?