Subscribe to Breaking News
Loading ...Corvino: Scared in California
If the election were held tomorrow, it’s quite likely that gays would lose marriage in California.
That’s California, our most populous state, home of San Francisco and Nancy Pelosi and the liberal Hollywood elite. What progressive California giveth, progressive California may taketh away.It surprises (and frankly, depresses) me how few gay people know or care what’s happening. Here’s the quick version: in May, the California Supreme Court declared the state’s ban on same-sex marriage unconstitutional. Prior to the decision, California had domestic partnership legislation granting nearly all of the statewide legal incidents of marriage. But the Court held that denying marriage to gay and lesbian couples deprived them of a fundamental right and constituted wrongful discrimination.
Gays began legally marrying in June, making California the second state (after Massachusetts) to support marriage equality.
Meanwhile, opponents collected enough signatures for a November ballot initiative to amend the constitution so that “Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.” (The amendment would leave domestic partnerships intact, but it would make it impossible for California to recognize same-sex marriages from Massachusetts or elsewhere.)
For several months we seemed poised to win. That changed in the last few weeks, with recent polls showing us losing 47-42%.
Why the shift? One reason is that we’re being out-fundraised and outspent, and the opposition’s advertising is effective. Recent figures posted by the Los Angeles Times show our opponents raising $26.1 million to our $21.8. A substantial chunk of the opposition’s money has come from out of state, 40% of it from Mormons.
You read that last line correctly: 40% of the financial support for one-man-one-woman marriage in California is coming from members of a church that little over a century ago was pro-polygamy (and still has many polygamist offshoots). 40% of the support is coming from a religious denomination that makes up less than 2% of the U.S. population.
What’s even more shocking are some of the individual reports about donors. The Sacramento Bee tells the story of Pam and Rick Patterson, who live with their five children in a modest three-bedroom home in Folsom. They withdrew $50,000 from their savings and donated it to Yes on 8. Pam says that it wasn’t an easy decision, “But it was a clear decision, one that had so much potential to benefit our children and their children.”
Or consider David Nielson, a retired insurance executive from Auburn. He and his wife Susan donated $35,000. They plan to forgo vacations for the next several years and make other sacrifices to cover their donation, “because some causes are worth fighting for.”
If I didn’t know better, I would think that California had just made same-sex marriage mandatory.
And this is what’s both baffling and frustrating. We gays have a direct and palpable stake in the outcome of this referendum. Yet few of us (myself included) are willing to make the kinds of sacrifices made by the Nielsons and the Pattersons—people whose marriage was, is, and will remain heterosexual regardless of what happens. They are free to choose so-called “traditional marriage” if it suits them. So what are they so afraid of?
I think the gay-rights movement’s failure to grapple with this question is another important reason why we may lose. We frame our arguments in terms of rights and liberty, forgetting that some people want the liberty to live without exposure to certain ways of life. They want a world where no one sees marriage for gays as an option—not their government, not their neighbors, and definitely not their children.
They want that world badly, badly enough to sacrifice for it.
In a democratic society, they are free to want that simpler world, and to spend money to get it, and to vote in favor of it. We are free to fight back. But that fight must include thoughtful responses to their concerns. It is not enough to assert our rights, especially when the documents embodying those rights can be amended by popular vote.
We need to make a positive moral case to our opponents. We need to show them that our lives are good, that our relationships are healthy, that our happiness is compatible with theirs. We need to show them that marriage is good for gays, and that what’s good for gays is good for society.
We need to tell them the story of Del Martin and Phyllis Lyon, the first same-sex couple to marry in California, a couple who were together for 56 years until Del Martin’s death in August at the age of 87. We need to tell them: these are the kind of people you are trying to take marriage away from.
I wouldn’t put my money on winning over the Pattersons and the Nielsons. But there are undecided voters who share their concerns—concerns about the world their children will inherit. We need to make the case to them. We need to raise money to communicate that case. And we need to do it fast.
[For more about the campaign or to donate, go to http://www.noonprop8.com/]
John Corvino, Ph.D. is an author, speaker, and philosophy professor at Wayne State University in Detroit.
For over fifteen years he has traveled the country speaking on homosexuality and ethics. His writing has been featured in regional and national periodicals, at the online Independent Gay Forum [http://www.indegayforum.org/staff/show/92.html], and in numerous scholarly anthologies. His column “The Gay Moralist” appears Fridays on 365gay.com.
For more about John Corvino, or to see clips from his “What’s Morally Wrong with Homosexuality?” DVD, visit www.johncorvino.com.
****
Catch John Corvino as he lectures on gay rights and debates same-sex marriage with Glenn Stanton of Focus on the Family:
October 21: Valencia College (Orlando, FL) (DEBATE) West Campus at 1 pm in 5-111; East Campus at 6 pm in 5-112
October 22: Siena Heights University (Adrian, MI) 9 pm Ledwidge Building
October 23: Western Michigan University (Kalamazoo) 7:30 pm Kirsch Auditorium
October 30: Canisius College (DEBATE) (Buffalo NY) 7 pm Regis Conference Room
I should start by saying that as a straight man, I believe in marriage equality. I am certainly hoping that this battle allows marriages to be obtained by any couple that wants to start one (regardless of gender) however, I think it is worth mentioning that the official stance of LDS was not to promot polygamy.
According to a book that I recently read, the founder was kicked out of the Religion after he attempted to introduce that very idea. I do not believe that it is correct to accuse the LDS of ever supporting or condoning Polygamy.
In fact it is only the fundamentalists (usually banished by the LDS itself) that still attempt to practice polygamy. I think everyone should be allowed to have mistakes in their past. Currently the organization does not in any way allow Polygamy, they don’t even look the other way… they reject those practicing it from their church.
I think in any situation, fair facts and disclosure are important to take the moral high ground. This is a great article though!
I am also not a member of LDS in any way, just a jewish guy from NJ.
This is clearly a case of de Tocqueville’s “tyranny of the majority.” It seems to me against the American principles I was taught as a child, that a majority can vote to withhold or take away the civil rights of a minority. Progress had been made to the point that if this was an amendment aimed against blacks or Jews, there would be a huge outcry. But gays and lesbians are still fair game. As this prejudice is based on religious views, it violates my freedom of (or from) religion which is a constitutionally guaranteed right provided in the First Amendment. What the great legal minds in the gay and lesbian community need to do is find a legal basis to overturn these amendments that are already in place in so many states.
Yes, this all does seem to come down to money and not what is fair and what is right. Those on the extreme right will vote yes on 8 no matter what. They cannot and will not be swayed. Those on the progressive side will vote “NO” on 8 and they too cannot and will not be swayed.
So, it comes down to the “undecided” voters to make up the difference. They are the ones that BOTH sides are targeting with their respective messages. Unfortunately, it takes money to get that message to them!
So, I will contribute as much as I possibly can, without putting myself into the gutter or living under a bridge. There is power in numbers! If we all give even meager amounts like $1.00, $5.00, $10.00 or even $20.00 each, collectively this would make a HUGE impact!
We’re not all Billionaires or Millionaires. But, we don’t have to be. If we join together and FIGHT, we can and WILL win the day!!!
California – Vote “NO” on Prop. 8!
Arizona – Vote “NO” on Prop. 102! AGAIN!
Florida – Vote “NO” on Amendment 2!
Connecticut – Vote “NO” on Question 1!
Morgan, my wife is an LDS daughter.
We watched about 5 minutes of Latter Days…not exactly great cinema–my wife found it incredibly insulting.
We have found a bizarre combination of love from her church family and also this strange denial that we exist (maybe they really are like Lavern and Shirley when the door is closed).
I’m frustrated with them. And I’m frustrated with their arguments that we are damaging their precious lifestyle–one that had my wife living a fairly lonely, excluded life into her 30s. Spare me.
Not true Roger Ramjet. The amendment of the constitution will not be interpreted contradictory to the original guarantee of equal protection.
So, if 8 passes we lose our right to marry period. This information comes directly from a California judge (and former g-friend).
Just in ELLEN DEGeneres is BUYING Airtime to air her own NO ON PROP 8 commercial!!!
BIDEN will say NO ON 8 on her show MONDAY!
Welcome to our world, where the Mormons influence everything. They are the nicest, most narrow minded and bigotted group you can imagine. They incessantly work to attack us everywhere. Know there is no limit to their hatred toward GLBT families. But they will always smile as the push the blade into your back and say “We love you.”
If we lose in Nov. The war for equality rights will continue and get stronger. Each day more are comming out of the closet. Even some of the people against equality are caught tapping their feet in the restroom.
If every LGBT Californian gave $25 – $100 (of the 2 million estimate stated in this article) that would raise $5 – $20 million to oppose Prop. 8.
The supporters of Prop. 8 are taking a risk by passing Prop. 8 in eleminating marriage for everyone in California, same-sex and opposite-sex couples.
The California Supreme Court did not specifically grant marriage to same sex couples, only that their unions must have the same dignity and respect as opposite-sex unions. This is best accomplished by a common name.
If the religious fundies want to reserve the name marriage for a man and a woman, then the Legislature may be compelled to designate civil marriage by another name, such as civil unions or domestic partnerships, for everyone same-sex and opposite-sex.
If Prop. 8 fails, the fundies will be back again in 2010, 2012 and until it passes. One just has to take a look at the current Prop. 4, Abortion Notification, to see how determined they are.
Californians please vote NO ON PROP. 8 and PROP. 4.
sasha,
I read all 172+ pages of the May 15th 2008 CSC opinion. In the majority opinion, the California Supreme Court (CSC) specifically stated that the CSC had the right, and reserved that right, to overrule and nullify any law that is unconstitutional made by the legislature or any unconstitutional amendment approved by the people, where individually or in concert. It has aready done so in the past several times. The people cannot take away a “basic human right” and that is a guarantee in the California Constitution. That constitution cannot permit conflicting clauses; it is written that way.
Your judge friend is in the wrong. Please let him/her know. They are just trying to do a number on your head.
Also, let the bigots spend their money and be the poorer for it after the election.
Additionally, much as New York has said, the “full faith and credit” clause of the US Constitution will require all states to recognize the marriages from other states, even same-sex marriages. It will of course take a few cases to make it to the US Supreme Court to encode it in law.
… AND …
It will cost some money, take some time, which we need to spend appropriately and wisely,
… BUT …
To make it easier, we need a President who will appoint “liberal” pro-LGBTQI judges that are agreeable to the idea of same-sex marriage in the first place, to make it less difficult and cumbersome to get that ruling.
It is just a matter of time. Once three states agree on the topic, even if by those “activist” judges, the avalanche of acceptance will prevail.
The CSC has already reviewed all the angles for our “suspect” minority, and it has found the bigots lacking. That logic will never change. The opponents of same-sex marriage are GREATLY in the wrong.
Let it be written; let it be done, NOW!
damn it !! raise holy hell !! we in other states have contributed twice or more times and you are letting these polygamists push you around? !! expose them for what they are !! we in delaware are counting on you !!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Just 1 word – Unbelievable
Check me out at http://www.veroticmen.com
Quasi, hate to argue with you but that applies to laws and refers to the Knight Initiative…the law voted in that started this whole mess. That is the law that was overturned. Prop 8 doesn’t insert a new law but an ammendment to the California constitution. The constitution is the document that law is interpreted by.
Also amusing that your personal reading trumps the opinion of an acutal judge. Are you a lawyer?
Although LDS leaders and most of their followers are hostile to gay marriage, there are some who are on our side. See what you think:
http://mormonsformarriage.com/ – “Mormons for Marriage supports marriage equality for all, and stands in respectful opposition to California Proposition 8.”
Don’t you think that the GLBT community should have prioritized early on and sent most of their tens of millions of campaign dollars to the “Stop Prop 8” drive instead of wasting their money on an ungrateful Senator “Marriage is between a Man and Woman” Obama? Barack had plenty of funds. So why did we give our money to someone who supports discrimination? That is like letting your own children go hungry while giving your family’s food away to the fat neighbors who could care less if you starved to death.
By the way, where is that simple ten second “Vote NO on Prop 8!” commercial from Obama? Don’t we get anything back for all our money and for our votes?
Once more, the scared rabbits in the GLBT community are again playing the role of useful fools. The marriage equality battle is a more immediate issue of concern to our community that the political ambitions of a passive/aggressive homophobe. Obama, as well as most of the Democrats, have already said they do not support our equality. I really wonder how many Black people would come out and vote for any candidate who insulted their dignity is such a manner?
But what do you expect. Far too many Gay men in America are still living out their adolescent well into their late twenties, thirties and even into their forties. Living “on the fly” (so to speak) in the sense of being in a state of perpetual arrested emotional development. Let’s face it, most barflies and party boys don’t give a crap about long term consequences.
Like overage teenagers, many males in the GLBT community just live for the thrill of the present and apathetically ignore the future. And by the time they become old enough to care about the same-sex family unit and its place in society, that is, if they’re not too burnt out or too jaded to maintain a relationship, it may be too late for them to significantly affect the political process.
Come on, why is there only ten thousand or so of us married in Massachusetts where it is still safe to marry? Jewish people only represent 3% of the population and I’d bet there are more than ten thousand married Jews in Massachusetts. But what do you expect? When people have a right, like the right to vote at age 18, people are sometimes just not mature enough to value that right. I hope our young people’s current apathy, concerning our civil rights, is just a generational issue that can be resolved and not something endemic in the gay community.
On the other end of the spectrum, the other half (primarily lesbians and more settled gay men) think that some messiah (like Obama or Hillary) is going to swoop down out of the heavens and rescue us from the slathering jaws of the psychotic bible-bigots. The cold hard fact is that any legislative action regarding federally mandating civil equality for the GLBT community ranks far, far below other more immediate issues; like, for example, funding a study of the mating habits of the black-footed ferret or a congressional proclamation commemorating National Artichoke Day.
And yet we still support people for president who tell us to our face that we are not as good as heterosexuals. That is why Proposition 8 will probably pass. It is because most of us are either apathetic hedonists, scared wimps or delusional masochists.
Can you imagine what would happen if there was an amendment like Proposition 8 that took away the rights of heterosexual Black people or Hispanic? The rioting, property damage, and the violence that would ensue would scare the holy crap out of the racists who would rue the day they ever considering such a god-awful thing.
Sadly, the peace-loving nature of the GLBT community is our most virtuous gift to human civilization and, at the same time, it is our weakest trait. We got to realize that we are on our own. Candidate Obama refuses to sacrifice the votes of a few bigots in return for our support; certainly a President Obama will not jeopardize his legislative agenda for our sake as well. No one on Capital Hill in Washington, D.C. will ever (now listen carefully)…no one on Capital Hill will ever stick their necks out for us without major concessions to bigots too. That is because the bigots are their people; we are not.
We need a third party who, with only ten percent of the votes in both houses of Congress, could be major player in forwarding legislation. A third party could force both of the major parties to take up issues that they now believe they can safely ignore. A third party would be a major power-broker that both parties would have to appeal to in a close vote in Congress. And that gives a small third party huge bargaining power.
There is such a gigantic dung hill which The-Village-Idiot-in-Chief, G. W. Bush has left behind that I cannot see our concerns even being on the political radar for years to come — if ever. Sure ENDA and Hate Crimes might come up for a vote and even pass, but with huge concessions given to bible-bigots which will take the teeth out of any meaningful legislation. DADT is doubtful while we are still involved in conflict overseas. DOMA is far too politically risky.
So, I think we had better just resolve ourselves to fight our own battles — primarily on the state judicial level in the few “liberal“ states that are left. We must focus all of our efforts on California, Massachusetts, Connecticut and a few others. In the future there might even be a few more free states where we can live. These will be our sanctuary states. If we lose them, if we lose this foothold, then we’ve lost all hope for generations to come.
~ Bud Evans