The state of California often has acted as a trend-setter for the rest of the nation.

We here in Iowa know that the West Coast is cutting-edge.

It is the place where presidential candidates flock to spread their messages, and it’s the place where laws get passed that eventually might set the tone for the rest of the country.

In a recent act of gay rights legislation, let’s hope it will.

According to Reuters, California Gov. Gray Davis has signed a package of laws that extend protection for gays and lesbians in schools, workplaces and their homes.

Thanks to this new legislation, there will be a statewide registry for domestic partnerships among elderly (i.e., both gay and straight); it is now illegal to discriminate against people in employment or housing based on their sexual orientation.

Also, there is now extensive protection for gays and lesbians who are the targets of harassment in public schools.

Time for cheers and applause?

Is it time to commend California for steps that are so important, it’s unfortunate that they’re just coming now, and that they’re considered “landmark?” Not yet.

Another California ballot initiative is seeking to define marriage as a heterosexual union, according to a recent USA Today article.

Because of President Clinton’s signing of the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act, states are allowed to decide for themselves whether gay marriages should be recognized.

According to the same article, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints is encouraging its members to give money to the ballot, which is up for referendum in March 2000.

How one state get several matters so right and the other so wrong?

The paranoia that surrounds such gay rights laws is consistently baffling, as was the Defense of Marriage Act, which is one of the most ridiculous pieces of legislation passed by the Clinton administration.

Why should an institution be more protected than an individual’s rights?

Why it is such a threatening concept that two people who love either other — and are married in practice, if not by law — should be able to be visit each one another in the hospital or send their children to school without worrying if they’re going to be picked on simply because of their households?

Hopefully, those voting in the March 2000 referendum will take the same tactics that their governor did and realize that gay rights cannot be ignored any longer.

And the state of California should get it right — you can’t take three steps forward and then take a step back.

---

Iowa State Daily Editorial Board: Sara Ziegler, Greg Jerrett, Michelle Murken, Kate Kompas and Carrie Tett.