What Harvey Milk Tells Us About Proposition 8

Thirty years ago on election night Harvey Milk gave an electrifying speech at the "No on Proposition 6" headquarters in the Castro neighborhood of San Francisco. The results were in: Proposition 6 was going down to defeat.

In 1978, Proposition 6 ( "the Briggs Initiative") was the California ballot measure aimed at preventing gay people and supporters from working as teachers in public schools. Harvey Milk was a San Francisco city council member who had been in office for a mere ten months. Through his role in this campaign he proved himself to be more than just an "elected gay official." He was a leader at the height of his powers. When introduced to the crowd that night by Sally Gearhart (another important figure in the fight against Proposition 6), the response to Harvey was thunderous. He proceeded to give one of the greatest speeches of his relatively short political career.

Although there are many parallels to be made between Proposition 6 (1978) and Proposition 8 (2008) there are also many differences. Unlike Proposition 8, Proposition 6 had a name, a face, and a personality as its figurehead in the person of State Senator John Briggs. Briggs came across as a seemingly opportunistic and somewhat ineffectual politician, but regardless of his baboonery, the issue that he and his supporters tapped into -- "gay teachers" -- was volatile enough to find large-scale support among the electorate. Only one month before the election it looked as if it would be a very close vote, with the majority of California voters in favor of its passage.

On the other side, we had Harvey Milk as our figurehead, a "community organizer" who understood the value and importance of a well-coordinated grass-roots campaign. As a coordinated master plan, Harvey debated Briggs in high school gyms and on TV and radio, while an army of well-trained volunteers went about "canvassing" door-to-door, speaking with people on the streets and in the shopping centers about the potential consequences of the "anti-gay" Briggs Initiative. Eventually, enough voters were convinced that the measure was both unnecessary and a possible violation of constitutional rights. Proposition 6 went down by a resounding 59 to 42 percent.

On election night Harvey delivered his galvanizing speech with gale-wind force:

...to the gay community all over this state, my message to you is, so far a lot of people joined us and rejected Proposition 6, and we owe them something. We owe them to continue the education campaign that took place. We must destroy the myths once and for all, shatter them. We must continue to speak out, and most importantly, most importantly, every gay person must come out. As difficult as it is you must tell your immediate family, you must tell your relatives, you must tell your friends, if indeed they are your friends, you must tell your neighbors, you must tell the people you work with, you must tell the people in the stores you shop in (thunderous applause), and once they realize that we are indeed their children, that we are indeed everywhere, every myth, every lie, every innuendo will be destroyed once and for all. And once you do, you will feel so much better.

In light of the passage of Proposition 8, Harvey's message of thirty years ago remains as vital today as it was then. It is our responsibility to let our loved ones, co-workers, friends, and neighbors know who we are, so that those who vote in favor of discrimination have our names and faces in their minds eye when doing so.

Although Proposition 8 wasn't exactly a re-make of Proposition 6, it's the same disaster movie storyline pitch: any recognition of constitutional rights for gay and lesbian citizens will somehow destroy the natural order and as a result America's institutions -- be they schools or marriage--will crumble.

Harvey pitched a different storyline: an accommodating democratic society based on constitutional principles, including the separation of church and state, and equality for all its citizens will make our country stronger and freer. But Harvey was more than just a good pitchman. He had an innate sense of history, and as a result he made his mark on history. Three weeks after his Proposition 6 victory speech Harvey was killed, and we're still waiting for another leader of his ilk to emerge. While we may not be able to predict from where or when real leaders come, eventually they do. In the meantime, as we celebrate the election of a man whose own parents' interracial marriage would not have been legal in sixteen states prior to 1967, Harvey we're still waiting.

Rob Epstein is the director of the Oscar winning film The Times of Harvey Milk, and is this years' recipient of the International Documentary Association's Pioneer Award.

Comments

[barbarossa89]

What is your definition of marriage? I have seen many.

One man and one woman, joined in holy matrimony.
Two people committed to each other.
Two or more people committed to one another (polygamy)
Two or more creatures capable of sexual conduct uniting. (Bestiality)
At least one creature making a commitment to someone or something else. (A man who married a TV in Europe a few years back.)

Just saying, if all that is needed for a marriage is love, what do we care what others call it? Let them call it a Civil Union, or whatever. "A rose by any other name would be as sweet." Regardless of whether society recognizes it in general, remember that the commitment is what matters, not what it's called. Right?

I am straight, but I would not be too offended if the state decided to change heterosexual marriages by some other term. It's all semantics, so far as I am concerned. Not something we need to bother getting riled up over.

[Lemeritus]

Except that it isn't just a matter of "semantics", barbarossa89.

Many argue that civil unions are equivalent to marriage in all but name; they are not in these regards (from FactCheck.org):
1. The right to federal benefits. The Defense of Marriage Act passed in 1996 prohibits same-sex couples from receiving federal marriage rights and benefits.
- Taxes. Partners in a civil union aren't permitted to transfer assets & wealth without incurring tax penalities.
- Health insurance. Health plans governed by federal law permit the employer to choose whether extend benefits.
- Social Security survivor benefits. Same-sex couples are not eligible for such benefits
2. Portability. Because civil unions are not recognized by all states, such agreements are not always valid when couples cross state lines.
3. Terminology. "Marriage" is a term that conveys societal and cultural meaning. In this regard, it's important to note that many churchs will not perform weddings for same-sex partners; that is their right -- others will. The impetus for many gays is to make their vows before God and "those here gathered". It's ironic that religious organizations who demonize gays for their promiscuity fail to regard or respect the appetite in the LGBT community for commitment.

[andvoodoo2]

A legally married couple in this country enjoys more than 100 rights that a same sex couple doesn't under a "civil union". If this were just about words, it wouldn't matter to anyone. However, it is about TAXES and RIGHTS. You need to do some research.

[midknightryder13]

I'm sure it was a typo, but it's actually more than ELEVEN HUNDRED rights that 'civil unions' don't cover.

[Rrhain]

Please explain how same-sex marriage leads to polygamy, bestiality, and non-human marriage while mixed-sex marriage does not.

It would seem that since such things have been happening forever and since we have not had same-sex marriage, then it is mixed-sex marriage that leads to such things, not same-sex marriage.

Until you can explain why same-sex marriage would result in such things but mixed-sex marriage would not, you are doing nothing but trying to distract us with irrelevancies.

[luvobama]

They always go there. It's how their minds work because they are filled with fil th.

[Steamboater]

Rrhain: Those saying same sex marriage will lead to marriage with animals and polygamy (coming from mormons, that's a hoot) know very well that it won't. It's the same trickster argument they use when they equate abortion with the Holocaust. A little bit of this and little bit of that and it's all a devil's brew meant to fool people into denying a group equal rights.

[wmfor]

Try this one:

Suppose all African-Americans had full rights of citizenship, except they were called "freemen" and the term "citizen" was reserved for Whites. Would they be offended? SHOULD they be offended? It's all semantics.

[Hint: Semantics has to do with language, language is the basic tool with which our brains operate; language effects our beliefs, our emotions and all our actions. Nothing in human society can be separated from the language in which it is framed.]

[Steamboater]

Yes, semantics defines whether someone is inside or outside the norm and has a great affect on perspectives of how people are seen.

[JohnBisceglia]

RE: "definition of MARRIAGE"

The media's use of the term 'Gay' Marriage is annoying; it presupposes Queer Love is "different than" Heterosexual Love. 'Same-Sex' Marriage requires its counterpart, 'Opposite-Sex' Marriage....which gets cumbersome and silly.

Marriage Equality is best.

Perhaps one day we will become enlightened enough to embrace this definition for ALL couples:

MARRIAGE - a Union between 2 Human Beings, embodying Love, Trust, and a Mutual Respect and Responsibility for the other.

Isn't quibbling about WHOM has WHAT plumbing called SEXISM?

BTW - For those of who fidget and squirm every time I use the term "marriage", you need to understand that committed relationships between 2 members of the same sex have existed since Time Immemorial - it's just that these Sacred Unions have not had the legal protection that The Exalted Heterosexual Marriage enjoys.

[Cyano]

I'm still waiting for someone, anyone to tell me how gay marriage threatens hetero marriage, or anything else. There have always been gay people in every society and somehow we've soldiered on regardless. There were two gay guys that lived down the street from me as a kid. Aside from our curiosity, they had zero effect on anyone. If they had been married, it wouldn't have made a scintilla of difference to me. Mind your own business, right-wingers!

[noamjunior]

Many so-called "conservative Christian" males are h o m o sexualsin the closet.
These Men, while married to women secretly desire to marry men and need a law to prevent them from doing so-
Its the only thing I can figure out - and is somewhat proven by incidents involving Larry Craig, Ted Haggert etc

[billy goat]

Great! So on top of it all, the GAYS are responsible for all this.

[andvoodoo2]

You said, men secretly desire to marry men and they "need a law to prevent them from doing so-"


WHY?

[Brainspore]

Rob, I can't wait to see your movie. I just wish it could have gone into wide release before the election, maybe its message would have made the difference in such a tight race.

[BlueZoo]

Rob's movie is not "MILK" which comes out in theaters on 26 November. It stars Sean Penn as Harvey Milk. Rob's movie is from several years ago. The topic of both is Harvey Milk and well worth seeing.

[wmfor]

You are confusing Rob's 1984 documentary with the current film starring Sean Penn.

[Helmsey]

I agree the gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender community does need a strong voice to lead the fight for civil rights. It just saddens me so much that with all our past history in America, of slavery, of sexism, and of racism; that we have still not moved past these issues that were apparently "self-evident" to our founders centuries ago (even if just in words and not in actions). Why can we not realize the basic notion of equality among all citizens? I am sure the day will come in this country when a generation looks back at this period of time in American history with as much of the same shame and guilt as I feel looking back at the pre-civil rights period in the country. I just want that realization now and it is frustrating.

[ccortezz]

I will honor his memory by continuing to remind my neighbors that I became a 2nd class citizen the morning of Nov. 5th. I victim of religious persecution. Never Again

[ProfessorDuh]

A lot of us are going to remember this about the Mormons, and await our opportunity to pay them back for the kindness.
In spades.

[gotborked]

This is unfortunate. The unprecedented post-election bigotry by activists against religious people gives those who voted Yes on 8 in order to protect religious liberty all the evidence they need that they did the right thing.

[ProfessorDuh]

You expect vicious, religious whack job persecution to go unrewarded?

[billy goat]

In the short term, you can claim victory. Whatever that means to you. I assure you that my family will go on with or without your blessing. I'm not sure what you gain be denying my family legal legitimacy, but enjoy whatever it is you believe you have gained by that. Rest assured that you've preserved nothing. In the long run, people will come to see the injustice of these actions. Until then enjoy.

[antaeus]

Take your propaganda elsewhere. Catholic and Mormon churches already have all the right in the world to deny marriage in their houses of worships as they see fit. For example, Catholics already routinely deny marriage to divorcees (well, poor divorcees; we all know that the wealthy and connected buy annulments, but I digress . . . ).

Prop. 8 imposes religion on all of society. Why are you so un-American as to be against the separation of church and state?

[Helmsey]

I see what you are getting at gotborked, but to do nothing against institutions that openly support oppression of civil rights? I do not think that the back-lash against certain religious organizations is unfounded. They need to be called out on their bigotry and intolerance.

[Brainspore]

I don't judge people by their religion, but I do judge them by their actions. Those who voted for prop 8 were perpetrators of discrimination, not victims of it.

[M1]

I think your right about that....what tolerance I had for the Mormon religion has vanished and I have a very, very, long memory.

[Steamboater]

Me too. This is something I'll never forget and if Romney runs in 2012 we won't let that mormon so-and-so forget it too. In fact, I havea sign on my window that's going to stay there that says: "MORMON MISSIONARIES, STAY OUT OF CALIFORNIA AND GO HOME!"