-
Website
http://www.americablog.com/ -
Original page
http://www.americablog.com/2008/11/lawsuit-to-be-filed-to-stop-prop-8-hate.html -
Subscribe
All Comments -
Community
-
-
Top Commenters
-
Popular Threads
All Comments
As California sits now, a small minority group passionate about a single issue--usually social issue--that can persuade enough people who actually vote (generally only a small percentage of the population) to take their side can do whatever they want to the state constitution. This is minority rule and that is the most frightening proposition of all.
No, it's more frightening that it's a huge coalition of people trying to write their religious beliefs into the constitution. That scares me more than anything.
ps: the CA constitution forbids public initiatives that rely on percentage of votes; they can never say "If 30% vote on this, then this happens, otherwise this happens." I think this would retroactively violate that statute.
Here's a bright side: Prohibition was an amendment to the California constitution, and look how that turned out...
I'm happy that Obama has been elected, but BUSH has left this country in such a mess that it's going to take more than radical change and more than a term to heal this country. I'm finding it difficult to break out of my deep bitterness and resentment.
Time to wrest religion out of government. Past time to wrest religion out of government.
I hope Mr. Obama and Congress use the regulatory and investigatory powers or the threat of using them to herd the rabid kitties of the right into a semblance of democratic behavior.
I realize that you are all frustrated that Prop 8 passed, but what's done is done, and attempting to punish your fellow American's for voting their conscience goes against the very foundations of our political process. I encourage you be calm, non-confrontational, and make your case to your fellow citizens in a rational and personal way. If they are able to see how their decisions affect real people, they are much more likely to respond favorably to your arguments. Oh, and threats (ScottinSF) only make the inviduals against your more certain that you are not a rational person and not capable of intelligent debate.
Peace.
Regarding the Catholic church, I was referring only to their intelligence in protecting their tax-exempt status. As they have retained it successfully thus far, through many more wide-reaching societal issues, I believe that it was a safe assertation to make. The covering up of child abuse speaks not to their intelligence, but to a potential moral ambiguity that I agree is troubling.
1) The "go count your wives thing was a bit funny", you should have stopped there. I only have one, by the way, so it wasn't hard. I even counted twice for you, just to be sure. :)
2) Incest was not a part of the polygamy practiced by the LDS church
These two statements and deuceriders posts above are a perfect example of comments that in no way contribute to a civil discussion. I'll give you the first one, though. As a rejoinder, it did give me a chuckle, and as it has a basis in historical fact, isn't simply an attempt to cloud the discussion. The second statement fails this test.
If you're not interested in a rational discussion, please feel free not to respond.
I just wrote to Reid to dump Lieberman:
http://reid.senate.gov/contact/index.cfm
Please strip Lieberman of his committees now.
He has been nothing but a back biter and traitor to the Democratic party for the last four years.
He endorsed McCain.
He attacks his (former) party at every opportunity.
Joe Lieberman does not deserve any committee posts.
WE deserve better.
Thank you for your time.
http://www.mcfarlandpub.com/book-2.php?id=978-0...
"African-Americans voted for the measure by a 69 percent to 31 percent margin. However, 55 percent of white voters and 52 percent of Hispanics voted against the proposition" CNN (I can't find the link now)
"According to exit polls, blacks were far more likely than whites or Hispanics to support the ban. Age also was a key factor — the exit polls showed voters under 30 opposing the ban by a 2-to-1 margin, while most voters 60 and older supported the ban."
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27523989/page/2/
I can only hope that those whose marriages are now going to be banned get over their initial shock and hurt and do more than march in protest in the streets; I hope they pay a visit to every church including those in Utah who donated so much hate!
I hope that we don't just sit around and hope that some marriage lawsuit against prop 8 is going to be successful.
I'm ready.
We may have lost the battle but the war is just getting started.
Voting and supporting the political cause of one's conscience is our right as Americans. Acting like an ass by creating a public nuscience because someone disagreed with you is not. You could be looking at trespassing, harassment, etc. charges. Your time would likely be better spent in political activism.
http://www.sfgate.com/webdb/prop8/
Many black congregations are no help in AIDS prevention, and by butressing widespread ignorance and double-standards, contribute to the extraordinarily high numbers of new infections among African American men, women and children. Instead of taking leadership, prominent pastors,who preside over huge congregations housed in Mega-Churches, have become pigs at the trough of Faith-Based Federal funding and have adopted the Right-Wing line on abstinance-only sexual education and outreach to the gay and lesbian community. In the case of Prop Hate (8) they were only happy to take Mormon money and join the cause.
It is way overdue that Progressives stop giving the black church a pass on issues of homophobia. The traditional Civil Rights groups, most notably the regional Southern Christian Leadership Conference, stepped up for us. But they have to do more, even if it means disrupting the unity of African Amerrican Christianity. If waving Rolex watches and cash is enough to buy them and, their pastors off, then what good are these churches?
anyway, here's the relevant part of the CA constitution, article 2: "An initiative measure may be proposed by presenting to the
Secretary of State a petition that sets forth the text of the proposed statute or amendment to the Constitution and is certified to
have been signed by electors equal in number to 5 percent in the case of a statute, and 8 percent in the case of an amendment to the Constitution, of the votes for all candidates for Governor at the last gubernatorial election. The Secretary of State shall then submit the measure at the next general election held at least 131 days after it qualifies or at any special statewide election held prior to that general election. The Governor may call a special statewide election for the measure... An initiative statute or referendum approved by a majority of votes thereon takes effect the day after the election unless the measure provides otherwise. If a referendum petition is filed against a part of a statute the remainder shall not be delayed from going into effect."
There are a number of clauses in there about things that an initiative *cannot* be, but presumably the team of Yes on 8 lawyers thought of all that and made sure their amendment would abide by them.
all I can say is, if you're part of a same sex couple that was married in the last two months in CA, keep a copy of your marriage license in your wallet; you may have to produce it pretty often.
You've helped me and America avoid more shame.
Me, especially.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/timtimes/3000859890/
Enjoy.
"When I despair, I remember that all through history the ways of truth and love have always won. There have been tyrants, and murderers, and for a time they can seem invincible, but in the end they always fall. Think of it--always."
just replace tyrants and murderers with 'bigots and haters', and you're up to date.....
One other point. I'm 55 years old. I don't remember ever having the opportunity to vote to give any minority any civil right. I do remember that every fight for civil rights was won in a court room. These California propositions are a travesty.
go figure.
http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=pe2023Sz...
I can almost guarantee that those swine celebrating this hate legislation will be whining and caterwauling when their taxes rise to help pay for defending against the inevitable lawsuits challenging the state when all those gay marriages are threatened by the passing of Prop. 8 .
And at that point, those homophobes shouldn't expect the same massive amount of out-of-state funds to help keep their taxes down, or to help challenge those marriages conducted before yesterday.
Yes, it absolutely sucks this legislation passed, but the only option is to keep fighting, to give up in despair is EXACTLY what these sick fucking homophobes want more than anything.
After all that was the founding principle of our Nation. You cant be taxed as full citizen but be deliberately denied the rights of one.
Also I will never have to serve on a Jury ever again, since the good god fearing Mormons and Catholics of CA have clearly said the courts don't matter here. Since they get to decide what rights I have , I now get to pick what responsiblilties I have.
So the next Jury summons I get I am going to send it back with "Sorry not a full citizen so can't help you ..."
On a related note, you may have noticed the controversy over at TPM about allowing pro prop 8 ads on that site. I have been a loyal and consistent TPM reader from the beginning. I've come to rely on Josh and company to do the real reporting that so much of the MSM does not. But, I can't escape the conclusion that Josh and TPM have assisted the forces of hate by allowing those ads to appear on the site. So, I've made the very painful decision to no longer patronize TPM.
Michael Garibaldi: This isn't going to be easy.
G'Kar: Nothing worthwhile ever is.
Can you imagine if Muslim marriages didn't have to be legally recognized in Georgia?
Can you imagine if Catholic marriages didn't have to be legally recognized in Kentucky?
Can you imagine if Protestant marriages didn't have to be legally recognized in New York?
Can you imagine if Mormon marriages didn't have to be legally recognized anywhere but Utah?
Can you imagine if interracial black/white marriages didn't have to be legally recognized in Alabama?
Can you imagine if interracial Hispanic/white marriages didn't have to be legally recognized in Florida?
Can you imagine if interracial Asian/white marriages didn't have to be legally recognized in California?
Can you imagine if atheist marriages didn't have to be legally recognized in Virginia?
Can you imagine if all of that were true simultaneously?
This is not a state's rights issue. This is a federal, fundamental civil rights issue. This needs to be changed in the U.S. Constitution, and completely override the states entirely. This is just not right. Separate but equal? Where the hell have I heard that before?
Absolutely
The Christianists have been using that 'states-rights' agenda as a runaround
This world would be such a better place if there was no religion.
All you can say for it is that while it doesn't make for good government (or balanced budgets) it is more or less value-neutral in terms of cultural issues. It can be used by either side on any issue.
I don't want to see the initiative system go away, but it should be much much harder to pass an initiative--especially one that amends the state constitution.
1. Against the MORMON CHURCH for putting money into politics. Otherwise, it is time to TAX them!
2. Against the Yes on 8 campaign for sending out flyers that LIED by saying Obama supported Yes on 8.
Meanwhile, the No On 8 campaign has this to say:
Results Status
Roughly 400,000 votes separate yes from no on Prop 8 – out of 10 million votes tallied.
Based on turnout estimates reported yesterday, we expect that there are more than 3 million and possibly as many as 4 million absentee and provisional ballots yet to be counted.
Given that fundamental rights are at stake, we must wait to hear from the Secretary of State tomorrow how many votes are yet to be counted as well as where they are from.
It is clearly a very close election and we monitored the results all evening and this morning.
As of this point, the election is too close to call.
Because Prop 8 involves the sensitive matter of individual rights, we believe it is important to wait until we receive further information about the outcome.
Geoff Kors
Executive Committee
NO on Prop 8
Kate Kendell
Executive Committee
NO on Prop 8
http://newsroom.lds.org/ldsnewsroom/eng/comment...
which says:
"The following letter was sent from the First Presidency of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints to Church leaders in California to be read to all congregations on 29 June 2008..."
From http://mormonsfor8.com/ itself:
>In a letter dated June 29, 2008, Mormon leaders in Salt Lake City
>called for church members to work hard to pass Proposition 8 in California.
...
>Many, if not most, Mormons have responded to the church leaders’ request
>for assistance on this matter by actively campaigning for
>and donating to protectmarriage.com.
So yes, pat yourself on the back for your successful participation in a deceptive soft-money campaign designed to make an end-run around our societies ethical standards and electoral laws. How very holy and righteous of you, and of the LDS church.
On Oct 9, the LA Times reported:
"Mormon Church steps into the Prop. 8 battle"
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2008/10/n...
More commentary:
"The Mormon Money Behind Proposition 8"
http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily...
Don't forget--there's going to be a new President and and new Congress. That means changes at the IRS.
Tax exempt? We'll see.
I find it so very ironic that in this same forum you are denouncing all of those who voted Yes on 8 as "haters" or bigots, all the while venting obvious hatred towards the Mormon and Catholic churches' members for voting their consciences.
and means. This however was of our own choice. No where does it state that
the church itself gave money. The members did and that is no different than
any of those who individually did that did not support 8.
Technically, the flyer did not lie. It states Mr. Obama's position on gay marriage (against), including several of his own and Mr. Biden's statements which back up this position. It then sports the familiar YES ON 8 slogan. Nowhere does any flyer I've seen say "Obama supports Prop 8"
The reality is that Mr. Obama is against same-sex marriage, but also against codifying it in a state constitution.
Is the flyer misleading? Yes, perhaps, but if every campaign that issued a misleading communication were sued, our entire government would be in court almost every day of their political life. As would your own organization.
Civil rights issues should not be ballot issues. We cannot depend on the people to decide the rights of those in the minority. Who knows how long minorities in this country would have attained equal rights if they had to depend on ballot initiatives to give them to them. I'm pretty sure that we'd still have a few hold-out states today that would not give blacks equal rights.
I hope there is a way to oust this Proposition of Hate.
I have seen several comments here and on related items talking about boycotts. And in truth I had already thought about that in the last few days. And I think it's a great idea, and I don't mean like those bogus boycotts of Ford and so forth.
First question: how do we get such a thing organized? Does every state have an "equality" website such as Equality California and Equality Texas? That would be a start. It's easy enough for each person to decide for him- or herself, and I think it would be much more effective to have an organized boycott. California may not rely on the tourist industry as much as, say, Florida. another state that could do with a good boycott right about now. Still, I think with proper participation California would feel it.
Second, how do we decide who to boycott? Obviously, travel to California would be a no-no. Does that mean also boycotting any California companies? Nowadays it's easy to buy things on the internet without having any idea where the seller is located. And how about California individuals (i.e., eBay and the like)? Can there be an "exception" list for companies or individuals who donated to the "No on 8" effort or at the very least did not donate to "Yes on 8"? How about indirect boycotting,such as films? I understand some of those are made in California.
Anyway, is there an organization out there who can help organize a boycott and perhaps knows some basic "ground rules"? I'd like to see something along these lines start happening now because in a couple of weeks the impetus is going to start fading and soon it will be forgotten. Let the ones who were so gung-ho about this initiative start doing the traveling to California (and Florida) to make up for what they are losing with us.
Individual sites are allowed to choose what ads they want to carry. I think that's where the choice should properly be located. Punishing a company like Google for trying to adhere to first amendment principles in their advertising arm's policies (while donating rather heavily to stop 8 on their own account) isn't good for our democracy in the long run.
On the other hand, MySpace is the worst thing that ever happened to the Internet, and should be boycotted simply for the good of the 'tubez.
For those of you in L.A.: Protest at the LDS temple on Santa Monica Blvd & Overland, today, 3PM PST.
But I also think that it is important to reward those who stood with us. As an immediate step, I'm paying really close attention to where my produce, meat, and dairy products are coming from. I'll buy apples and oranges imported from Mars before I buy anything from the central CA.
You're a drag on society and a disgusting example to childre.
I don't dislike you as a person or persons, but I don't want children to think that what you do and how you live is right, because it isn't. Why do you want to get married anyway? What difference could it make to you? Because you're married does not mean anyone respects you more or finds your lifestyle acceptable. It just means you're disrespected the institution of marriage, which is between a man and a woman for the purpose of having children. Since you can't do that you choose to try to adopt. Which is even more disgusting and self-serving.
Idiots like you make the rest of us intelligent heterosexuals look bad.
Yesterday America overwhelmingly told people like you that your time has passed. Your politics are over.
Take solace in this while it lasts. Which will be a couple months to a couple years.
Either way, you're standing on the tracks and the train's coming through.
Get ready for the Funky President and the Big Payback.
Marriage is a social phenomenon that occurs across many cultures and serves a number of different functions including the division of labor, systems of property, and the fusing of social networks (or other methods for the maintenance of social solidarity.) In some societies marriage is much more contractual and property oriented than religious, or reproductive.
Your Christian narcissism is showing.
I have enjoyed your comments and I hope you are having a wonderful day despite this person
While of course you are entitled to your opinion, it may be taken more seriously if you couch your arguments (or at least present some, instead of spewing random crap) in a more civil tone.
I agree that some of the posts on here are somewhat vitriolic, but you must understand that these individuals were passionate about Prop 8, and are bitterly disappointed by its passage. One can expect and excuse a certain amount of rage, before a return to civil discourse.
I recently stumbled upon this blog, and I'm not yet certain if it is even open to differing opinions, but starting out your comments on a topic in the manner you have pretty much guarantees that even if such opinions ARE welcome, you will not be.
I encourage you to consider that although you obviously disagree with the poster's lifestyles, they are still human beings with feelings, and your post makes you look, at best, unintelligent.
I worked against Prop 8 because it did the exact opposite of what those damned bumper stickers said....Prop 8 did NOT protect marriage.
Prop 8 actually DESTROYS the RIGHT to marriage for some, and now THREATENS the legal status of some marriages that were performed in the last few months.
YOU are the drag on society and its people like you that are a disgusting example for children. Why would anyone want to have their children grow up with such hateful thoughts as yourself! A beautiful child, a beautiful person is one that knows no hate.
This isn't over- sorry to tell you!
No one shall within the sanctity of marriage be allowed to get DIVORCED. A divorce is as much a right as a marriage.
You may NOT take your free pass out of the sanctity of marriage you CHOSE to enter.
If marriage is not a right and/or freedom of choice... neither should be divorce.
You want to say who can get married... then why not say who can't get divorced?
I'd love to know the difference... because I'm pretty positive divorce is also strongly rejected among religious beliefs... however, seems to be happening daily.
I'd like to see how many of you would like that propostion...and that right taken away from you.
By Howard Mintz
Mercury News
While refusing to concede that the ballot measure has passed, gay marriage supporters nevertheless filed a petition with the state's high court in the event the current vote holds and Proposition 8 amends the California constitution to once again outlaw marriage for gay and lesbian couples....
The legal challenge maintains that Proposition 8 is invalid and takes away a "fundamental right'' from "just one group — lesbian and gay Californians.'' The petition argues that the state constitution cannot be amended if it violates other constitutional rights.
The state Supreme Court this spring struck down California's previous laws banning gay marriage, finding that they violated the state constitution. That 4-3 ruling set in motion the political firestorm over Proposition 8, which was designed to trump the Supreme Court's decision.
http://www.mercurynews.com/elections/ci_10906871
As Topher wrote: "The legal challenge maintains that Proposition 8 is invalid and takes away a "fundamental right'' from "just one group — lesbian and gay Californians.'' The petition argues that the state constitution cannot be amended if it violates other constitutional rights."
So that's the reason. The amendment depriving gays of the right to marry violates both the substantive due process clause of the U.S. Constitution as well as the equal protection clause, since only a particular group is being deprived of this right. Similar clause(s) also exist in the California Constitution, so that this new amendment would put the state constitution in conflict with itself.
And frankly, California needs to do something about its initiative process since this could go back and forth ad infinitum, with whatever group cares the most getting a proposition on the ballot to amend the Constitution in the way it would like, and marshaling the funds and resources to get it passed. That would be bad enough if it were a statute we were talking about, but subjecting the Constitution to this sort of process is ridiculous.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/max-blumenthal/wh...
When the professional signature gatherers were out getting signatures, I suggested the following technique to disrupt the process. This was in response to what I felt was a silly method to convince people not to sign the petitions that Equality California suggested. It was to have gay people stand next to the signature gatherer and try to talk people out of signing the petitions in front of grocery stores. There was no way that method would have worked.
The facts:
Most of the people gathering signatures for the anti-gay marriage proposition were not volunteers, but being paid per signature.
The signature gatherers could care less about any of the propositions. They are doing it for the money. That is their motivation -- money.
The signature forms can not be photocopied per state law -- they have to be professionally printed. This of course, takes time and money to do. To have to print more petitions is costly.
What I proposed was this:
Encourage every person by email to use their personal cash and buy the signatures and blank forms from the signature gatherers. Ask them how much they are being paid per signature. Most will tell you. Pull out your wallet and tell them you'll buy the signatures with cash at the same rate they are getting paid. Then offer like $5 for each blank petition they have. I tried this out, and it totally worked.
No forms equals no signatures. A very active effort to do this would have killed this proposition before it got to the voters.
And no trips to California. Oh, no. Plenty of other warm places to go. Screw them, I used to have so much respect for the place and it all just vanished.
On Wed, Nov 5, 2008, I was depressed and crying at work. But now that some time has passed, I actually think it might be a good thing that Prop 8 passed.
Firstly, EVERYONE in California and the nation is discussing gay rights and gay marriage. This means that regardless of what anyone may think about the right of gay people to marry, this issue is now undeniably a mainstream issue.
Secondly, it gave a chance for people--regardless of sexual orientation, ethnic group, religion, etc, to band together against this new set of discrimination against a California and US minority group.
Thirdly, it has opened some interesting conversations about the place of ethnic minorities in the LGBT community with regard to both how mainstream America views the LGBT community and about the marginalization of minority communities by the mainstream LGBT movement itself.
Finally, the timing of Prop 8 passing and the location (california??!?!? WHAT?!?!?!) has awakened a lot of people up to the fact that there are a lot of people out there who just don't get it. And, I think that ultimately, Prop 8 is going to be overturned by the Supreme Court. It will probably come up on the ballot again, and hopefully the next time around it will NOT pass--not even by a slim majority. But we've all go to work hard to make sure that it WON'T!!! We can't expect others to do the work for us.
This country has a history of Civil Rights winning in the end. It is only a matter of time before everyone will truly be equal before the eyes of the law. Until then, we all just have to work hard and communicate with our closedminded brothers and sisters out there. We have to let them know that we are the same as them, and only as different as the next person.
ONE LOVE PEOPLE!!!!
obamaisamerica.blogspot.com
http://obamaisamerica.blogspot.com/search?q=prop+8
COME CHECK IT OUT!!
Gay Tax Protest. Let everyone else pay our taxes until they start to care about our rights. I seriously doubt the government will give a crap about ANY issue in our lives, from serving openly in the military, employment rights, adoption, etc. ad nauseum, until they RESPECT our very homes and loved ones inside.
Heterosexuals - You better wake up. Instead of pondering a cerebral concept like the "1,138 rights of marriage", you need to educate yourselves about the CONSEQUENCES when one or more of those 1,138 rights are denied. GOOGLE "Freeheld" or "Tying the Knot"; watch the DVDs. Write it down now.
Yes, I did said HATE above - I stand by it. Because how else can you explain these 3 realities?:
A police woman loses her life in the line of duty; her wife of 13 years is denied all pension benefits.
A rancher loses his husband of 22 years; his inlaws evict him and try to take the home he built and lived in with his beloved.
A detective spends 25 years risking her own life while protecting society; she has to spend her remaining days on this earth worrying whether her earned pension will be transferred to her wife (while living with terminal cancer).
YES, H-A-T-E. And your silence on this matter is a serious affront to our families's safety and security. FAMILY - isn't that a cherished concept in the U.S.A.?
So now after decades of disinterest, some of us in the LGBTI community have AWAKENED. And we will refuse to pay one penny of income tax to the IRS until the government (i.e. - you) decide you WANT our tax dollars as EQUAL
CITIZENS.
This ain't a vote - This ain't a debate. PAY MY TAXES until I have what your family ALREADY HAS; your apathy is
costing you money as you read this.