As gay activist organizations prepare themselves for California’s Supreme Court to turn a blind eye to equality and let Prop 8 stand, they’re preparing next steps. (THANK THE LORD!) But the big question is whether to make a move to put the issue in front of voters during the 2010 election, when folks like Gavin Newsom and Meg Whitman will face off in the gubernatorial race, or wait until 2012, when organizers expect a surge of pro-gay-leaning Democrats to hit the polls because it’s a presidential election year. As for who’s steering the next Prop 8 fight? Your worries that the same folks who, many argue, bungled the original effort should be put to ease. Courage Campaign chairman Rick Jacobs: “People are not going to let the people who ran the last campaign run this campaign. … This time, we’re going to make it clear you’re talking about real people.”
I think we would win regardless of either year, so I’d rather have dinner now rather than later.
I mean, wouldn’t you rather have dinner at 10 o’clock rather than 12 if you had a choice>?
The most likely people to convert are people who support Domestic Partnerships but aren’t yet on board with marriage. People like moderate suburban Republicans.
Visibility is our friend. Every gay they see, even ones as obnoxious as Perez hilton can be, is way way better than the gays that the far right paints us to be.
I say push now.
Our greatest ally right now is the Westboro Baptist Church. Let those batshit crazies be as visible as possible. All it does is point out the absurdity in opposing the equality rights train.
@DavidMichael: What makes you think that? How are we going to make up the 600,000+ vote deficit we had with Prop 8?
I’m all for pushing sooner, IF we can win. But I just don’t see what’s been done that’s going to push that many votes in our direction. Plus, it’s not exactly a cakewalk to get something on the ballot (1 million signatures) and win it (millions in $$$).
Better to do the organizing/education work that needs to be done over the next few years and then run in 2012. IMHO.
Would the NAACP react three years later if they had their rights overturned? Would NOW–National Organization of Women–react three years later?
What are we saying by waiting that it isn’t important enough!!! The quicker we react the better. I do not think the church will put as much into it this time as to the backlash and peoples minds are changing.
As to PerezHilton at least he had the courage to stand up for OUR community. Which of you can say they have made this issue as important as he has? Let’s not fall into the stupid arguement that that right wing nuts are using to divide OUR community. The more discussion the better.
We do it in 2010!
” or wait until 2012, when organizers expect a surge of pro-gay-leaning Democrats to hit the polls because it’s a presidential election year.”
This did not work out so well the first time, now did it?
It’s great that they people in Cali are moving forward with plans for however Prop 8 turns out. However, I think some caution should be used in suggesting things such as the quote above. I doubt you’ll see a higher Democratic turnout in 2012 than we saw in 2008.
I personally would be happy to hear that they are moving forward with more local outreach programs, education programs, etc as we are doing here in southern Texas. There were *cough* certain demographics that did not receive adequate outreach … or something.
@DaveO: I’d rather have dinner at 6:00 than at 4:00. Just sayin’.
Many of you forget, Prop 8 could have failed the first time. The No on 8 campaign ran a MISERABLE piss poor effort. I know because I was here in CA and I saw it. They micromanaged supporters and volunteers. They were extremely disorganized. They didn’t go into the Inland Empire.
All I can say to them is GOOD RIDDANCE and don’t let the door hit your ass on the way out. We don’t have time for bad leaders making bad decisions for self-aggrandizement.
Prop 8 will be overturned in 2010. We’re not waiting till 2012. We’re going to do it as soon as possible and we’re going to shell shock the world.
Fem In the City
No disrespect intended to the poster but Prop 8 certainly did run a piss poor campaigh. They refused to critisize Obama for his openly anti-gay bigot rhetoric. Actually they refused to critisize any Liberal for their anti-gay rhetoric yet if it were a Republican they would go batshit attacking them. HRC as well positively refused to critisize Barack Obama or any Democrat. They spent millions of contribution dollars on the Obama campaign when at 30% did not support Barack Obama or his vile homophobic rhetoric on gay civil rights. As he went to one public forum after another and stated “I DO NOT SUPPORT GAY MARRIAGE BECAUSE GOD IS IN THE MIX” … they refused to critisize this as bigotted. HRC made a very lame attempt very late in the game. So good riddens is right. HRC and No on 8 can’t go away soon enough.
During the Prop 8 fight we just didn’t do a good job of getting out the message about gay marriage! We needed to educate the voters about the two institutions that share the same name:
(1) The first is the civil marriage. It is performed by the government and is a business contract determining rights, responsibilities and financial conditions and requires others to acknowledge and existence of a relationship between two people.
(2) The second is a sacred rite and is a church responsibility. This religious sacrament, conferred by various religious denominations, whose exact nature, meaning, and theology differs from denomination to denomination.
It is unfortunate they have been called by the same name, and it is inexcusable for religious people to confuse the two deliberately!
The fight we have is to educate others about the difference between civil and religious marriage.
The arc of history bends toward justice. Fight On!
Assuming the court upholds Prop 8, it would be part of the California Constitution. Overcoming it would require a REVISION of the Constitution, which requires 2/3 of each house to concur in proposing the revision before it can go to voters (Article 18 of the California Constitution). What is the likelihood of getting 2/3 of each house of the California legislature on board by 2010? Once that happens, can we really get a majority of the state on board?
Comments are closed.