In what is considered one of the more liberal and progressive states in the country, California seemingly took one giant step backward as its citizens narrowly passed an initiative to ban same-sex marriages on the November 4, 2008 ballot. The California Supreme Court went to session earlier this week to decide whether Proposition 8 is valid or invalid.
Proposition 8 amended the state constitution to define a marriage as being between a man and a woman, effectually taking away the right for same-sex couples to marry.
Proposition 8 became the most heated political debate in state history outside of presidential elections and easily the most expensive social issue campaign in U.S. history. Contributions totaled $39.9 million to the pro-Prop 8 campaign and $43.3 million to the against-Prop 8 campaign.
Results and History
California voters passed the initiative 52.3% to 47.7% (7,001,084 to 6,401,482 votes). The voting pattern highlights the geographical divide of California. The more densely populated coastal areas, like the San Francisco Bay Area, tend to be and vote liberal while the central valley and inland areas, like Fresno and Bakersfield, tend to be and vote conservative.
Los Angeles tends to more often than not be the deciding factor in polarizing issues, and the Los Angeles Times has a great county-by-county breakdown of the voting results. L.A. County surprisingly supported Proposition 8 (50.4% to 49.6%), a fairly slim margin, but still a contradiction of its progressive Hollywood image.
Within the past decade, gay marriage has become a hot topic in California. Voters passed Proposition 22 on March 7, 2000 that defined marriage as being between a man and a woman. The initiative passed overwhelmingly 61.4% to 38.6%. Years later, state legislators would pass Assembly Bill 849 to make California the first state in the country to approve gay marriages without pressure from the state supreme court. Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger vetoed that bill, eventually making way for Proposition 8 to make its way onto a ballot.
The Fallout
Even after all of the ballots were counted and Proposition 8 passed, the issue of gay marriage in California did not go away. Had the initiative been defeated, the issue still would not have gone away.
Article comments
— go to most recent comments1 - Tommy Mack
Tan Buddy,
It is all that and a bag of chips.
“There was immediate prejudice against religious groups” stems from those groups forsworn bigotry.
In New Bigotry II, I quoted San Francisco Archbishop George H. Niederauer that “Proposition 8 simply recognizes that there is a difference between traditional marriage and a same sex partnership.”
In The New Bigotry, I cited California’s Attorney General Jerry Brown that the courts have already said that the right to marry is protected as an “inalienable right.”
Separate but equal is unconstitutional. It’s just that the Mormons put up a lot of money and person-power that they drew to ire of the stupid. According to the church's report, nearly $190,000 went to its role in getting the initiative passed. $97,000 of that money went to the Utah-based Mormon Church staff for their time devoted to the Yes on 8 campaign.
The Court has been put in a bad position " damned if they do and damned if they don’t. The issue is a legal HOT POTATO.
Tommy
2 - fuzzygruf
Let's look at the tolerance issue another way: So if a majority of white people think black people should be slaves, then it's intolerant of black people to not accept the opinion of white people?
3 - Storm Christopher
I thought this was a blog for "superior writers."
First of all, the author lauds the homophobic forces behind Proposition 8 for "using legal means to attain their goals." His implication is that the anti-8 forces did otherwise, that they employed illegal means to defeat prop 8. Prove that, Mr. Tan.
Secondly, Mr. Tan seems not to be awake during daylight hours. He criticizes the anti-8 forces for vandalizing churches and outing people. He must have missed the news about a San Diego Gay and Lesbian Center that was vandalized immediately after the prop 8 decision. He must not be aware that gay centers across the country routinely suffer anti-gay vandalism or that gays and Lesbians routinely experience descrimation in all its forms.
Thirdly, he rails about what he perceives as the intolerance of gay people toward so-called Christians. As if an oppressed group was under some obligation to be tolerant of their oppressors. A novel idea, that, however, one that would still have America as a colony of England. All that tea in the harbor, you know, and all that property destruction. Imagine - the Declaration of Independence as "hate speech."
No, I don't favor the tactics that a -few- individuals have employed. But I understand their rage, and I won't criticize them.
4 - roger nowosielski
You might add to the above the noted tolerance of the Christian Right, properly displayed while burning the abortion clinics. Just to bring a little balance to the equation.
5 - Cindy
Double what Storm Christopher said.
6 - Jenny
I'm a lifelong liberal democrat and heterosexual, and have not only supported but worked for gay rights issues. That said, I was offended by the racism and rationales, excusing violence by the gay community after the election. The smug, nasty rants by columnist Dan Savage, using the outcome of the vote on Prop 8 to say that no one had any future right to talk about racism that exists in the gay community after that, of course, this is the same Dan Savage that compares the teenaged runaways that ended up in New York City, and who were exploited as prostitutes, to being "embraced" by the gay community there. Melissa Etheridge's rant about how she would no longer pay her taxes, not caring that her taxes help pay for the roads she and her tour buses drive on, to clean up the air she and her tour buses and plane trips all across the country for weeks on end pollute. Those taxes pay for schools, and other taxpayers before her paid to support the school systems she was educated in, they pay for her trash collection, for health care benefits, which include, btw, free healthcare and treatment for those with HIV/AIDS, and that helps the poor and struggling in the gay community who have the disease but no insurance. There's a huge problem of racism in the gay community, especially in California. This and many other examples showed me that many like them in the gay community don't really care about the wider issues, and by and large are pretty much single issue voters. At the same time, others who might disagree with them get painted as being guilty of hate, for disagreeing with them. In all candor, I do support the right of the religious to have their beliefs, just as I've supported the rights of others, including gays to have their own beliefs.
Now, like Tan the Man, I used to think that some of the concerns mentioned during the lead up to the vote, were based on misunderstanding and fear, but then I would actually research some of the claims made. I spoke with old friends in Massachusetts who live in Lexington, MA about what I read about regarding what's required to be taught in the schools as MA has gay marriage. My friends are liberal dems as well, and they confirmed that what I'd heard was true, that they had assumed that what would be taught would be within age appropriate boundaries, but they pulled their children out of public school and sent them to a religious school afterwards, because they were essentially told they had no rights. They believed that the opt out provisions that were also state law, would cover their concerns, yet as of legalization of gay marriage, cities and towns are informed they no longer have to provide notice. We aren't talking about a book about a child with two moms or two dads, but some fairly graphic content, and what sounds like to me, exploitation of children as young as five years old, to promote the idea that even feeling that you love a friend of the same sex, could mean that one is gay. Rather strange since we're told that one is born gay, that it's not a choice. Parents have every right to protect their children, from people who might seek to overstep the boundaries. I was also told about a pamphlet given to young teens, where prostitution was encouraged as a means of hooking up, with addresses of gay and lesbian bars. I saw a graphic on the web of this pamphlet. I listened to a radio interview, not a right wing talk radio show, but a rather erudite Boston talk radio program, where the host supported gay rights, but interviewed a father who had sued the Lexington School department for violating his rights, and a woman from a pro-gay group that supported not allowing parents to opt their children out of such education. The woman essentially stated that she "didn't trust parents to teach their children about such issues", meaning teach them to suit her beliefs.
Now in CA, the no on Prop 8 people claimed that the opt out provision would remain, that it was ridiculous to claim it would be rendered moot, but they said the same thing in MA, and then broke their word. In California already, gay rights groups have gone to court to fight to deny parents the right to opt their children out and they won, though the media doesn't mention that fact. We see lawsuits against religious individuals, for example a religious ob-gyn was sued, because she provided a patient, a referral to a doctor, who would perform a procedure that she didn't because of her religious beliefs. The patient was a lesbian and wasn't denied care, doctors make referrals each day, yet it's discrimination if a doctor doesn't perform a procedure because of their beliefs? There are other such suits. This isn't a matter of being denied a job, or an apartment rental, it's not being threatened or harmed, it's an attempt to demand that the religious not have any rights to their beliefs. It's happening in England, in Europe, Scandinavia, Canada. So, Tan the Man, you're wrong that there was exaggeration or any lies about what children will or won't be taught in schools. There is a far leftist extremist agenda at work, within the gay rights movement, that isn't about gay rights, but about exploiting the movement to attack other freedoms, like religious freedoms.
7 - roger nowosielski
Your last sentence, "there is a far leftist extremist agenda at work, within the gay rights movement, that isn't about gay rights, but about exploiting the movement to attack other freedoms, like religious freedoms," shows your true colors, Jenny - and that in spite of such an eloquent effort on your part to try to present yourself for the objective person (you'd like us to believe) you are.
8 - Cindy
Double what Roger said.
9 - roger nowosielski
Thanks. I knew something was fishy once I started reading it. And sure as hell, my instincts were right.
10 - Cindy
Ella protesta demasiado.
11 - roger nowosielski
I had to look it up.
12 - zingzing
"Do you know how much outcry there would have been had people vandalized the buildings of gay and lesbian organizations?"
you must be kidding. right? it's routine these days.
do i know how much outcry there would be? oh, deafening, deafening silence.
or did i just go deaf? i dunno. you tell me. sigh... just write it down.
13 - Jet
Some of my best friends are gays!
14 - roger nowosielski
You should have putted it in quotation marks, Jet, or someone might get the wrong impression.
15 - Jet
A sure sign of trouble is when they tell you up front about how liberal they are, and how they support gay rights, but they're heterosexual.
"Just as long as I don't have to see it, I'll support it"... does that make me a liberal?
16 - Jet
Some of my best friends aren't gay?
17 - roger nowosielski
Kind of tells you a bit about "liberals." I suppose mentioning that they're heterosexual serves a purpose of sorts: to show you how really liberal they are.
I'm amazed that people can be so unaware of themselves and how easy they show you their true self.
18 - Jet
My next door neighbor's sister's brother-in-law knew a bus driver that met a man with a used car lot that lived next door to a hair dresser lady that worked with one once.
She said he was sweet!
The wrong impression? You mean there are still people on this website that don't know I'm not "normal" in the bedroom, light in the loafers, or one of them thar fag... uh homos... que... them immoral recruiters that steal hunky babe husbands from gym locker rooms and steam rooms and lure them back to my apartment with chocolate protein bars and and and...
wait I lost track
19 - roger nowosielski
False consciousness!
20 - Jet
I wonder if Tiger Woods has ever successfully "putted it in quotation marks"?
21 - Jet
Has anyone else noticed a sort of peace and contentment on this website recently, a lack of tension?
22 - roger nowosielski
I'm disarmed.
23 - Jet
For chrissakes Roger, what if Cindy reads that!!!
24 - roger nowosielski
I had better thread softly here. Cindy's got a hot temper in case you haven't noticed. I might be in a heap of trouble.
25 - Jet
It depends on what color thread you're planning to use to sew the conversation up with.