May 22, 2005: Among the most interesting postings this week were those involving civil rights for same-sex couples. Let me say at the outset that I believe that citizens should have more control over the political, economic, and personal decisions that affect their lives. The social conservatives would have it quite differently, and it is important to take strong positions against efforts that compromise our rights.

As is the case with many issues, I have taken some votes during my stint on the city council that may prove relevant. First, in my first action as Mayor, I placed on the council agenda for consideration the adoption of an ordinance that prohibited discrimination in hiring and employment in city government based on sexual orientation. We got the ordinance passed, probably the first such ordinance passed in a Southern city. Second, I supported adding to the “hate crimes” legislation categories of attacks against homosexuals. Most recently, I opposed the Virginia Affirmation of Marriage Act as unconstitutional in that it denied citizens the right, among other things, to freely contract with others of their choosing or to transfer their assets at death to whoever they desire. These are fundamental rights that should not, be denied any citizen, independent of their sexual orientation. I also supported the amendment to Va Code Section 38.2-3525 to permit the extension of healthcare insurance coverage, on a voluntary basis, by private insurance carriers to a broader group of individuals living in the same household as the employee who has the insurance. The social conservatives in the House almost killed this reasonable initiative because they were concerned that it might assist same sex couples. Fortunately, reason prevailed, but only by one vote. I also opposed efforts to prevent same sex couples from adopting children simply because of their orientation; the standard for adoption should be “the best interests of the child.” And finally, I do not intend to vote to place the proposed constitutional amendment that would declare marriage as between a man and a woman on next year’s ballot for public referendum. There are many reasons to oppose this initiative, not the least of which is my general concern about amending the Constitution. Even without the amendment, same sex marriages — or even civil unions -- are not likely to happen anytime soon in Virginia; they are presently precluded by state law. But most importantly, the precedent of permitting the rights of minority to be determined by the will of the majority, which is what would happen if this initiative is placed on the ballot, is bad policy, inconsistent with what we are as a nation, and not something Americans have typically supported. Think of where we would be if voting rights for blacks in the south in the 1960s were determined by majority vote rather than by the protections of the U.S. Constitution. In the last legislative session, over 70 bills were proposed that would amend the Virginia Constitution for socially conservative reasons. These greatly concern me, and I will argue against such initiatives if I am elected to the House of Delegates. --David

David Toscano 2005, May 27, 2005

Note: Comments on Toscano's site may be rotated with 48 hours of submission.