Is Calling Gay Marriage Evil Considered Hate Speech or Free Speech?

Forking over a couple bucks will not only get you a ride on Washington, D.C.'s Metrobus, it may also place you directly in front of a billboard screeching about the evils of gay marriage. And you thought delayed trains and buses were the worst things about public transportation.

Throughout D.C., advertisements from the homophobic Stand For Marriage D.C. are popping up, blasting the District's decision to legalize gay marriage and calling for a city-wide vote on whether same-sex couples should have the right to legally enter into relationships. Their campaign slogan? "Let the People Vote on Marriage." That's trendy. Goes right along with "Let the People Vote on What Water Fountains Certain Groups Should Drink From," and "Let the People Decide Whether Employees Should Discriminate!"

A group of LGBT rights supporters known as Full Equality Now D.C. is urging the city's Metro to pull the ads, saying that an ad attacking gay marriage violates the Metro's anti-discrimination policy. But a Washington Post columnist named Colbert King is saying that the ads should remain in place, and to take them down would be violating free speech.

So what is this? Free speech? Discriminatory speech? Speech that's meant to suppress, marginalize, and alienate a specific group, or speech that shows just how free a country we really are? Bah, activist conundrums. Forget yelling "Fire" in a public theater. The new debate is whether some religious folks can plaster their bigoted and homophobic opinions on the sides of buses and call it free speech.

Full Equality Now D.C. says that the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority’s (WMATA) non-discrimination policy should require that the billboards come down.

"While we understand that WMATA allows politically-oriented groups to purchase advertising on its transit system, this advertisement is not merely political," writes Full Equality Now D.C. "The specific request of this advertisement is that one specific group of citizens have their right to basic equality under law submitted to a vote. While other advertisements may address controversial issues, this advertisement specifically targets citizens on the basis of sexual orientation, in direct opposition to both common decency and the standards of non-discrimination in WMATA’s own policies."

That sure sounds reasonable. WMATA's own non-discrimination policy forbids advertisements that openly celebrate discrimination, which is essentially the cause du jour of Stand for Marriage D.C. According to Stand's own Web site, the group believes same-sex marriage is harmful to children and harmful to the common good. Call it bigotry with a glass of champagne and some caviar, given the prose with which Stand for Marriage D.C.'s so subtly uses to blast gay marriage.

But while common sense suggests that Full Equality Now D.C. is doing the right thing by protesting the offensive billboards, some folks are saying the ads should stay and that to take them down would be caving in to the censorship police. Take King's comments in the Wash Post, where he paraphrases Salman Rushdie as a reason to keep the billboards alive. What is freedom of expression, after all, without the freedom to offend?

And for the cherry on top, turn toward a letter signed by activists with the ACLU, the Gay and Lesbian Activists Alliance, the Campaign for All D.C. Families and a handful of others, urging the ads to stay up. They say that the proper response to offesive speech is, indeed, more speech.

"As supporters of civil marriage equality, we also embrace the principle of free speech enshrined in the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which makes our own advocacy possible," write these leaders. "We, the undersigned, therefore urge you to reject the misguided censorship advocated by Full Equality Now DC. Free speech is not only for those whose beliefs we find acceptable."

Guh. It's not an easy decision. The tasteful thing to do would be to say to Stand for Marriage D.C. "Sorry, take your homophobia and try to sell it elsewhere." But there's also something to be said about fighting offensive speech with the type of speech offered by marriage equality advocates. If Stand for Marriage D.C. puts up one sign blasting gay marriage, pro-equality folks should put up two. If Stand for Marriage D.C. takes a soundbyte and uses it to demonize same-sex marriage, then LGBT rights advocates should return that soundbyte with the type of appeal that changes hearts and minds on the issues of equality.

Because while groups like Stand for Marriage D.C. have catchy phrases that make for excellent homophobic billboards, they can't even stand in the same circle with LGBT rights advocates who are saying, simply, "Please allow us to love the person of our choosing."

(Photo courtesy of JLaw45's photostream on Flickr.)