No, that is not the only alternative. We have a system that is supposed to check against both extremes. The ease with with the California constitution can be amended by a simple vote simply highlights the inadequacy of the current checks.
There is bigotry in this country, and it needs to be peeled away like layers of onion. There are many ways to peel an onion. Newsom’s approach to peeling that onion, some might say, is like taking a knife and making a stabbing slice through a few layers. In and of itself, that slice may not function to peel many layers off, but the cut he has helped to make has now been filled with thousands of couples who have married legally. The way I see it, there are at least 4 tangents of social change that such action catalyzes, in no particular order:
- Media coverage and increased awareness of the marriage equality and gay rights movement among the general public
- Heightened awareness of the marriage equality and gay rights movement for the friends, family, acquaintances, employers (etc…) of the couples who married legally since the Spring.
- Heightened awareness of the marriage equality and gay rights movement for the legal and legislative systems
- Heightened awareness of the opposition and of just what the arguments are (or rather lack thereof) against marriage equality and gay rights.
All of these things function to help the movement gain traction and get a grip on the edges of those layers of the onion. To blame Newsom et al for Prop 8 passing, imho, is to ignore the first three items and see only a narrow view of what is actually taking place in the fourth item.
“Because Newsom was a smug activist politico and he pissed us off” or “because children are being exposed to same sex marriage and…that’s just wrong!” are not compelling arguments against the broader movement, and if Prop 8 passes the movement will move on, whether anyone likes it or not.
Exactly. California’s initiative process amounts to glorified mob rule. This is exactly what the Founding Fathers feared. Anyone with enough money can [del]buy signatures[/del] pay for others to collect signatures, bypass the legislature and get whatever crack pot proposal they want on the ballot. They don’t even need to live in California. Now we just need someone to bankroll a ban on divorce on the ballot; that’ll do even more to “protect traditional marriage”.:rolleyes:
Judging from the evidence, they do. Sorry.
That just means that McCain was unpopular enough to lose. It doesn’t mean much about racial bigotry, and it means nothing about anti-gay bigotry.
Ignorance is not homophobia. It’s ignorance.
IANAL, but mightn’t it be better in the long run if they try to take away the status of those same sex couples already legally married?
It would be something to take to the SCOTUS, where the whole thing might be overturned. Or am I being naive?
It’s still not over. Cite.
That’s a centrist campaign position intended to win swing votes. I’m pretty sure Sen. Obama has expressed support for same-sex marriage before outside of the context of a presidential campaign.
Pro-SSM, please. (Bueller? Bueller?)
That’s the idea, and lawsuits are already being filed with this exact thing in mind.
Same-sex marriage, please, and:
(a) Nobody has “taught” same-sex marriage to second graders. There is no curriculum in California public schools re marriage of any kind. Don’t buy into the very same lies that you accuse others of being susceptible to.
(b) The same-sex wedding (singular, not plural) was a field trip which parents had the choice to opt their children out of. The parents and children involved were overwhelmingly supportive, and IIRC they sued Yes on 8 to stop them using that case in their campaign.
Or, you know, not allowing a freakin’ Constitution to change on a political whim.
Racial bigotry and orientation bigotry are not two peas in the same pod. It is quite possible to have one without the other.
LGBT rights movement, please.
By the way, for those of you in San Diego, there will be a rally at the Center at 6:30 tonight. I expect to see you all there!
Oh, I see. Somehow you think that if he panders to the other guy, that proves he’s not pandering to you. Forgive me if I don’t find the “oh, he’s just lying to get votes” argument a compelling reason to feel better about it.
If an attempt at invalidating existing same-sex marriage makes to SCOTUS and SCOTUS oveturns in it’ll just mean Prop 8 can’t be applied retroactively.
Looks like the ACLU is getting onboardand they’re going for that avenue mentioned earlier:
Hang in there, there’s hope yet!
Apparently it occured in Mass, not CA.
Yes, but that doesn’t matter why or to who. It still happened and it was a stupid idea.
And- it’s nice you prefer to use a particular set of PC terminology. Don’t correct others, however. Please.
Oh, I forgot, us Gays and Lesbians are just supposed to shut up about getting married and not force the poor heterosexuals to hear about our lives. Talk about blaming the victim.
Why do I keep thinking of white people in the past telling black people how they “should” behave so they’ll be accepted?
There is absolutely nothing stupid about a group of students being invited and going to a teacher’s wedding - gay or straight.
So, we could have gay marriage, but only if we don’t ever let anyone know we have gay marriage?
There’s something stupid in your post, that’s for sure, but I don’t think its the Massachusetts field trip.
The other position was not stated in the context of a campaign, IIRC. Sorry, don’t have a cite. But I can tell you that the Obama campaign has been very involved with the LGBT community in particular and it’s not a group he wants to piss off.
No. The term “gay marriage” is both inaccurate and misleading. It’s nothing to do with political correctness; I am bisexual and see no need to be locked out of both “gay marriage” and “straight marriage”. When you use those terms, you are codifying the massive ostracism from all sides that I am personally a victim of and I don’t understand why you want to blame me for that.
You mean “to whom”, and the entire point of fighting for our rights is so that we can live our lives without constantly looking over our shoulders and wondering if we’re going to do something politically damaging to the cause. That’s what true equality is. Your cynical blame game is not helping. I mean, really–the Yes on 8 campaign just poured out months of lies and hate to swindle the voters into institutionalizing discrimination, and you’re blaming us for being a little happy about finally winning our rights for a couple of months? Those of us who are directly affected by this do not need to be spat upon from both sides, so please take your insults and blame elsewhere.
Exactly… and telling people that Gavin Newsom was “stupid” for saying Same Sex Marriage is inevitable is just as insulting. The man is right - whether the haters like it or not, it’s coming…
Newsom didn’t lose this for us - the money from the mormon church and the knights of columbus did…
Amen.
My neighborhood’s flag flies at half-mast today, but it won’t next time. To hell with anyone who tells my neighbors and loved ones to roll over and “behave” and maybe we’ll let you love each other someday.
There are already far more kids in orphanages around the world than there are parents willing to adopt them. Even here in the U.S. there are kids who spend their entire childhoods in foster care because no one will adopt them. You’re right that part of the reason is that many parents are only seeking to adopt young children. Another part is that many parents are only seeking to adopt children of a particular race (most often, white). But studies have shown that gay and lesbian parents are generally more likely to be willing to adopt children considered “undesirable” by the average adoptive parent.
There is also a drastic shortage of foster parents. Kids get split up from their siblings because it’s impossible to place them together. Kids get bounced from one foster family to another, having to repeatedly adjust to a new home, new school, etc. Kids get placed in kinship care with relatives who don’t particularly want them and aren’t well-equipped to care for them. And kids get left for far too long in foster homes where abuse is suspected, because there just isn’t anywhere else to put them.
The new law in Arkansas bans unmarried couples (including all same-sex couples) from both from adopting and from serving as foster parents, when there aren’t enough people willing to do either.
Prop 8, according to what I’m hearing, is still not officially called, due to uncounted ballots that could tip it.
Candlelight vigil happening in Sac around the capital building RIGHT NOW.
It isn’t, and there are millions of ballots yet to be counted, yet the Governator has already ordered all county clerks to stop issuing marriages to same-sex couples.
Do you have a link for that? I tried searching Google News for it and didn’t come up with me. There were several stories about county clerks deciding to stop issuing licenses, believing they are complying with the law, but nothing about Arnold ordering them to stop issuing licenses.
I think it is over, though. I see no evidence that suggests that the uncounted votes would be overwhelmingly against Prop 8. I’m not willing to hold out hope just to be disappointed later.
What is still up in the air is whether the marriages that have been performed will be found invalid, and whether this court challenge to Prop 8 will succeed.
It’s hard to predict what the CA Supreme Court will do in either case. These articles seem to suggest that the court challenge will fail and the marriages will be found invalid:
http://volokh.com/posts/chain_1225907782.shtml
And the reasoning seems correct I think. But, then, it’s hard to predict what the CA Supreme Court will do.
Two of my friends went and eloped today. God, I hope they don’t lose their marriage.