The Los Angeles Times doesn't mince words when it comes to Proposition 8, which it strongly opposed in an editorial this weekend. Describing the ballot measure's intentions as terrible, the paper also takes time to rip into the "Yes on 8" campaign's misleading tactics, like their repeated assertions that same-sex education will infiltrate public schools.

Clever magicians practice the art of misdirection — distracting the eyes of the audience to something attention-grabbing but irrelevant so that no one notices what the magician is really doing. Look over at that fuchsia scarf, up this sleeve, at anything besides the actual trick.

The campaign promoting Proposition 8, which proposes to amend the state Constitution to ban same-sex marriages, has masterfully misdirected its audience, California voters.
…
Look at anything except what Proposition 8 is actually about: a group of people who are trying to impose on the state their belief that homosexuality is immoral and that gays and lesbians are not entitled to be treated equally under the law.

That truth would never sell in tolerant, live-and-let-live California, and so it has been hidden behind a series of misleading half-truths. Once the sleight of hand is revealed, though, the campaign's illusions fall away.

Here's to hoping California's voters can see through Yes on 8's cloud of bull shit.

Social conservatives are always griping about how gay marriage weakens "traditional" marriage. Well, The Los Angeles Times' editorial team thinks that's a bunch of rubbish:

Perhaps the next few months will ease these fears, as same-sex couples begin their married lives together. Those couples will settle into communities without disorder or threat; they will bring legal protection to their bonds of love. Those bonds can only be good for society — children gain from being raised by married parents, and communities are stronger when residents are legally committed to one another. As more and more Californians marry, society will grow stronger, not weaker.

That's no doubt why opponents sought a stay of the court's ruling until after the election. They know that as same-sex marriages become commonplace, the fears about them will fade, and eventually we will wonder what all the fuss was about.

Wouldn't that be nice?