...that I sent to then-candidate for Congress in South Dakota, Blue Dog Stephanie Herseth, in February 2004.
In addition to the subject of the email (same-sex marriage), I was also reminded of how much my life (and the country) has changed since then...at the time I had never been a member of a political party and had only recently gotten interested in politics at all, thanks to Howard Dean.
Below the squiggly line, I present for your own bemusement/nostalgia the email in it's entirety, minus my contact info at the end:
Dear Ms. Herseth,
I recently contributed $50 towards your campaign, in the hope of helping the Democratic Party retake at least the House of Representatives. While I do not live in South Dakota and am not a member of any political party, I was inspired by Howard Dean to do what I can to assist with progressive candidates in other state & local races. After reading over your positions on the issues of the day, I felt comfortable in donating towards your campaign—the first time I have done so, aside from Gov. Dean, I might add.
Therefore, you can imagine my disappointment upon reading that you are supportive of Pres. Bush’s call for a Constitutional Amendment banning the marriage of homosexual couples. (For the record, I am a heterosexual married man).
Your exact quote, according to the AP, was "I agree with the president on this issue. Marriage should be between a man and a woman." There is nothing wrong with being uncomfortable with the idea of gay marriage—I’m not thrilled about it either. However, civil rights are not about being “comfortable” with concepts, they’re about equal rights for all citizens. A hundred years ago, many were “uncomfortable” with members of different races marrying; that didn’t make laws against this right. At one time, many men were “uncomfortable” with women being allowed to vote (or to run for office, I might add). Progress is supposed to increase equality, not decrease it.
Homosexuals are either citizens of the United States or they aren’t. If they are, then they deserve the same rights as anyone else—including the right to marry whomever they wish. If they aren’t (which is what this proposed amendment is really about), then cut the rhetoric and make a statement saying so and see where that gets you.
Finally, it should be remembered that no church is required to perform a homosexual marriage if they choose not to. But for the government not to recognize a legally binding contract between consenting adults (including inheritance, hospital visitation, insurance, etc.) goes against everything that democracy stands for.
I realize that as a Michigander, I am not in a position to vote (or not vote) for you. I am, however, in a position to provide (or not provide) support in other ways, including financially, and am saddened to say that my first donation to you appears, at this point, to also be my last.
With regret,
(Brainwrap)
Oh, also "for the record", I'm pretty comfortable with it these days myself, and in fact recently attended the bat mitzvah of the daughter of a same-sex couple (old friends of my family). They're a wonderful, loving family and I wish their relationship was fully recognized by the state of Michigan.