Posted by
Playful Walrus on Monday, September 29, 2008 1:15:38 PM
Who are the Thorons? After having run ads meant to defeat Proposition 8 that don’t mention Prop 8 (to skirt various restrictions), the marriage neutering activists have finally run an actual, official, genuine “No on Prop 8” ad. It features Julia and Sam Thoron, a grey-haired, conservatively dressed couple that has been married for 46 years. What the ad doesn’t tell you is that the Thorons have long been celebrated homosexuality advocates. From a marriage neutering website:
Sam Thoron's rich history of dedication both to PFLAG and the GLBT community began in spring of 1990 when he became part of the steering committee for the San Francisco Chapter of the PFLAG, Parents, Families and Friends of Lesbians and Gays.
Not just any chapter… the San Francisco chapter.
In September 1992 Sam was honored with an invitation to join the PFLAG National Board as Regional Director for the Mid-Pacific Region. This term of board service ended in 2001. In 2002 he was asked to rejoin the National Board of Directors as National President. He served in this capacity through October 2006 and continues to serve on the National Board.
A retired general commercial insurance broker, Sam is a member of the Equality for All Statewide Campaign Committee, which was established to counter attempts to imbed anti-gay discrimination into the California State Constitution. He serves on Board of Directors of Marriage Equality USA.
Julia and Sam continue to build on their proud history of advocacy for gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender equality, working with their deep commitment to justice and fair play for all citizens to realize the vision of PFLAG.
I guess that info doesn’t do much for their mainstream credibility. I think most viewers of the ad would look at the Thorons a little differently if they knew this.
The ad itself is a pathetic play on emotions. Where are the logical arguments? Let’s look at what they say:
SAMUEL THORON: Julia and I have been married for 46 years.
That is meant to show you that they take marriage very, very seriously. As if they hate each other so much that they’d never stick together if it weren’t for their strong devotion to marriage.
JULIA THORON: Together we've raised three children - who are now adults.
SAMUEL THORON: My wife and I never treated our children differently, we never loved them any differently and the law shouldn't treat them differently either.
HOLD IT! The law didn’t treat them differently before, and it doesn’t know, and it won’t if Prop 8 passes. So this is a red herring.
JULIA THORON: If Prop 8 passes, our gay daughter and thousands of our fellow Californians will lose the right to marry. Please don't eliminate that right - for anyone's family.
WRONG! Your daughter has always had the same “right” to marry as anyone else, she still does now, and she still will if Prop 8 passes. Currently, she has the “right” to get a marriage license with another woman – without a groom. So does my straight sister.
So let’s review. These people are married. They raised three kids. One of those kids is a woman who does not want to get married (as in, finding a groom). Because they want their daughter to be able to get a state-issued marriage license without getting married to a groom, they want the rest of us to allow the order of four judges to stand, forcing us to issue marriage licenses when a bride or a groom is missing. Their daughter doesn’t want to marry a groom. Fine – she can still have her ceremony, she can still live as she chooses, she can have a registered domestic partnership that will treat her and her female friends as spouses of each other. But that’s enough enough. Sam and Julia Thoron want you to be forced to give their daughter a marriage license, even though she chooses not to marry.
Sorry. Words mean things. “Marriage” means something specific. Neutering marriage will be bad for society. The people of California simply do not have the same interest in licensing same-sex relationships as we do both-sexes relationships, though we do have the domestic partnership marriage-equivalent. Proposition 8 will not hurt anyone, and judges should be put in their place, so I’m sticking with YES on Prop 8.