Gay Rights in California

Thank you for writing about this issue. I have no interest in dampening last night's results - I feel that joy, too. But it means a lot to at least have this loss recognized and discussed amongst the "mainstream" (in the good way!) left commentators like you.

it looks like the decadent left in their coastal enclaves who provided the fifth column of 'no on 8' voters.

Sadly, there are lots of older liberals (like my 78 year old Mom) who are progressive about lots of things, but can't come to grips with the idea of gay marriage. In a decade or two we'll be embarrassed by this vote.

Remember, this is why they are going for constitutional amendments. The anti groups know the demographics are against them. They are relying on the 65+ year old voters to pass amendments that they hope will be difficult to overturn. Straight people who are anti equal marriage are much more passionate that the straight equal marriage supporters. I am not sure when this will be reverse. I'm not hopeful. The arc of progress for blacks and other minorities has gone from discriminatory restrictions to amendments and laws affirming equality. For gays we have gone from no legal statements either way to laws banning our marriages followed by amendments banning our marriages. Demographics aside, we are going BACKWARDS.

Wish the legal types in Cali would chim in on Prop 8. Its passage is clearly discrimination under the law, (14th amend?), but as amendment can it be challenged? If not, I would like to propose several amendments myself that would benefit this great state, not the least of which would be a ban on Mormons (bigoted bastards that they are.) All the worlds fucking problems and they blow millions telling gays they can't married and the Inland Empire goes for it.

In the very same election African-Americans finally scale the mountain top they also lend the most damaging blow to equal rights for gay citizens. This irony is little commented on. Black Americans are notoriously homophobic. I've read upwards of 3/4 of them that voted on Prop 8 in CA supported the continued exclusion of gays from full participation in the vast and varied benefits of marriage. It's a troubling dilemma. I have to applaud their achieving the presidency yet deplore the bigoted and ignorant abuse they accord fellow sufferers of mistreatment. How do they, historically oppressed, demand a seat at the table yet desire others deserving equal rights and access be denied?

Yes, Obama could have cut an ad and that might have helped.

Significantly, gay rights organizations could have stepped up and done the work on the ground to build support for gay marriage before they litigated to victory. Hell of their own making, I believe.

But shameful nonetheless for the many gay Californians who are married and who want to be married.

Our only hope soon is that since the proposition was so badly written and ambiguous (if taken literally, it means the state can't do anything but recognize heterosexual marriages; can't levy taxes, hold elections, etc), it can be stricken by the court for being stupid.

A quarter of voters in the city of San Francisco voted for Prop 8 because San Francisco is not a monolithic bloc. It's a city of half a million people with sizeable african-american, asian-american and hispanic populations, as well as remnants of the old working class that's been here for decades.

If the Obama campaign had thought of cities and states as monolithic voting blocs, McCain would be planning his cabinet right now.

If you woke up this morning and found out Obama won, but that South Carolina had legalized slavery would you consider it a good election.

I have friends who have awoken this morning to discover that they can be legally discriminated against because they live in state of California.

I am outraged and sickened. America deserves its Ted Stevens and Michele Bachmanns. No Obama victory excuses writing bigotry into the Constitution -- even if that is a state constitution.

I once lived in California -- now that state joins Alabama as one place I will never move to.

Not being from California, I have an important question about the process used in this Proposition.

If the California Constitution can be changed by a simple majority vote, then, in what sense is it really a constitution?

Isn't the purpose of a constitution to describe a framework of principles around which a state or nation can build a civilized society. If the California Constitution can be so easily changed, isn't it just another list of legislated rules, subject to the whim of the political moment.

50% + 1 vote. Hell of a way to run a constitution. Where's James Madison when you need him?

I'm sorry, but I'm done fighting. I and my family have been nothing more than a political football for as long as I've been a voter. I can't take getting beaten up in one more election cycle. I know when I'm not wanted. More and more, Americans are speaking loud and clear: I'm not valued here. I'll find someplace where I am.

What the heck is up with Mono County?

Though I'd like to think it will be stricken down on account of criminal stupidity, or that the numbers will change after the absentee votes are counted, both seem unlikely. But I'm all for a repeal initiative, and for putting a counter-amendment on the ballot in 2010.

Whether I can get married in the next 5 or 10 years isn't the problem for me. It's just a horrible feeling, watching your rights get voted away by the majority.

The California Constitution is a joke; it needs to be scrapped. It shackles the legislature to strange payment streams and prevents the legislature from actually determining how to draft the budget. It needs to be scraped, and any new proposition/amendment should have a 65% threshold to pass.

Also, turnout was pretty poor for what should have been such a monumental election. And LA County went for Yes on 8, which can be said to be the margin of victory (since it has more than 1/4 of the population). So that was a fail.

Three years ago my husband and I moved to Canada. We watched with sadness and amazement as the results came in. The decision to emigrate is a complicated one, and shouldn't be made in a fit of anger. But after watching Americans across the country (in Florida, Arkansas, California and elsewhere) firmly and clearly chose for bigotry over equality, I am ever so glad we left when we did.

Proponents of gay marriage should have kept this fight out of the courts solely used legislative means to achieve their goal. Keep pecking away in the legislature and gay marriage probably becomes legal much sooner than will now be the case.

I'm a 48 year old LA gay man who has been in a relationship with my partner for almost 29 years. So this was a personal issue for me. I was always pretty pessimistic about the outcome. I know from many years of personal experience the great number of hateful bigoted religious folk in this country.

However, I'm not convinced that Obama would have had enough influence on the Prop 8 vote and even if he did, it would have been a tricky issue for him. I honestly don't fault him for his (non)actions.

I think more blame should be heaped on Governator Ahnold. If he had done an ad or two opposing Prop 8, I believe it would have made a HUGE difference and it wouldn't have hurt him politically.

Why wait for another five or 10 years if it's inevitable? I mean, I'd be willing to try it on the ballot every year and see how long the Utah Mormons are willing to spend their money to defeat it.

It's sad that Prop 8 passed but it's not the end of the world. Seriously. How did California's domestic partnership law change when it was called marriage? No matter what it was called it's still a "fake" marriage because it only existed in the boundaries of the state-- take a weekend vacation to Las Vegas and suddenly you're no longer married. What kind of marriage equality is that? The symbolic kind that rings sorta hollow.

As a lesbian in a 10 year relationship I feel we have a lot to be thankful for right now-- we now have a president who *IS* inclusive of our families. I don't fault him or Hillary for mincing words on marriage because I am a pragmatic liberal-- I want them in office working on our issues, both behind the scenes and in the forefront. I think Obama and others will lead when the moment is right but I don't want them to sabotage their own political careers for the sake of the lgbt's struggle over marriage v. civil unions.

The fact is that the GLBT community is not unified on the issue of marriage. There are plenty of us who want the rights and don't give a crap about whether it's called "marriage" or "civil unions," I just want the rights, dammit.

Regardless, I also think this is the end of the backlash era. We have had amazingly fast change on glbt rights in this country-- things will and are getting better all the time. So chin up, folks. It's coming, we have to have a little patience and be prepared to do a lot more work to help people understand why these rights are important to us and our families.

Sorry for unwittingly repeating Larry's point about the legislature.

it costs a lot of money to put a measure on the ballot. They are also notoriously hard to time.

In other words, one could aim for the November 2010 statewide election, but you might get on the June 2010 gubernatorial primary election instead.

I really think we should see how the lawsuits work out--it really should not be that hard to convince people that it is NOT okay to take away the rights of other people by a popular vote.

Interestingly, a constitutional amendment which said "No law in the state of California may discriminate on the basis of race, religion, sex, sexual orientation, age or marital status" would be pretty damned hard to be voted down, and would functionally repeal Proposition 8.

Any billionaires who have 2-5 million to get the "Equality For All" Amendment?