You Can't Take This Away From Me: Proposition 8 Broke Our Hearts, but It Did Not End Our Fight

Like many in our movement, I found myself in Southern California last weekend. There, I had the opportunity to speak with a man who said that Proposition 8 completely changed the way he saw his own neighborhood. Every "Yes on 8" sign was a slap. For this man, for me, for the 18,000 couples who married in California, to LGBT people and the people who love us, its passage was worse than a slap in the face. It was nothing short of heartbreaking.

But it is not the end. Fifty-two percent of the voters of California voted to deny us our equality on Tuesday, but they did not vote our families or the power of our love out of existence; they did not vote us away.

As free and equal human beings, we were born with the right to equal families. The courts did not give us this right--they simply recognized it. And although California has ceased to grant us marriage licenses, our rights are not subject to anyone's approval. We will keep fighting for them. They are as real and as enduring as the love that moves us to form families in the first place. There are many roads to marriage equality, and no single roadblock will prevent us from ultimately getting there.

And yet there is no denying, as we pick ourselves up after losing this most recent, hard-fought battle, that we've been injured, many of us by neighbors who claim to respect us. We see them in the supermarkets, on the sidewalk, and think "how could you?"

By the same token, we know that we are moving in the right direction. In 2000, California voters passed Proposition 22 by a margin of 61.4% to 38.6%. On Tuesday, fully 48% of Californians rejected Proposition 8. It wasn't enough, but it was a massive shift. Nationally, although two other anti-marriage ballot measures won, Connecticut defeated an effort to hold a constitutional convention ending marriage, New York's state legislature gained the seats necessary to consider a marriage law, and FMA architect Marilyn Musgrave lost her seat in Congress. We also elected a president who supports protecting the entire community from discrimination and who opposes discriminatory amendments.

Yet on Proposition 8 we lost at the ballot box, and I think that says something about this middle place where we find ourselves at this moment. In 2003, twelve states still had sodomy laws on the books, and only one state had civil unions. Four years ago, marriage was used to rile up a right-wing base, and we were branded as a bigger threat than terrorism. In 2008, most people know that we are not a threat. Proposition 8 did not result from a popular groundswell of opposition to our rights, but was the work of a small core of people who fought to get it on the ballot. The anti-LGBT message didn't rally people to the polls, but unfortunately when people got to the polls, too many of them had no problem with hurting us. Faced with an economy in turmoil and two wars, most Californians didn't choose the culture war. But faced with the question--brought to them by a small cadre of anti-LGBT hardliners - of whether our families should be treated differently from theirs, too many said yes.

But even before we do the hard work of deconstructing this campaign and readying for the future, it's clear to me that our continuing mandate is to show our neighbors who we are.

Justice Lewis Powell was the swing vote in Bowers, the case that upheld Georgia's sodomy law and that was reversed by Lawrence v. Texas five years ago. When Bowers was pending, Powell told one of his clerks "I don't believe I've ever met a homosexual." Ironically, that clerk was gay, and had never come out to the Justice. A decade later, Powell admitted his vote to uphold Georgia's sodomy law was a mistake.

Everything we've learned points to one simple fact: people who know us are more likely to support our equality.

In recent years, I've been delivering this positive message: tell your story. Share who you are. And in fact, as our families become more familiar, support for us increases. But make no mistake: I do not think we have to audition for equality. Rather, I believe that each and every one of us who has been hurt by this hateful ballot measure, and each and every one of us who is still fighting to be equal, has to confront the neighbors who hurt us. We have to say to the man with the Yes on 8 sign--you disrespected my humanity, and I am not giving you a pass. I am not giving you a pass for explaining that you tolerate me, while at the same time denying that my family has a right to exist. I do not give you permission to say you have me as a "gay friend" when you cast a vote against my family, and my rights.

Wherever you are, tell a neighbor what the California Supreme Court so wisely affirmed: that you are equal, you are human, and that being denied equality harms you materially. Although I, like our whole community, am shaken by Prop 8's passage, I am not yet ready to believe that anyone who knows us as human beings and understands what is at stake would consciously vote to harm us.

This is not over. In California, our legal rights have been lost, but our human rights endure, and we will continue to fight for them.

Comments

[Hazumu]

Joe; [Pt-3]

What you are going through, what you are feeling, the bitterness you are tasting, is what I and many, many other transgenders felt when YOU acted to strip US from ENDA. We felt betrayed and hated upon, and that the calls for 'baby steps' and 'we'll come back for you later' were disingenuous, and masked - at the very least - a lack of empathy on the part of gays and lesbians toward trans.

I also knew that marriage equality was the antithesis of 'baby steps', although I held out hope -- real hope -- that Prop H8 would be defeated. Maybe it would work...

I, too am tasting the bitterness of the defeat, because the people that voted for the ban equate me with you even though you and I know gay and trans are different.

And the schadenfreude I feel at your (and Barney's and Chris's and John's) fall after overreaching and tripping over your overgrown sense of maleness..­.

...is tempered by my feelings of bitterness over the defeat of a principle of universal equality and fairness that I hold dear. I don't like the idea that I'm living in a country where a mob majority can treat me as less-than with such impunity and sense of entitlement to do so.

So, Joe, where do we go from here?

-30-

[Burnsey]

I'm sorry Joe, but I think that the HRC and the NO on * campaign did an absolutely horrible job on this proposition. I'm really sorry, but did you all really think that by not showwing ANY gay people that you were doing the right thing? I don't. I saw the ads for months and months and the only one I saw with a gay person was the one that Ellen did with her own money and effort. I think that the HRC let us down in many ways. Really, how did you manage to talk about the proposed ban on same sex marriage without using the terms gay, or lesbian? Did you really think that Californians wouldn't know it was about Gay people? I've donated way more money to the HRC than I should have in the past, but this (after the horrible non inclusive ENDA you promoted) shows that neither YOU nor the Organization you purporte to "run" is entirely ineffective and should be replaced. We need people willing to fight in the streets, and not just hold those lovely black-tie affairs and hob nob with the elite politicians. YOU failed us Joe. The HRC finally lost the last bit of good will from me and most of those I know.

[sjmarie]

Joe, I had mixed feelings on election day. I was happy to hear about Obama's win but at the same time astonished and sadden by the passing of Prop 8. I'm a hetersexual woman of mixed descent (blk/hisp) married for twenty years. I was shocked that 70% of blacks in California voted for prop 8. I believe it is largely due to their religious beliefs. I wonder if they took the time to ponder and remember that racists used their Christian beliefs to justify prejudice against people of color. I was raised Catholic and taught that homosexuality was a sin, but what I most understood about Christianity is to love your neighbor (tolerance) do no harm to others, and be a servant of God in serving others. As an adult, I don't believe homosexuality is a sin but a genetic characteristic that science will someday prove with a consencus. The passing of prop 8 struck a chord within me because I know how it feels to be demeaned by others for something I can't not control -the color of my skin- and the lasting psychological effects that it had on me growing up that other people of color and homosexuals who are discriminated against have to endure. It's time for black leaders to step up to the plate and have a healthy discussion of this issue in the black community.

[BeltwayBette]

It took me a while to get to this opinion so if it's still rough around the ages, please forgive me.
My Quaker meeting discussed marrying gay couples, then decided on ceremonies of committment.

I am not gay. I was torn in several directions. Our meeting house was torn in several directions.
And then in one moment of imagination, I got it.

I imagined my only and beloved son was gay.

What would I want for him? A. Would I want him to roam through the world, possibly promiscuous because there was no path to marriage for him? No children? A life doomed possibly to terrible loneliness in his older years? B. Or would I want him to have a partner in marriage, a committed family like his neighbors? Easy answer for this loving mom. B.

Then against my own will, I thought --oops,. sodomy laws.

And just as quickly, I realized something no one ever talks about. Does any 21st century human believe that heterosexuals only practice missionary sex? If so, they still believe in the tooth fairy.
So my final decision is this:

Proposition 8 suporters: Please stop fiddling with our precious Constitution to fit your version of the world. And please stop labeling others with words you don't know the real emotional meaning of -- ever.
And last of all: Get your own life in order. Please.

[fdavidm]

That is a beautiful message and maybe that I've now calmed down a bit, I can take your advice and move forward.

[RexT]

Joe, A great message, thank you. Sure was nice to see you here at our Palm Springs party last weekend. We were pretty hopeful ... we still are!

[mlaiuppa]

The defenders of Prop 8 are saying "Let them make gay marriage legal."

This is the big LIE. Propaganda.

Because...­.it was already legal under the current California State Constitution. Our California Supreme Court said so.

So what the Mormons, Catholics and right wing fundamentalists did was to change our Constitution to make something that was legal, illegal. And in the process they discriminated against the basic rights of a minority of California citizens.

Californians have every reason to call "Bigot" and institute boycotts against the perpetrators. We don't tolerate special interests coming into our state and dumping lots of money to buy *their* point of view.

Go back to Utah. And count up all of the money you're going to lose in tourism. Because California isn't skiiing in your mountains or attending your little film festival.

[Rafaelnnyc]

I have to ask, when did marriage = LBGT liberation? It is a sick institution. There are already gay divorces in Spain.

Let's instead fight for economic rights, education to end homophobia and violence against LGBT folks, women and redo our gender relations, and work with our straight allies to create an inclusive society.

We can discard these out-dated institutions that have only worked to oppress us all. Don't waste our resources on an institution that won't bring us liberation.

peace in and out,
Rafael

[apoyo]

I would suggest that the word "marriage" not be used. It is almost subliminal and brings out a conditioned response. Legal unions or nuptial agreements or life contracts may work better.

It is a terrible thing that people who call themselves Christians find it so easy to discriminate against others. Besides the money lenders, I know of no one else that Jesus had a problem with. And even then it was only because they were doing business in the temple.

Discrimination on any basis is cruel and unjust.

[pthesmith]

The challenge is the GLBT community views the issue from a civil rights perspective, while the African American community views it from a "religion" perspective. African Americans are largely Christians. So, their Christian beliefs probably determined their vote. For this reason, I think the "same opression" arguement is fruitless. The key is to get African Americans to view gay marriage as strictly a civil rights issue, without regard for their religious beliefs. How? I'm not sure.



However, the suggested relationship between Obama's election and Prop 8 is hamstringed by the civil rights issue. Any relationship between the two would require African Americans to have voted for Obama as a civil rights issue ("because he's Black"). African Americans were fighting against this perception throughout the election. So, to discuss Prop 8 and Obama's election in terms of a civil rights issue would require African Americans to say they were voting for Obama because he's Black. This puts African Americans between a rock and a hard place.

[AdamX]

This issue has NOTHING to do with equality. Keep pretending it does - but it does NOT. The issue is a WORD. Come up with a new word, and stop your hateful smear of everyone (most of California) who disagrees with you. Can any of you debate without name calling? I have YET to hear it!

[annecoulter]

LGBT always takes it a step too far. Always makes a drama out of the situation. As a Californian I have seen it over and over.

Until they grow up, they are not going to be taken seriously outside San Francisco, and even in the city they are starting to press their luck.

[Herders4Me]

Is this a threat? For people expressing their opinions openly and legally?

So, first, they can't marry - and now, they can't express their pain and frustration, either?

When you strike people down, please don't expect gratitude.

[dmmSF]

"Press their luck" ?? What does that even mean? And what steps are "too far"? Expecting equal rights? No one should be calling anyone names. Let's not smear but dialog with real facts. Ready...go­.

[Thabor]

That is because its rather difficult to debate people so persistantly and willfully biased and wrong. Establishig is as a matter of equality should be as simple as reviwing the differences between civil unions and marriages. If it truly were just about a "word" as you claim then you have no basis for you vehement opposition to it. You have no trademark, copyright, or other special entitlement to the word "marriage" it was in the public domain even prior to the establishment of the United States. If you want a special word all your own, go get it. Stop using it as an excuse for taking others rights away.

[WASanford]

“Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere­.” Martin Luther King Jr., letter from the Birmingham jail, April 16, 1963.

It seems a shame that those who’s equality and dignity MLK gave his life for, either didn’t hear or failed to understand his message. Perhaps they thought that he was only talking about what was happening to them and that injustice to others is ok.

If the religionists want to own the word “marriage” then we should let them have it. In California, at least, we should strike the word marriage, out of our laws, past, present, and future, then couples wanting to form a partnership, whether they are Jack and Judy, Jack and Jack, or Judy and Judy, would get a simple license to form a domestic partnership

[bessielil]

While some laws certainly have come from various religious traditions, in order to live up to our stated principles of 'liberty and justice for all' we MUST separate religious 'marriage' from legal civil unions for all.

If I were in charge (why don't people put me in charge?) I would ban 'legal marriage.' Everyone would register for civil unions. Everyone who wants to spend their lives together, that is. Separation and divorce laws would remain the same. That would be the legal contract between The State and The Citizen Couple.

Houses of worship would then be totally free to discriminate as they see fit. The way they always do. Couples could have raucous or somber religious services. They could make their promises according to their own world view and faith community. No clergy would ever have to ignore the teachings of their belief system. But outside of that community, everyone would have equal rights in life partnership.

How about that? No state would legalize any marriage. They would only sponsor civil commitment ceremonies, and maintain legal records.

When my husband and his ex divorced, it was a legal issue. We are now legally married, but the Catholic Church does not recognize our 20 year commitment. I don't care. He might, because it's insulting.

A Constitutional amendment that takes away rights seems un-American to me. We've amended the constitution to expand rights whenever we truly accept that all are created equal under the law.

[cylindar]

Marriage has never been something for same sex people. So no rights have been violated. What you have here is an attempt to redefine marriage. That's fine but let's get the facts straight (no pun intended).

[kylennblack]

So, someone of color who lived during the time of slavery did not have their civil rights violated because they didn't have rights to begin with?

Considering that marriage in many places originally consisted of one man and many wives and women were treated like property, I have no problem with "redefining" marriage.

[AdamX]

Yes - you have no problem redefining marriage - but a lot of us do. Why don't you come up with a new word, and stop trying to deprive the heterosexual community of their rights?

[mlaiuppa]

So let's redefine it.

Marriage is a religious ceremony conducted by some faiths.

Civil Unions are legal contracts licensed by the government and should be recognized by all states in the United States for standardization and uniformity. (This means no state can say people of different races or different religions are forbidden to join, no matter what any religion says.)

Everyone is entitled to a union with full legal rights. If they want to have a religious ceremony and can find a church willing to perform it, fine. But a religious ceremony does not grant any more rights than are granted under the legal government contract.

You want to get "married"? You buy a license from the government and you are legally recognized as committing to a union. You want to go through an additional ceremony of your choice? Fine. But it doesn't legally add anything to your rights or privileges.

Happy now?

[JasText]

Keep fighting, Joe. Look how long it has taken, e.g., the women's movement to see some progress (much of which seemed in peril with the advent of Mooselini)--but we still don't have an ERA and our hard won reproductive rights are under continuous attack. Gays and lesbians have made significant progress in a relatively short time, I have faith that your efforts will be rewarded as awareness grows.

[anghiari]

What I don't understand is why is seems and I may be wrong, the oppose Prop 8 group seem not to recognize that this proposition had little chance of winning in CA. I am from California and worked in politics there. Any group should be aware that Southern California, central CA and much of Northern CA with perhaps the exception of the San Francisco Bay Area has lots of moderate to right wing/Republicans. I think there may have been Republicans who knew they were losing the Presidential campaign who wanted to make a political and idealogical statement on Prop 8. The Republicans have a history of using the political referendum to sell right wing ideas to the larger public in CA. Term limits got its start with a CA. proposition as has issues around property tax, affirmative action considerations in state universities, and a whole host of issues that Republicans in California couldn't get passed in the State Legislature so they take them to a relatively uninformed public. I think this group should have used family members of out gays, lesbians and transgenders on PSA's and national ads to fight Prop 8...Right wing tries very hard to make gays the other....f­amilies change that dynamic...­because families look the same by and large nationwide. Also lots of right wing families have gay members too....