A Solution

For those of you outside of California, Proposition 8 was a recently passed state ballot proposition that amended the state constitution to restrict what should define marriage.

It was a bitterly contested fight between the secular progressives (Democrats) and Christian conservatives (Republicans) (no worries... I understand that I just made a broad generalization there)...

Despite staunch opposition from Republican Governor Arnold Schwartzenegger, State Senators Diane Feinstein and Barbara Boxer, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, the mayors of San Francisco, Los Angeles and San Diego as well as every meaningful editorial board in the state, Prop 8 defeated the previously passed May 15th, 2008 California Supreme Court decision that had recognized same-sex marriage as a fundamental right.

The official ballot title language for Proposition 8 is "Eliminates Right of Same-Sex Couples to Marry." The entirety of the text to be added to the constitution was: "Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California."

In essence: Prop 8 proponents sought to deny "same-sex couples all state-level rights and obligations of marriage — in areas such as inheritance, income tax, insurance and hospital visitation"...

In the run up to this latest election, we Californians were subjected to an endless scare campaign of epic proportions... The pro Proposition 8 junta put forth the hysterical right wing talking point that the "Gays" were going to teach homosexuality to your children in schools, and that you'd have no say in the matter... These nutters describe homosexuality as if it were some type of human parvo-virus... spread on contact...

Ironically, it has been (incorrectly) stated that perhaps it was the influx of first time black voters, brought into the fold by the Obama campaign that turned Prop 8 into law...

However, based upon the map below one can clearly see that this is not the case... as the areas where black voters predominantly live all voted against the proposition...



And take a look at this research from Nate Silver at his fabulous site:

fivethirtyeight

Prop 8 Myths

Now, it's true that if new voters had voted against Prop 8 at the same rates that they voted for Obama, the measure probably would have failed. But that does not mean that the new voters were harmful on balance -- they were helpful on balance. If California's electorate had been the same as it was in 2004, Prop 8 would have passed by a wider margin.

At the end of the day, Prop 8's passage was more a generational matter than a racial one. If nobody over the age of 65 had voted, Prop 8 would have failed by a point or two. It appears that the generational splits may be larger within minority communities than among whites, although the data on this is sketchy.

The good news for supporters of marriage equity is that -- and there's no polite way to put this -- the older voters aren't going to be around for all that much longer, and they'll gradually be cycled out and replaced by younger voters who grew up in a more tolerant era. Everyone knew going in that Prop 8 was going to be a photo finish -- California might be just progressive enough and 2008 might be just soon enough for the voters to affirm marriage equity. Or, it might fall just short, which is what happened. But two or four or six or eight years from now, it will get across the finish line.

It was the typical agents of intolerance within red state California that voted to strip gay couples of their civil rights, the elderly, the Republicans, the Catholic church, the religious right, stadium church evangelical Christians (you know... all the organizations typically rife with closeted gays)...

In fact almost half of the $35 million used to promote the measure came from Utah... the Mormon Church to be specific...

Oh the irony... the religion that pretends to abhor polygamy (but has sects within it that still practice it) wants to "protect marriage"... Sorry if I've offended anyone, but any religion that gets its start from a self-appointed prophet named Joseph Smith who had a vision of an angel named Moroni who gave him some golden tablets, a sword, and a breastplate (items which only he had ever seen) in 1823 has got to be a little off center... as well as insular... but hey, supposedly we are a free country... and we all have our legends... believe what ever you want to believe... just don't force your dogma and morality upon another's civil rights... (I imagine I've just landed myself on an enemies list somewhere in Temple Square, Salt Lake City... oh well, take a number and get it line...)

While I truly feel for Andrew Sullivan's opinion on gay marriage... I think I may have a solution to the problem...

End marriage as a state or federally sanctioned institution.

Period.

It is my opinion that marriage is largely a socially mandated institution, and all who wish to engage in it should be allowed to do so in their own house of worship or in ANY ceremony the couple in question deems fit as a way to publicly express their affection and commitment to each other... the state should have no influence or bearing on who, where, how and why we should marry... This is an issue of FREEDOM... of separation of CHURCH and STATE...

All couples who wish to do so, should enter into CIVIL UNIONS as a public statement of responsible commitment... For the purpose of child support, inheritance, income tax, insurance and hospital visitation only...

No dogma, no bigotry, no sexism, no racism, no homophobia...

I vote "NO" on state sanctioned marriage...

"YES" on civil unions for EVERYONE...

And "YES" on private marriage... to whomever you should wish to betroth...

GO ON... LEAVE YOUR "THOUGHTS" IN THE COMMENTS SECTION...