(It stinks, but with every day, we are one step closer to equality. Also, it seems Frank Schubert agrees with Paul, No on 1 did run the better field operation. - promoted by Brian Leubitz)
I hate losing elections, but what I REALLY hate is losing after a high turnout. Losing because our base didn't vote is depressing, but at least it tells us what we need to do to win next time - and progressives can take heart in the fact that "the people" are truly on their side, if only they showed up. Last night, Maine's Question 1 passed 53-47 - despite a much higher turnout than expected (we matched last year's Obama level at the University of Maine in Orono, winning the campus 81-19.) The "No on 1" campaign also had a far greater field presence than the opposition, and superior financial resources. It reminds me of 2004, when Bush won despite the progressive base voting in record numbers. When California's Proposition 8 passed last year, everyone could tell that our side ran an awful campaign. It was painful, but gave us many lessons to learn - lessons that the "No on 1" campaign in Maine took to heart, and performed beautifully. That's why this loss is so much worse than Prop 8. I don't know what we could have done differently, and am too sleep-deprived to think it all through.
BANGOR - "Welcome to the real Maine," said Regional Field Organizer Gabi Bérubé as I arrived yesterday at the "No on 1" office in Brewer, just across the Penobscot River from Bangor. That's what Mainers up here call their part of the state, and it's where I am spending the rest of my time on the campaign. I asked to go to Bangor because I wanted to help our field effort in more challenging places, after "No on 8" spent too much time last year preaching to the choir. The Bangor office covers everything north and east of here - in other words, two-thirds of the state's land mass. Replicating Howard Dean's 50 State Strategy, "No on 1" believes we have gay marriage supporters everywhere - and it's our challenge to organize them. But we're also targeting the University of Maine in Orono, whose 11,000 students make it the largest college in the state. Mobilizing young people on campus - and turning out identified supporters in rural areas - will prevent us from getting creamed in northern Maine, which will help us win statewide.
"Yes on 1" - the Maine campaign to repeal marriage equality - aired its first San Francisco produced ad this week, which was kind of a dud. It was like the first "Yes on 8" ad in California - minus the Gavin Newsom footage. Within 24 hours, the "No on 1" campaign aired a strong rebuttal - in contrast to the 12 days it took "No on 8" to respond. Rather than simply deny the "gay marriage in public schools" charge, the ad accused outsiders of harming kids - and that schools protect "all Maine families," allowing our side to stay on the offensive. With 53 days to go before the election, a new poll today shows Question 1 narrowly ahead by 48-46. Supporters of marriage equality should realize that every effort will make a difference - and that we now have an opportunity to finally defeat anti-gay bigotry at the ballot box.
In just 77 days, Maine voters can set the national agenda for marriage equality. The state legislature passed same-sex marriage earlier this year, but now the right has collected enough signatures to put a referendum ("Question One") on the November 2009 ballot - and has hired the same political consultants who successfully passed Proposition 8. Supporters of marriage equality, however, are determined not to repeat the same mistakes we made in California - and will run an inclusive field campaign with a pro-active and pre-emptive message that (with the right resources) can bring about victory. It does not cost a lot to win campaigns in Maine (only $3 million), and voter turnout is expected to only be about 500,000 people. In other words, the campaign is winnable - but has not yet received the national attention it deserves. While Californians are divided on whether to repeal Prop 8 in 2010 or 2012, they can set aside their differences by helping us win in Maine. If we prevail on November 3rd, it will be easier to take our rights back in California.
We are writing to inquire about the recent fundraising activities of EQCA. In early July, it was brought to our attention that EQCA had hired a professional fundraising corporation known as Grassroots Campaigns Inc (www.grassrootscampaigns.com). Since then, we have heard numerous reports that this money was being raised with a script promoting 2010 - Several people on this list, including Stacey Simmons and Robert Polzoni can attest to this. On August 5th, Melissa Staten, a director for Grassroots Campaigns, confirmed that her organization has raised $530,000 in the San Francisco Bay Area and over $ 1 million dollars statewide for EQCA's "repeal of Prop 8 in 2010." We have a few questions as it relates to the money for 2010 and EQCA's announcement later today:
A) Should EQCA announce that they are supporting and/ or in favor of 2010, will a portion of this money be used to pay for the additional research? The Courage Campaign, along with Winner & Mandabach, have stated that we need to raise nearly $200,000 to conduct additional polling, research, and focus groups to solidify ballot language and a campaign plan.
B) On August 11th, 2009 at 2:31pm, Becky - director of the San Francisco office of Grassroots Campaigns Inc. (415-447-9396) - confirmed that money being raised is for 2010. If EQCA announces 2012, we have two questions: 1) will the money that was raised using a script for 2010 be given to support the efforts of the grassroots moving forward or 2) will this money be refunded? At the very least, people should be able to request a refund, if they wish, as numerous individuals were assured that their money was being used for 2010.
C) In addition to the million-plus dollars EQCA has raised since May, the Courage Campaign has raised over a $100,000 in a week's time. Regardless of a particular campaign date, it has become evident that significant funds can be raised at the grassroots level, despite major donor's reluctance.
Our final question: what systems are in place to assure accountable and transparent use of funds being raised? Perhaps this is a question better suited for the August 22nd campaign structuring meeting - but it is a question that the community should ask nonetheless.
The Sacramento Bee will host a live webcast discussion with legal experts about the implications of the California Supreme Court's ruling on Prop. 8, on minority rights, the First Amendment, equal protection and even religious freedom. It promises to be a good discussion, and it starts at noon.
But considering that the Court has, for now, given up on its ability to protect the civil rights of the minority in the face of mob rule, the logical arguments must also incorporate the emotional ones, and what must be now taken into account are the personal stories, highlighted here by state lawmakers.
Assemblywoman Nancy Skinner, D-Berkeley, confided in a Capitol press conference that her daughter is lesbian.
"This is a decision that affects all Californians in a very personal way," Skinner said of the ruling on Proposition 8.
"It impacts my family in saying that somehow my daughter's love for the woman who is her partner is not as valid as the love others have for the opposite sex."
Skinner appeared at a news conference with the Legislature's four openly gay members, all Democrats - Sen. Mark Leno, San Francisco; Sen. Christine Kehoe, San Diego; Assemblyman John Perez, Los Angeles; and Assemblyman Tom Ammiano, San Francisco.
San Diego Mayor Jerry Sanders, a Republican, spoke briefly at the event, noting that he has one daughter who is lesbian and the other "straight."
"They don't have the same rights today," Sanders said.
I want to add my voice to that personalization by highlighting this section of an LA Times piece on some of the 18,000 married couples, now granted separate rights than their fellow gays and lesbians.
Julie Nice, a University of San Francisco law professor specializing in constitutional and sexuality law, sees the emergence of the legally married gay class as yet another inconsistency in the nation's laws governing same-sex marriage.
"This kind of chaotic patchwork is not sustainable," Nice said of laws recognizing the right of gays to marry in five states, granting recognition to legal marriages conducted elsewhere in a few others and now California's validation of the pre-Proposition 8 marriages while denying the status to other gays [...]
Several gay couples were in attendance as West Hollywood officials sought to chart a path forward in the fight for same-sex marriage rights after the high court's decision. Although Mark Katz, 58, and Robert Goodman, 48, continue to be recognized in the state as legally married, they deemed the ruling "tragic."
"This is as if we were freed slaves living in a slave state," said Goodman, a career counselor. "We were able to keep our marriage, but none of our brothers will be able to marry."
Mark Katz is my cousin. The rhetorical bomb-throwing must run in the family. But they are wonderful people, with an adopted son, and while yesterday's ruling secured some of their civil rights, they are not satisfied with being put on a kind of island, where their friends and fellow citizens must live under a separate system.
The legal ramifications of this are truly troubling, and ought to be examined thoroughly. But my first thought turns to my cousin. And those familial connections, and the new connections forged through organizing, will eventually be how these rights are achieved for everyone.
In 1964, Stanley Kubrick produced the Cold War film Dr. Strangelove, or "How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb." By upholding Proposition 8, the California Supreme Court has learned to stop worrying and love the initiative process. It's an apt analogy, because today's decision leaves an unchecked power of the voters to strike a "bomb" through our basic Constitutional protections. Not only did the Court minimize Prop 8's effect on the right to marry, using logic that contradicted last year's decision on the same subject. It set up a dubious distinction between "amendments" and "revisions" to the state Constitution, which will allow virtually any ballot measure to pass as a mere "amendment." Without adequate safeguards that a "revision" was meant to place, equal protection is no longer sacred - because the power of the ballot is supreme. At the same time, the Court ruled that the 18,000 same-sex couples who legally wed last year are still married - because to invalidate these licenses would be an undue violation of due process and property rights. While that was a wise decision, it remains a mystery why such a right is more important than equal protection.
It's cold comfort to many that history is moving in the right direction, with five states already on their way to marriage equality. But it's our job to make sure history moves faster towards equality here in California.
We must redouble our efforts in California to finally win this fight for equal rights. Please, take a moment today and lend your voice to this just cause.
Let's be respectful. But let's be clear. We must start changing minds today. I know many of my fellow Californians may initially agree with this ruling, but I ask them to reserve final judgment until they have discussed this decision with someone who will be affected by it.
Please talk to a lesbian or gay family member, neighbor or co-worker and ask them why equality in the eyes of the law is important to every Californian. Please talk to local business leaders who know that this will cost jobs and make California less competitive. Please remember we all know someone who is hurt by this decision today. Please reach out to these friends, family members, co-workers and neighbors and discuss why this decision is wrong for California.
California, at its best, is a beacon of equal rights and equal opportunities. If we want to prosper together, we must respect one another.
That's why we must resolve to restore marriage equality to all Californians. Let this work start today. Sign our petition and join the efforts of the Courage Campaign and Equality California.
America's Next Top Anita Bryant, Miss California Carrie Prejean, is turning her second place in a beauty contest into a national spokesmodelship for opposition to gay rights. This is an improvement on what you get out of second place in a beauty contest in Monopoly, which is only $10.
What happens when a young California beauty pageant contestant is asked, "Do you support same-sex marriage?" She is attacked viciously for having the courage to speak up for her truth and her values. But Carrie's courage inspired a whole nation and a whole generation of young people because she chose to risk the Miss USA crown rather than be silent about her deepest moral values. "No Offense" calls gay marriage advocates to account for their unwillingness to debate the real issue: Gay marriage has consequences.
Did I miss the memo where her resentment at answering a question poorly (remember "we live in a land where you can choose same-sex marriage or opposite marriage"? Um, no, that's kind of the point) inspired a nation? I mean, the Republicans really have to do a better job with their folk heroes. For one they have to be, um, heroes, not unemployed plumbers or second-place beauty contest winners.
FWIW, here's the ad from the National Organization For Marriage.
Yes, if we as a country don't stand up for the rights of bigots, we will have shamed ourselves. Won't somebody think of the gay-bashers?
Keep an eye on this Carrie Prejean. If the right tries to do with her what they do with their other presumed victims, she'll have a national speaking tour and a talk show after Limbaugh within a week.
Today, the Vermont legislature overrode a gubernatorial veto and voted to allow same-sex couples to marry. They become the first state to legalize gay marriage through the legislative process rather than the courts. Of course, California passed a gay marriage bill twice, in 2005 and 2007, only to see the Governor veto the legislation both times. And then... nothing.
Now, the bill never passed by a margin approaching a 2/3 vote in either chamber, so you might question the efficacy of an override vote. However, that only makes sense if you aren't aware that the California legislature NEVER overrides vetoes. This actually came up last year, when the Governor vetoed the initial FY2009 budget and the legislature threatened to override. Instead they ceded to the Governor's demands. Indeed, California has never overridden a budget veto in the history of the legislature, and the legislature pretty much never overrides vetoes of any other kind, even if the measures pass both houses with overwhelming margins. The last override in California? THIRTY YEARS AGO.
Part of this is due to the unnecessary forced bottlenecks in the legislative process, where practically everything passes right at the end of a legislative session, and the Governor vetoes after the session ends, which means that the legislature is out of session at the time they could override a veto. But another part concerns an insidious professional courtesy mixed with threats, where the Governor in recent years has implicitly vowed to veto all kinds of bills if he's ever overridden on one.
The overall point is that California's government does not operate like a functioning political body. The veto override, a major tool for a legislature to impose their will on a Governor, doesn't exist. The majority vote, when a Governor agrees with the thrust of the legislation, with respect to the budget and taxes, doesn't exist. And so ordinary functions of political bodies are closed off to California, by self-imposed means. This highlights once again why we have an ungovernable political structure that needs to be radically changed.
As a response to post Prop 8 comments from local LDS Church leaders and a supportive poll of Utah voters on an openness to equal rights for the LGBT community, several Utah legislators -- working with Equality Utah -- put together the Common Ground Initiative, in an attempt to create a dialog, and encourage Mormon leaders (who have undoubtedly large influence over legislative policy in the state) to make good on their statements.
In response, The Sutherland Institute, Utah's leading (only) think tank and Heritage Foundation offspring -- infamous here for holding an "Earth Day" event hosted by Roy Innis and other energy industry hacks -- has pieced together their own campaign to counter the adult discussions with petty divisiveness titled Sacred Ground. (pdf) They've scheduled several "State of the Union - Stand Up for Marriage" events here locally (targeting bloggers, legislators, and local media) hosted by Utah's worst Wing-nut (and believe me that's saying a lot) LaVar Christensen (Direct Quote: "Tolerance is the religion of people who no longer believe in anything.") , and completing the campaign with a published book and YouTube campaign.
Your last word in what's happenin' (apologies to Raj and Rerun):
• Here's George Skelton having some fun and making up statistics to scapegoat immigrants, failing to mention the economic activity they produce and the Social Security payroll taxes they pay but never collect. It's simply wrong to pander to xenophobes the way Skelton does in this piece, under the guise of "being honest." If you want to be honest, explain that, as baby boomers age, the fiscal impact of younger workers in the country is positive, at least so says that left-wing rag the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis and countless other studies.
• Debbie Cook has resufaced at the new site OC Progressive, and she writes a strong post about to need to collectively focus on energy as crucial to our future as a sustainable planet. It's really good.
• The Museum of Contemporary Art in L.A. reduced its staff by 20%. Not only construction and manufacturing jobs are affected by the meltdown. The arts and non-profits are among the hardest-hit.
• Just why did the NFL and the Los Angeles NBC affiliate ban an ad on marriage equality, and then lie that they weren't airing "advocacy-based" ads during on Super Bowl Sunday to boot? Someone ought to find out.
• California now has less wind power capacity than Iowa. I don't totally agree with the conclusions for why, but it's worth studying.
• CA-Sen: ZOMG, Chuck DeVore Twitters! And Facebooks! He raised $1,600 on Twitter! He's TOTALLY like Obama! (Is that 140 characters yet?)
By the way, that picture in the WSJ of DeVore checking his Blackberry like a strung-out meth addict should be atop all of Barbara Boxer's campaign literature for the next couple years.
Despite threatening weather, organizers estimated that nearly 5,000 people came out to City Hall in Boston, MA to stand together as supporters of marriage equality. Organizers, including local politicians, leaders with Mass Equality, and U.S. Congressional Representatives Rep. Nikki Tsongas and Rep. Edward Markey all spoke to the crowd.
Massachusetts made history in 2004 when it became the first U.S. state to legalize same-sex marriage. That thought was not lost on organizers today, many of whom traveled to California in the lead up to the vote on Proposition 8 to help with the No on 8 campaign. State Rep. Carl Sciortino read from the Constitution of the State of California, "All people are by nature free and independent and have certain inalienable rights." Thus launched the demonstration.
Some quotes and highlights:
Rep. Nikki Tsongas (D-Mass.): "We are a partner with everyone across the country when it comes to bringing about marriage equality."
State Rep. Byron Rushing: "I am here this afternoon because we are engaged in struggle. If there is no struggle, there is no progress. We are here to struggle. In this democracy, marriage is a civil institution, and in a democracy, all civil institutions must be open to all who qualify."
Rep. Edward Markey (D-Mass):(Reflecting on the fact that gay marriage is now illegal in California, while it is legal here in Massachusetts) "There is one thing that distinguishes Massachusetts from California on the issue of gay marriage. We are right, and they are wrong! ... Gays should have the same rights as straights. As God's children, they should have the same rights straights have. Everyone is entitled to full rights under the U.S. Constitution, so now we engage in this great struggle. ... They asked the ancient Greek philosopher when we would know full and true justice. And he answered: We would know true justice when all of those who have not been harmed are as angry as those who have!"
Gary Daffin (LGBT political activist and Executive Director, Multicultural AIDS Coalition): "Here in Massachusetts, we wanted our brothers and sisters in California to wake up after the Election and relax and feel at home in their country. It took Black people 400 years for us to feel at home in our own country. It might not take the LGBT community 400 years, but we need to keep fighting."
Heather Baker (special ed teacher and Boston LGBT rights activst): "We are the American family, we live next door to you, we teach your children, we take care of your elderly. We need equal rights across the country."
Even though the weather wasn't picture perfect, the scene outside of Boston City Hall was. And yeah, that may sound cheesy, but the energy level at today's "Join the Impact" rally in Boston gave me faith that we can build this national movement to ensure marriage equality, and work to foster LGBT rights in all 50 states.
People are still filing out of what I imagine to be very congested spaces and rallies across the country, but I thought I'd go around the Web and find some reports.
Gay rights supporters waving rainbow colors marched, chanted and danced in cities coast to coast Saturday to protest the California vote that banned gay marriage there and urge supporters not to quit the fight for the right to wed.
Many cast it as a civil rights issue.
Crowds gathered near public buildings in small communities and major cities including New York, San Francisco and Chicago to vent their frustrations, celebrate gay relationships and renew calls for change.
"Civil marriages are a civil right, and we're going to keep fighting until we get the rights we deserve as American citizens," Karen Amico said in Philadelphia, holding up a sign reading "Don't Spread H8".
"We are the American family, we live next door to you, we teach your children, we take care of your elderly," said Heather Baker a special education teacher from Boston who addressed the crowd at Boston's City Hall Plaza. "We need equal rights across the country."
Democracy is not a one-shot deal. People can't just vote every 4 years (or 2, or more often) and think that the work is done. We still need to make our voices heard, to hold our elected officials responsible, to advocate for the causes we believe in. Very rarely do we see a direct and immediate change from any act of public assembly or civil disobedience, but each of us is still one. And the more of us there are, the harder we are to ignore.
Greater public awareness + greater media coverage = greater political awareness = a better shot at change that matters.
It was a beautiful sunny morning as thousands of people converged on Civic Center Square (just across the street from where Obama rallied the Bay Area twice, more than a year ago now).
One of the most stirring speeches was given by an African American Baptist preacher, a man who was introduced as having been taught by Martin Luther King. His ringing oratory, as evinced by the title of this diary, brought the crowd to its highest pitch of enthusiasm; I could imagine being at a rally in the 60's and hearing King exhort his followers for civil rights. (Sorry, I did not get his name).
Apparently Mark Leno and Carole Migden spoke at the SF rally.
In Los Angeles, protesters clustered shoulder to shoulder near City Hall before setting off on a downtown march, chanting and carrying rainbow-colored flags and signs bearing messages such as "No More Mr. Nice Gay" and "No on Hate." [...]
The Los Angeles Police Department estimated that 40,000 people would attend the march, which officials expected to be peaceful.
Across the state, the rallies took on a carnival-like atmosphere in heat-wave conditions.
Hundreds of people gathered on the steps of Houston City Hall this afternoon to protest the passing of Proposition 8, California's constitutional amendment taking away the right to marry for same-sex couples. Along with the passing of other anti-gay measures across the nation, Prop. 8 made November 4 a day of mixed emotions for many of the progressives in attendance, who say they went to bed ecstatic about the election of Barack Obama but woke up the next morning to find out not everything had changed for the better.
SAN DIEGO - A crowd estimated at 10,000 by police and 15,000 by organizers marched downtown Saturday to protest the passage of Proposition 8, with one arrest of a counter-protester reported during the otherwise peaceful event.
A man identified by police as a member of the anti-illegal immigration group San Diego Minutemen was arrested about 12:30 p.m. at Sixth Avenue and Ash Street following a fight, said San Diego police Capt. C.J. Ball.
I'm headed down to the e-board meeting, but I wanted to again mention the Join the Impact rallies in support of marriage equality today, in over 300 cities in all 50 states. Organizers expect over 1 million people to attend nationwide. Stay with Calitics all day, we'll have site reports from at least 7 locations across the state and the country - San Diego, Los Angeles, Ventura, San Francisco, Sacramento, Chicago, IL, and Albuquerque, NM. Hopefully we'll have pictures and video from some of those events as well.
If you're going to a JTI event, write up a diary and we'll post it on the front page. To find an event in your area, check the wiki.
UPDATE by Brian: We'll be getting some updates later on today, but I thought this photo from the SF rally was worthy of sharing.
The numerous issues inside the No on 8 campaign, and their disappointing mismanagement, has finally bubbled up into the traditional media (we were talking about it a week ago). The SacBee writes about the trouble at the top:
Key staff members - including the campaign manager - were replaced in the final weeks as polls turned dramatically against the No side. Their replacements say they found an effort that was too timid, slow to react, without a radio campaign or a strategy to reach out to African Americans, a group that ultimately supported the measure by more than 2 to 1.
Gay marriage supporters are looking to the courts to overturn the decision. But if another political campaign is waged, said Dennis Mangers, co-chairman of the No on 8 Northern California Committee, "we'll have to do better."
No on 8 campaign manager Steve Smith was shoved aside three weeks before Election Day, after he was slow to counter TV ads in which the measure's supporters claimed that same-sex marriage would be promoted in schools if the measure failed.
And Smith was replaced by a committee - half the consultant class in Sacramento went through the revolving door of that campaign. And they set about to answer unchallenged ads from the Yes campaign and get on radio. But the message remained somewhat timid, and the campaign didn't put much effort into minority outreach or field operations. Late volunteers were told to go out on a street corner and wave signs.
What's remarkable is that the best activism and creativity I've seen from the LGBT community in years has come in the immediate AFTERMATH of this vote. The talent was out there, but wasn't channeled during the campaign. Activists are using wiki-based technology to set up a national day of action on November 15 called The Impact. A comedy troup in LA used the Yes campaign's own words to "advocate" for prohibiting divorce. And Utah lawmakers are turning the tables on the Mormon church by using their alleged tolerance to make major advances for gay rights in the Beehive State:
Leaders of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints have said they do not object to rights for same-sex couples, as long as those rights do not infringe on the integrity of the traditional family.
Now, gay-rights activists and at least five Utah legislators are asking the Church to demonstrate its conviction.
The group Equality Utah says the Church made the invitation, and they're accepting it. "The LDS Church says it does not oppose same-sex couples receiving such rights as hospitalization and medical care, fair housing rights or probate rights," said Mike Thompson, executive director of Equality Utah.
These actions are useful to the future of marriage equality nationwide, and could be the backbone of a smarter, more grassroots movement. Why were they not tapped at all for the No on 8 campaign?
Yesterday, Connecticut granted marriage equality to all its citizens, offering a glimmer of hope. I am convinced that justice will eventually prevail. But you have to treat the campaign like a campaign, and use the assets at your disposal.
The mass of outrage and activism that has welled up in the wake of California's passage of Prop. 8 will I think eventually be healthy. It's a testament to the failure of the No on 8 campaign that they were unable to channel this energy before the vote, but often it takes a disruptive outcome like this to make it happen. And I think people are finally starting to ask the right questions and move from lashing out in anger to a more mature response befitting the message of equality. The scattered instances of racial intolerance were harmful and unnecessary, especially given that, based on the exit poll data, there was no one ethnic group that deserved to be targeted (Republicans who crossed over to vote for Obama made up a far larger portion of the Prop. 8 coalition than African-Americans). The various proposed boycotts (how could the owner of LA's El Coyote donate to Yes on 8? Given their clientele that's unthinkable) and individual actions are natural outgrowths of a movement like this and they have their place, but at least someone is making sure that the actual culprits get mentioned in all of this.
What is odd about the loss of family rights for California's gay and lesbians is that the losing old school campaign was built while the rules of campaigning where being demonstrably rewritten by the Obama campaign.
The Obama campaign's success was built upon not ceding territory to old myths on Latinos, African Americans, and young voters. The myth that Latinos would never vote for an African American was debunked by the Obama campaign, the idea of low voter turnout among African Americans and young people was also debunked. But in addition to ignoring basic myths on minority voting behavior, the Obama campaign knew that it had to still work hard to get the electoral results they wanted. They waged a campaign to win the votes and turnout model they needed.
At the end of the day, Prop. 8 was still a campaign and it needed to maximize its potential, which it clearly did not do. Many on this site have asked the right questions and will continue to do so.
As for the next steps, this is not, in my view, about patiently waiting back and hoping that the younger generation will reverse the decision at some unspecified point in the future. It's about sustained effort on a variety of fronts. It is quite heartening to see 44 members of the California Legislature offer an amicus brief to the State Supreme Court on behalf of marriage equality in the ongoing lawsuit to invalidate the constitutional amendment. There are a lot of politicians on our side.
The spontaneous protests and marches can actually be a way to harness the energy if they are handled properly. I think The Impact, a series of protests organized on a distributed model in California and in every state in America, is exactly what is needed. This is actually quite promising and would move this seamlessly into an issue of civil rights. Ultimately, there is a future for equality. There always is.
Lots of people are angry about the passage of Prop. 8 and they are just channeling that anger organically. One of the results has been street protests, and today's blocked Santa Monica Boulevard.
Hundreds of people protesting California's new ban on gay marriage demonstrated outside a Mormon temple in Westwood on Thursday, blocking traffic on a major boulevard.
The protesters claim the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints spent millions to air deceptive advertisements in support of Proposition 8, which passed on Tuesday with 52 percent of voters casting their ballots to define marriage as a heterosexual union.
If you're unfamiliar with LA, that is a HUGE temple.
There is other talk of boycotting Utah and Marriott hotels, and further street actions. This is how civil rights movements typically mature. And many are correct in the previous thread in saying that rights are not usually put to a vote. This is all being done haphazardly. Will a leader emerge from this movement?
UPDATE by Brian: From the comments, some folks are organizing a similar protest in SF for tomorrow. Protest8 Blog has the information. It begins at 5:30 and goes from Civic Center down to Dolores Park.
Like many other Californians, I woke up this morning with bittersweet emotions. Yesterday, we as a state, and a country, elected our country's first African-American President. Yet, at the same time, California wrote discrimination into its state Constitution.
Discrimination in our Constitutions isn't exactly something new. Our much-praised US Constitution had recognition and toleration of Slavery written into its pages. It recognized slaves as only part of a person for the purpose of the census. It took over a century, and a bloody Civil War to take that discrimination out of the Constitution.
Until the data is finalized for this election it is pointless to try and figure out exactly how we lost the battle against Proposition 8. I strongly suspect we will see certain communities in California voting against it in very high numbers (latino & African-American come immediately to mind, but we will see when the data is fully available). We will also see the Central Valley and the Inland Empire voting against in large numbers, as well as San Diego and Imperial Counties.
Expect to see me looking at that data when it is available, but for now, I offer these words below the fold.
"Blacks turning out in droves to support Obama also threw their support strongly behind Proposition 8, which would overturn the state Supreme Court decision allowing gay marriage. Opposition to the ban held a slight edge among whites, while Lations and Asians were split."
Despite threatening weather, organizers estimated that nearly 5,000 people came out to City Hall in Boston, MA to stand together as supporters of marriage equality. Organizers, including local politicians, leaders with Mass Equality, and U.S. Congressional Representatives Rep. Nikki Tsongas and Rep. Edward Markey all spoke to the crowd.
