Comments on: Ruby-Sachs: Should the Prop 8 Vote be Delayed?

By: Yhitzak

Yhitzak — Fri, 14 Aug 2009 12:42:45 +0000

Proposition 8 isn’t the problem in California or the rest of the nation. The problem is lobbying, and the fact that GLBT groups don’t have a whole lot of that going on their/our behalf. So far, GLBT groups have stayed on the sidelines, refusing to participate in “politics as usual.” This is noble on some level, but also desperately stupid. Why should any political person, group, or party listen to any other person, group, or party? Money. Bottom-line, it’s all about money. And until GLBT groups have enough money AND the huevos to use it like the weapon it is, there will be no legal progress.

Additionally, we as GLBT people need to stop portraying the marriage debate (among other things) as being strictly or primarily emotional. Inequality is emotional ONLY at its very best. Legal equality is a matter of utility; when we are prevented from giving our best to society, the whole of society suffers. We need to demonstrate that notion instead of relying upon emotional plea-bargains and anecdotal tales of woe to illustrate our position.

As for the development of an opinion, Ms. Ruby-Sachs, only education will really help you. The arguments for both sides of this issue are very relevant; choosing a side doesn’t have to be the end of the discussion, nor SHOULD it be. What may help you determine your position best of all is to ask yourself this question: what does marriage equality mean to me? What do you hope to achieve for yourself or for your brethren by fighting for legal marriage equality? Is it about rights to share benefits, tax breaks or credits, and visit one another in the hospital? Or is it the desire to stand before the country and say, “Yes, I am.”? Is your marriage a showcase for the rest of society, or is it a glorious challenge for yourself and your spouse? Either way, who is anyone to pass judgement? But the questions are viable and should be answered by all of us, especially those who are demanding legal marriage equality.

By: Dr. Peter

Dr. Peter — Fri, 14 Aug 2009 06:11:49 +0000

Ms. Ruby-Sachs:
First let me write that I have much admired your work (thoughts) for a long time now. However, Re: your article above, I’m very worried! While I very much agree with you that we Gays must vigorously fund raise and lay a solid ground “work”, This increasing DIVISION in our very own community–citizens–lawyers–lawsuits–amendments–etc., is very disturbing, and has the very real potential to set our Civil Rights movement BACK for DECADES. We must all come totally out and on a one on one basis show our friends, neightbors, family and patients that we Gay people are truly kind, compassionate, loving, tax paying citizens who are the last minority in this wonderful country of ours to NOT have achieved our full Civil rights!
I’m reminded of Mahatma Gandhi who once said, “First they laugh at you—then they HURT you—and then, we WIN.”
Respectfully

By: Jay

Jay — Thu, 13 Aug 2009 23:25:58 +0000

ScottNH: the demographics are better for us in 2010 than in 2012. In 2010, the Democratic candidate for Governor (probably either Gavin Newson or Jerry Brown) are on record in favor of same-sex marriage–indeed, on record in believing that it is unconstitutional for us not to have marriage equality. In 2012, Obama will be at the head of the ticket, and he is on record as opposing same-sex marriage. You can believe that our enemies will be quoting him in every other sentence. He will attract a large number of conservative Black and Latino voters to the polls. They will vote against same-sex marriage. (BTW, this is not to blame African Americans and Latinos for the loss in 2008–it is only to say that we don’t do as well among church-going minorities as we do among other groups.) It is folly to wait until 2012.

By: ScottNH

ScottNH — Thu, 13 Aug 2009 22:47:35 +0000

Non-Presidential elections usually see large Republican turn-outs and minimal Democratic involvement. Campaign until the message is a given to the average CA voter, win a few more states across the country, and go for 2012. Safe is better. There won’t be any momentum lost because the number of marriages will be piling up across New England – and hopefully there may be a few more shockers like Iowa.

That said, I want to know why the article states running both elections will ‘garner voter disapproval’ – not sure why that’s the case…

By: spacestation

spacestation — Thu, 13 Aug 2009 21:54:43 +0000

I personally believe we should aim for a return to the ballot in 2012, with a continued focus on education, voter identification and community outreach. A return every two years until we win is unlikely due to the enormous expense (approx. $50 million each time). 2010 seems rushed and more emotionally charged than strategic. We are talking politics and running a winning campaign. Once the campaign starts, we lose the freedom to have open dialogue with our neighbors. It becomes all about sticking to the message.

I say let’s take this opportunity and hold the conversations that obviously still need to be had so California’s voters support us in the majority next time we go back to the ballot. 2012 is really not very far away. We have time now to truly organize our grassroots efforts more efficiently and effectively, conduct focus groups in diverse communities, canvass and build support while more millennium voters come of age.

I read one comment about the grassroots losing enthusiasm if we don’t move forward in 2010. That’s just not true. I’ve been a grassroots activist for marriage equality since 1993 and I’m still around, still ready to charge and certainly not going away until we’ve won in California. My enthusiasm is stronger than ever. There are many more seasoned grassroots activists like myself and we’re in it for the long haul. Plus, there’s an awful lot of work to do between now and 2012, enough that should keep any grassroots activist excited and very busy.

I also believe that if the 2010 groups would agree to a 2012 date, it would be a very unifying and electrifying move that would give us the needed fuel for an extended campaign and an eventual win.

By: Jacquemar

Jacquemar — Thu, 13 Aug 2009 21:49:17 +0000

I really don’t know how I feel. Both sides make a pretty good case. It would be a shame if waited and lost momentum, but it would also be a shame if we were under funded and lost again, taking away from funds we could have collected in 2012.

By: sfdave65

sfdave65 — Thu, 13 Aug 2009 21:20:36 +0000

jay and randy. thanks for saying what i wanted to say but couldn’t come up with the words.

By: randy

randy — Thu, 13 Aug 2009 18:00:39 +0000

I think it’s important that this issue be on the ballot every year until same-sex marriage becomes legal. This vote goes directly to the humanity of gay and lesbian people, and must not be put off for convenience or cash. It’s not about that. It’s about justice and morality. If we truly feel we have that on our side, then we must make the attempt, even if we believe we’ll lose. Make Californians decide if we’re going to lose. Don’t do it for them.

By: Jay

Jay — Thu, 13 Aug 2009 15:24:21 +0000

Of course, we need a strong grassroots campaign, and the grassroots are saying to go now. If we wait, the enthusiasm will wane, and the 49% of Californians who favor same-sex marriage will decide it can’t be an important issue if we aren’t even fighting for it.

In the New York Times, today, the leaders of the opposition expressed great relief that they may not have to run a campaign in California in 2010. I hope that they are well mannered enough to send “Thank you” cards to Geoff Kors and Marc Solomon.

It is ironic that ECQA, who botched the 2008 campaign, now expects us to trust them on their judgment that 2012 will be a better time than 2010. They simply lack courage and are much too comfortable with their big salaries. As far as I am concerned, my membership in ECQA is over. We need real leadership. Oh to have a Harvey Milk in our midst again.

By: Pati Di

Pati Di — Thu, 13 Aug 2009 15:20:07 +0000

I believe that the question of Gay Marriage should come up for a vote in California (and the other 49 states) in 2010, 2012, and every other year until it is passed as law all across the country. There is no sense to patiently waiting for something that might never come. The fight needs to be a constant stream of an ever growing and never ceasing legal battles across the country and in our own communities. We LGBT citizens have been too complacent and too easy to pacify with small victories when the ultimate issue is one of basic fairness and equal CIVIL rights. The day we as a collective group begin to make some serious noise is when we will no longer be ignored. Can anyone say, “no taxation without representation”?