|
||
Same Sex Marriage in CA: 8 Reasons Why We Should Lay Off the Debate over 2010 v. 2012
In recent weeks, some prominent LGBT organizations have been attempting to energize the rest of us by holding "2010 v. 2012 forums," where we debate when to return to the ballot box in California and ask voters to approve same-sex marriage. My first reaction was "2012, please -- I'm tired!"
But upon further reflection, I think the whole idea of this debate is based on a faulty premise that our only recourse is to return -- right quick -- to the same type of initiative battle we just finished. Herewith, my reasons why we should take a deep breath first.
1. Sad but true: it is just downright easier to get support when you're being threatened than when you're working for change affirmatively. Prop. 8 was an attack on us. When we're under attack, of course we've got to fight back (or else why would that chant "under attack/fight back" be so catchy?) It's harder to convince people to change the status quo and, to my deep dismay, this is the status quo that was just affirmed by the court. We had the advantage in 2008 when, for a brief moment, the law of the land was in our favor.
2. Voters weren't decided then, but they are now. The ugly Prop. 8 campaign caused most undecided voters to make up their minds by November 4. Even if some of those who voted yes on 8 might still waver when asked if they think same-sex couples should have marriage rights, that doesn't mean they want to be forced to vote on it again so soon.
3. When you're under attack, it's easier to rally supporters to believe this is the most important thing they could work on. When I was a little kid, I used to fantasize about a big giant coming along and threatening earth, forcing us all to unite. Prop. 8 was the progressive community's big threatening giant. But really, if we had to choose among all the pressing issues LGBT people face, not to mention all the progressive battles we have to win, would this be #1? Mounting another initiative campaign by our own initiative (pun intended) should mean we're deciding to put everything we've got into this fight. Are we?
4. It's incredibly expensive. The battle for and against Prop. 8 cost $83 million -- more than any other initiative in U.S. history. Money poured in from every state. I personally asked for campaign donations from friends and family all over. I'd frankly be embarrassed to go back to them again without something concrete to show that this time will be different. Otherwise I'd feel like I was crying wolf.
5. Other states need more help. Even if same-sex marriage in California is the most important issue here in our state, we'd need significant nationwide support as well. Same-sex couples can't adopt a child in Arkansas, Mississippi, Michigan or Utah; 38 states don't fully protect against LGBT discrimination in employment. Nearly 9 out of 10 LGBT students reported being harassed in 2007. In California, we do actually have basic protections. We don't have same-sex marriage, but we do have a safety net. Shouldn't some of that national support be thrown at states that don't?
6. Return to the ballot box too soon, and it's easy for the opposition to argue that we're subverting the will of the people and the Courts. It's like we're handing them their talking points on a silver platter. And our talking points? How do we explain to Mr. and Ms. Middle of the Road why they should vote differently so soon after? "We know you voted on this in 2008 and it's only two (or four) years later, but maybe you were mistaken, so won't you please vote the other way now?"
7. If I were on the winning side of a proposition, I'd be downright pissed to be asked to vote on it again so soon. We'd risk the voter equivalent of "If I told you once I told you a thousand times - no!" Sure, that wouldn't influence actual same-sex marriage supporters or die-hard opponents, but my guess is that the very voters who are still swayable would be those most affected by the tone and timing of a campaign.
8. The waaaaiting is the hardest part. But it's more lasting. We and the other side can keep going back and forth, back and forth, spending millions upon millions. Or we can actually create enough of a cultural shift that being anti-same sex marriage is no longer widely acceptable. We can step out of the initiative process for now, and do the much harder work of talking one-on-one with supporters and those who can become supporters. I'm just not convinced that all those millions spent mounting an initiative in 2010 or 2012 would actually get us there any sooner than smart base-building and dialogue with conflicted voters.
So what do we do in the meantime? We organize. We fundraise. We talk to our family, friends, neighbors and coworkers about our lives, our relationships, and why this fight matters. We embolden our supporters to reach out and talk about why marriage equality is important to them. We go back to the ballot box when we're coming from a position of strength - when we have the funds, the know-how and the support to win this once and for all.
For more critical reasons why we should "prepare to prevail," including the "importance of building trust and relationships in communities that represent the full diversity of California voters," see this public statement by the Jordan/Rustin Coalition. And for tips on talking with your friends and family about why marriage equality and other LGBT rights issues matter to you, go to Tell Three.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
Isobel, what I don't understand are the people who claim that it will be catastrophic if we lose in 2010. I don't this understand this way of thinking. Can you explain? I recall that it took three initiatives in Maine before the anti-discrimination law there won. I think if we wait we are in effect saying that marriage is not all that important, that the differences between California's domestic partnership and marriage are minor. It is certainly true that compared to most states, same-sex couples in California have a lot of rights, and it may be wise to direct our resources to the other states. Still, I think there is a value in continuing to fight for our rights. We may be tired, but I think we need to make sure that our enemies are also tired. If we make them spend $30,000,000 in California, they will not be spending it in Maine or Iowa or Washington.
It worries me to hear LGBT people say marriage equality isn't a top priority. Of course youth homelessness and suicide, job discrimination, DADT are all crucial, even horrific, issues. And perhaps they're more pressing than marriage if marriage is merely a superficial recognition for the relationships we have anyway.
But consider this: Marriage is one the longest standing societal organizers and cultural norms in existence. When getting to know a new friend, one of the first questions we ask is "Are you married?" When friends or family announce an engagement, we jump for joy. Why? Because it's the most recognizable and celebrated rite of passage in a human lifetime. When we say, "We're domestic partners," nobody breaks out the Champagne. Most people don't even know what that means.
Exclusion from marriage has relegated LGBT families to the fringes of abnormality. If we were allowed the right to something so basic as a "normal" family structure, LGBTs could increasingly be accepted as just that- normal. When that realization hits the mainstream, it follows that we'll see less bullying; fewer gay kids outcast by families; acceptance in the military and workplace.
That's why, whether in 2010 or 2012, we must go back to the ballot. It'll be tough. It'll be expensive. We might lose. But we can't be too tired or too self-conscious to try. Civil rights should never be put to a vote but, unfortunately, we have to play their game to win the equality we deserve.
See Isobel White's Profile
Well said JustMarried!
No, This may be inconvenient to you or to others, but my families equality is not gong to wait. Frankly I think your attitude that my equality is a losing proposition now and that we should wait is a perpetually losing one.
Do not counsel me to talk to others to beg for my rights, or say "pretty please", or act more "straight" to be accepted, or that me and my partner of 25 years is distasteful to the general public.
No, I am not going to follow that losing advice.
I am going to speak out now, right here and now and demand equality for me and my family, and I am not going to stop, not ever.
So, take your "peace in our time" conciliatory false and empty strategy to the ash heap of history where it belongs and join the real world.
See Isobel White's Profile
PhilipB - thanks for writing. I think the best I can say is that every movement needs those out in front and those pulling up the rear. Every movement needs those on the inside striking deals, and those on the outside fighting like hell. As long as we can be unified as to our ultimate goal, please, go ahead, speak out now and demand full equality. I just think that until we reach that cultural tipping point, we won't win and there are other strategies more useful than spending millions to take this back to the polls so soon. But that doesn't mean we shouldn't speak out now.
(And I would never tell you to act more straight).
Hi!
Thanks Isobel for your response!
You know, I came back here as I re-considered my comment. I re read your article a few times, and what I really want is success,
My comments were too strident, certainly directed towards you. I appreciate your gracious response and fanned!
Has any other minority been forced to put their civil rights up for popular vote?
The courts are the proper venue for this fight.
Whenever gay folks decided to pursue this issue, please don't forget the Briggs Initiative as a model. The opponents of the Briggs initiative knew full well that allowing the initiative to pass in southern California would allow it to pass; it in fact it was defeated in Los Angelels county and the Briggs Initiative went down.
Prop8. opponents need to get out the cities and go to the small towns, They may not win those small communities but they can't let the opposition run up the score. And please, please include people of color in the campaign, I mean people of color out in front and not behind the scenes. A good number of non-gay and lesbian people think this is "white only" issue.
Good luck!
Freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor; it must be demanded by the oppressed. Frankly, I have yet to engage in a direct action campaign that was "well timed" in the view of those who have not suffered unduly. - Martin Luther King, Jr.
No, we shouldn't WAIT. We've BEEN waiting. I think the lies that the Proposition 8 crew sold (i.e., the gays are going to force churches to perform marriages!!!) are now exposed, so it's time to vote again, now that we have full command of the facts.
I agree that goign to the ballot in 2010 (or 2012, for that matter) is a bad idea, but my objection is more about principle than strategy. The whole point of why Prop 8 was wrong was that it put a fundamental constitutional right of a minority to popular vote. That's just indefensible from a legal or ethical standpoint. Period. And now the LGBT leadership is proposing we do exactly that all over again? How, exactly, is that a good idea? And more imporantly, isn't that buying into the nonsense argument that a popular vote on these issues is okay? What kind of precendent are you setting for future maligned minorities? For crying out loud, people.
Look -- we may eventually win over the hearts and minds of the nation, but we can't count on that. As much as we might want to appear "well-behaved" and affable to the hypocrites and homophobes out there, we CANNOT afford this kind of indulgence of their misdeeds. We have no choice but to challenge this legally and politically, for ourselves as well as for all those who have the misfortune to come after us.
Your attitude is precisely why I hope you guys continue to lose this fight. Do you really think I'm going to eventually soften to your cause if this is the attitude you're going to take? That my honest thoughts and feelings on the matter are nothing than hypocrisies and homphobia? Do you think I'm going to actually care about anything you have to say when you continue to perpetrate the same closed-mindedness you claim is the source of your discontent? I promise you I'm not.
You. Lost. Twice. You lost in the most liberal state in the union, in what was the most expensive ballot initiative in history, in one of the most pro-Democratic election years in history. You had all the money and backing and support in the world, and you still managed to close the gap just to 4%.
I think propaganda is a powerful thing -- that's why gay marriage supporters invoke it so much. I think the country is moving away from gay marriage, not towards it. If even CA doesn't want it, you can't actually assert that any other state would be up for it. CA was the sure thing.
See Isobel White's Profile
carsntrucks -- not so sure about CA being the only sure thing. And also I really don't think it's the most liberal state in the union anymore. Have you forgotten about the Orange Curtain?
What about all those other states that have voted in favor of same-sex marriage, or had court rulings in favor, since Prop. 8? Hell, in Massachusetts it's pretty much just a non-issue. (I mean, there are rumblings, but I don't think they're going anywhere).
I think it is *amazing* that in 8 short years, we went from 39% in favor of same-sex marriage to 48%. That is a huge leap. I also think that if the anti-same-sex marriage forces hadn't pulled out all the cynical spurious crap about the schools, we would have won.
I'm not sure what exactly you mean by propaganda. Frankly I think both sides of any campaign use propaganda, if you mean by that spinning arguments to their own advantage. But the Prop. 8 backers outright lied.
See Isobel White's Profile
Matt Carter -- I totally agree with you about it's wrong to put a right of a minority to popular vote. As for legal challenges, I'm no legal expert, but I do know that a bunch of key orgs have cautioned against taking this to the Sup Court -- yet. See http://www.aclunc.org/news/press_releases/lgbt_organizations_point_out_that_lawsuits_could_set_back_progress_on_marriage_for_same-sex_couples.shtml
I know it can seem like all these orgs are just saying wait, wait, wait, being like the Booker T. Washingtons of the same-sex marriage movement, but I think they have a point. Let's be out there but let's be smart.
But the fact that we have put the "rights" of a minority to public vote should tip you off that this isn't a right in the first place. It's a matter of social policy. You're entitled to win or lose based on your arguments.
A lot of gay lawyers understand that, but they let lies and fabrications persist if they think it will help them politically.
I want to address point #7.
In 2008, California voters voted on Proposition 4, an abortion parental notification measure. It lost.
It lost for the fourth time. I have no doubt that in a future election, I will be asked to vote whether teens should have to notify their parents if they wish to obtain an abortion. The people who back this measure will keep trying until Californians stop signing their petitions to put it on the ballot.
I'm not holding my breath.
Every time I've voted on this issue, I've come to the polls fresh on the topic. I always say no. I don't resent them for asking again. The backers are aware that there's been a slight shift again abortion in the public consciousness. They'll try again.
There's also been a continued shift toward supporting marriage equality, so we too should try again.
We may lose the first time. We may lose the first time even if we wait until 2014. If we wait, we only give our opposition more time to gather resources. If we wait, we lose.
See Isobel White's Profile
Jaidit - I thought about the comparison to Prop. 4 too. You're right that the backers keep coming back again and again, spending millions on it. And each time pro-choice organizations with much more limited resources have to fight against them. It appears to me -- though I have no crystal ball and can be proven wrong -- that there's finally been enough of a cultural shift in CA towards support of teens' rights to control their own bodies that the anti-choice folks will continue to lose.
I don't think we've reached that point yet with marriage equality. Or to put it another way -- I think we'd end up like the backers of Prop. 4, spending millions upon millions only to lose again. The thing is: I don't want to spend our money this way. Let the anti-choice, anti-same-sex marriage folks spend their money how they want, but I'd like us to spend our money in the smartest and most effective ways possible.
I think we'll get there really soon, but I don't think we're there yet.
I couldn't disagree more. Southern states need help to stop discrimination? Please. People in California aren't going to worry about what's happening in Mississippi or spend their money or go there to help. People who live in California may not understand just how influential the state can be. In Oregon, we respond to what happens in Cali. If Prop 8 were overturned, it would do way more to motivate people in others states to take action.
I'm disappointed that the LGBT community allows activist leaders to decide when it is strategically appropriate to go forward with initiatives. Just get the sigs and put it on the ballot every freaking election until things change. Every time the numbers will move more in our favor. It's called progress. If you're tired and you need a break, go home. We just need your vote, not your blog posts or crying at a rally.
You obviously have no idea how public opinion works if you think people are going to be press-ganged into voting for something they really feel is wrong.
See Isobel White's Profile
adammc123- Doncha think it makes sense to throw some money at states where same-sex couples can't even adopt? I'm not necessarily talking CA money but I am talking about national attention.
Do it as soon as possible! While many gays and lesbians indulge in "intellectual debate" over when we should fight for a word, others of us have suffered horribly because we need the legal rights and protections. My partner, a foreign national, and I have waited fifteen years for "the right time." Right now I have a grandmother dying of cancer, a grandfather with Alzheimers, a mother with an undiagnosed immunological disease trying to care for them, and I can't return to the US to help out without leaving my partner behind. Some of us need these protection NOW!
"While many gays and lesbians indulge in "intellectual debate" over when we should fight for a word, others of us have suffered horribly because we need the legal rights and protections."
Precisely - Heterosexuals would instantly stop paying taxes if they were in our shoes for one week - It would be LAUGHABLE to them to "wait" and endure the suffering we endure daily while other people decide if the constitutional is more than a toliet-paper substitute.
"Constitution" - not constitutional, but we might as well add the Bill of Rights to the list of T.P. substitutes, since for gays it is about as useful in the U.S.A.
You've been blathering about not paying your taxes since last year. April 15 was a long time ago. We REALLY don't care.
See Isobel White's Profile
AnthonyE- thanks for writing. How terrible!
Prop 22 - 61 %
Prop 8 - 52%
2010 - 49% We win!!
Full equality. No delay. No excuses. You may be tired, but that's too bad.
LGBT people can't adopt in Florida either, ever since Anita Bryant.
While I would agree that it's easier to build a coalition when you're under attack, the part you left out is that the gay community never actually was under attack. That was an illusion from the start. Remember: Californians initially voted for Prop 22 by 61%, and there weren't tens of millions of dollars spent. The gay couples who went to court over this attempted to subvert the will of the people to begin with; getting another ballot initiative going would just make it obvious to even the fence-riders.
Prop 8 passed by less than 4%. That's hardly a mandate.
You're right, but the way I see it is, if a 60-40 split didn't stop them from pressing the issue, the numbers really don't matter. So if it's four or .4%, the outcome is the same.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
