A Remarkable Floor Debate on Gay Rights

SACRAMENTO — “You can hear a pin drop in here,” Assemblywoman Sheila Kuehl noted without much exaggeration in concluding surely the most remarkable legislative floor debate in years.

The debate that mesmerized onlookers and participants alike for 90 minutes late Tuesday night focused on a delicate subject the Legislature barely discussed at all until a few years ago: Gay rights.

It was remarkable in several ways:

* In the heartfelt baring of their true feelings by speakers on both sides.

* In the articulate rhetoric that astonishingly was both forceful and lacking in rancor.

* In the illumination of how wide the cleavage really is between conservatives and liberals on this emotional issue.

* In the fact society has become tolerant enough that some politicians now can stand at a mike and talk openly about their homosexuality.

“I had the strangest feeling at the end,” Kuehl said Wednesday morning. “Despite the fact I lost the bill by one vote, I felt exuberant. I felt something had happened that was very important. It was the kind of debate I wish we could have on all issues. People really thought about it and spoke from the heart.”

Kuehl, 56--who as a teenager starred as Zelda on TV’s hit show “The Many Loves of Dobie Gillis”--was elected in 1994 as the first openly gay member of the Legislature. The only other openly gay lawmaker is Democrat Carol Migden, 48, who was elected to Willie Brown’s old seat last year after he became San Francisco’s mayor.

“It was emotionally draining,” Migden said, “but it was a rare moment of the highest form of debate, fused with sincerity rather than nasty sound bites for the cameras.”

*

Kuehl’s bill (AB 101) would have added “sexual orientation” to the list of prohibited reasons for discrimination in public schools.

“This is not an issue that’s going to go away,” Kuehl said in her opening remarks. “I don’t care how much hatred there is in the world . . . how much bigotry . . . how much righteousness . . . because this is a community that has been invisible [and] it’s not invisible anymore.”

One could agree or disagree with the arguments that followed, but what particularly struck me was the civility.

I remembered a sordid Assembly debate on another gay rights bill--also AB 101--six years ago. In that ugly moment, then-Assemblyman David Knowles (R-Placerville) rose and described in graphic, unprintable detail his vision of homosexual acts. Even fellow Republicans tried to shut him up.

No conservative got close to that Tuesday night, although some of the calmly spoken remarks did jolt liberals.

*

“What would happen,” Assemblyman George Runner (R-Lancaster) asked Kuehl, “if a [private school] coach yelled out . . . ‘We don’t let any faggots on this team?’ ” That would be “a terrible statement,” Runner added, but he worried that his private school could be barred from competing athletically with public schools. Kuehl answered she didn’t think so.

Assemblyman Bill Morrow (R-Oceanside), a retired Marine Corps attorney, said that protected sexual orientations under the bill could mean “pedophiles, or necrophilia, transvestism.” Kuehl said she had a legislative counsel opinion that her measure covered homosexuals and bisexuals.

Assemblyman Peter Frusetta (R-Tres Pinos), a lifelong rancher, said “I’ve seen thousands and thousands of cattle . . . I’ve probably seen three . . . maybe four that had the hormone imbalance of being odd, unnatural. We called the heifers hermaphrodites. . . . [They would] shy away from bulls and take up with other heifers.”

People were puzzled about Frusetta’s direction until he said, “We’re going down a very dangerous path here.”

Republicans asserted that homosexuality is a chosen lifestyle they will tolerate but never endorse. Democrats responded that the bill was about discrimination, not endorsing lifestyles.

Declared Migden: “I don’t know if it’s genetic. I don’t know if homosexuality emanates from choice. . . . I don’t know why seeking to protect children prompts discussions about necrophilia. I don’t know about hormonally imbalanced heifers. . . .

“It is astounding beyond description the kinds of remarks hurled around here with ease, even some degree of arrogance. . . . Do you want young gay men beat up by their classmates? Do you think that works for ya?”

The bill lost on a 36-40 vote. Four Democrats--including Speaker Cruz Bustamante (D-Fresno)--ducked and didn’t vote.

But for one night, at least, the Legislature did return to its intense, but dignified good old days.