L.K. Regan
Published Oct 08, 2008

The November election is less than a month away, and in California the fight over Proposition 8—the proposed ban on the state's currently-legal same-sex marriages—is really starting to heat up. The "Yes on 8" campaign is airing its first television commercials, and they are full of scare-tactics designed to drive voters to deprive the LGBT community of its recently-won rights. Worse yet, there's evidence that the ads are working.

A SurveyUSA poll, conducted on behalf of several California television affiliates, finds that support for the ballot measure has increased over the last two weeks, to 47 percent in favor of the measure with 42 percent opposing. This reverses the five-point gap opposing the measure of two weeks ago. The one group to substantially move from the no to the yes column is young voters—notoriously the most volatile and polling-elusive of demographic groups. Furthermore, the change in polling numbers seems to track with the appearance of the first "Yes on 8" commercial, which features an excited San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom saying that gay marriage is here to stay "whether you like it or not." If you want to know what the LGBT community is up against, here's the ad (warning—it may make your blood boil):



Whether the polling accurately reflects any movement in public opinion—and, if so, whether Mayor Newsom's unfortunate turn of phrase is responsible—is unknowable. But it is clear that the forces in favor of Proposition 8 have begun an all-out media push. This has included a list of "Six Consequences to Expect if California's Marriage Amendment Fails," being widely circulated on the internet. Meanwhile, the Human Rights Campaign has a rebuttal authored by, as the HRC describes him, "Morris Thurston, retired attorney, adjunct professor at BYU Law School, and active member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints." In the coming days, you may encounter these various arguments. To prepare you for the dinner-table conversation with your relatives—or the street-fight, as the case may be—we've run down both the six alleged "consequences" and Thurston's debunking of them. You may want to print this out and carry it in your wallet.

1. Consequence 1: Children in public schools will be taught that both traditional marriage and same-sex marriage are okay. The California Education Code already requires that health education classes instruct children about marriage. (§51890) Therefore, if the definition of marriage is changed, children will be taught that marriage is a relation between any two adults.
   Rebuttal 1: No provision of the Education Code requires any teacher to teach that same-sex marriage is "just as good" as traditional marriage. Teachers are to teach respect for marriage and committed relationships, and Proposition 8 will not change this law.
2. Consequence 2: "Churches will be sued [over their tax-exempt status] if they refuse to allow same-sex marriage ceremonies in their religious buildings that are open to the public. Ask whether your pastor, priest, minister, bishop, or rabbi is ready to perform such marriages in your chapels and sanctuaries.
   Rebuttal 2: "The California Supreme Court ruling on gay marriage cannot have any federal tax consequences, and the Court so noted explicitly in its decision. The Supreme Court also noted that its ruling would not require any priest, rabbi or minister to perform gay marriages, which should be self-evident because of the First Amendment's guarantee of freedom of religion."
3. Consequence 3: Religious adoption agencies will be challenged by government agencies to give up their long-held right to place children only in homes with both a mother and a father. Catholic Charities in Boston has already closed its doors because of the legalization of same-sex marriage in Massachusetts.
   Rebuttal 3: If this situation ever faces a legal challenge in California, it will not matter whether Proposition 8 passes because California already has on its books (and has for several years) laws granting domestic partners (homosexual and heterosexual) the same civil rights as married couples....Therefore, the passage or failure of Proposition 8 will have no effect on the placement of orphans with gay couples in California.
4. Consequence 4: Religions that sponsor private schools and which provide housing for married students will be required to provide housing for same-sex couples, even if it runs counter to church doctrine, or lose tax exemptions and benefits.
   Rebuttal 4: California's existing non-discrimination laws give all registered domestic partners, whether heterosexual or homosexual, the right of equal access to family housing. To date, however, no California private religious school has been forced to comply with this law. Neither the passage nor the failure of Proposition 8 will have any bearing on the law relating to family student housing in California.
5. Consequence 5: Ministers who preach against same-sex marriages will be sued for hate speech and could be fined by the government. It has already happened in Canada, one of six countries that have legalized gay marriage.
   Rebuttal 5: This would never be an issue in the United States because we have far more liberal freedom of speech and religion laws than does Canada. There have been no hate speech lawsuits in Massachusetts, which has been a gay marriage state for four years.
6. Consequence 6: It will cost you money. A change in the definition of marriage will bring a cascade of lawsuits. Even if courts eventually find in favor of a defender of traditional marriage (highly improbable given today's activist judges), think of the money—your money, your church contributions—that will have to be spent on legal fees.
   Rebuttal 6: In actuality, the net fiscal effect of Proposition 8 will be an influx of revenue to California because of the anticipated increase in marriage ceremonies and the related boon to the economy. The change in the definition of marriage will not bring a "cascade of lawsuits" because heterosexual and homosexual registered domestic partners already have all the rights of married couples in California.

Given the strength of California's domestic partners law, in fact, you may be wondering why Californians need same-sex marriages anyway. Isn't it all the same? Technically, within California, that is true—passing Proposition 8 would deny same-sex couples only the "married" designation, not its protections. But outside California the situation is different. To be recognized by the federal government for purposes of taxation, Social Security, Medicare and other entitlement programs, a couple has to be legally married. So print out your rebuttals, and get to work.

soul_patrol wrote:

First of all, marriage is God's idea. Genesis 1 verse 26, it says, "Then God said "Let us make man in our image"".

Genesis 2 verse 22 says this: "Then the Lord God made a woman from the rib He had taken out of the man, and he brought her to the man."

Marriage is intended to be a procreative relationship. The question then is, if this basic institution, which has served society so well through history, why do we want to mess with it now? Why do we want to enter into a social experiment out of which we have no concept of the long-term ramifications?

Redefining marriage to include same-sex couples will further weaken marriage in general. Why not have a "civil solidarity pact" like they do in France or better yet, make up a will or Power of Attorney?

Feb 06 10:47 PM

mjsopas wrote:

(LOL) Freudian slip below... "Moron" = Mormon! Apologies.

Oct 15 11:06 PM

mjsopas wrote:

Regarding the fight before the election:

Equality California (EQCA - www.eqca.org) has raised several million dollars to fight the "Yes on 8" initiative and all funds are being spent to flood the airwaves with what exists to make that happen. However, the fact remains that funds are woefully short of the funds raised by the Yes on 8 backers - now over $25 million and counting, and very recently fueld by considerable donations - with estimates at 40%+ - coming from Moron individual/families and such deep-pocket religious right groups like Focus on the Family. In essence, EQCA ads cannot keep up with the well funded campaign by the other side and it is interesting the GLBT community has been very slow to donate or participate. I attended one fund raiser last month and I was one of maybe a dozen people (out of 150+) that gave anything that night. Even in L.A., with such a liberal/entertainment-driven population base that should truly care, it's really quite astonishing. People want the rights, the action... but, don't want to do some small part (spread the word, put out a yard sign, give some cash, whether $10 or $10,000, it's the effort and the gesture). This is the fundamental reason more is not being done right now. And it absolutely should be. I am not affiliated with EQCA, but I have made my donations to the cause in order to fight this grossly distorted smear campaign while fighting for my rights. I will attend another fund raiser this weekend at the Palm Springs Convention Center and let me tell you, I'm not an activist type by any stretch. But, this one... this one matters to us all and failure to win will set us back at least a decade. GET INVOLVED! DO SOME SMALL PART! THESE ARE YOUR RIGHTS!

Oct 15 11:05 PM

up4now wrote:

I have a "No on Prop 8" video called, "No on Prop 8, California Ends Its Discrimination:1948, 2008, which points out that California's Supreme Court was the first in the nation to end anti-miscegenation laws which banned interracial marriage in 1948, 60 years ago, and how many of the arguments against gay marriage were the same as today's, including scripture citing God's hatred of interracial marriage, that it would destroy society and that it would harm children.

While the video received 5 of 5 ratings when it was launched, since the Newsom ad the ratings have dropped, eerily reflective of the recent polling. Many of the negative comments have had to be deleted because they encouraged violence against gays and lesbians. All comments encouraging violence have come from those using religion as their reason for supporting prop 8.

Support Love, Stop Hate should be the message of the No on Prop 8 campaign. Here's the video link.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hzSjML1kXr0

Oct 12 7:03 PM

AdriantheRN wrote:

i've printed out this info and been handing it out to people. I'm astounded by the amount of people who have NO idea what Prop 8 is about.

Oct 10 8:08 PM

Mystic_Man wrote:

Maybe if people stopped paying (taxes) the bastards they will get the message. I mean this is the 21st century right?

Oct 10 1:39 AM

reymendojr wrote:

It's a depressing state of affair. I've never been so angry about something like I am today. Knowing that the polls are showing a chance of us LOSING our right to marriage... I can't help but want to cry. It's painful. My own mother is an advocate of "Yes on Prop 8" and it KILLS ME to see her parade around our schools supporting something this cruel.

All they see it as is the lose of traditional values. What traditional values? Are there really any left in the US to begin with? What this does to us is it takes away our securities and rights and a "normal" couple would be granted to do a piece of paper that states that they are married. The law wasn't even intended to impose anything on religious groups as well. It is only intended for state use (civil unions, etc.) and it gives religious groups the option, not a mandate.

The media is our best bet but LGBT still hasn't done anything in regards to this. Why is that? I hope they step in soon...

I hope it doesn't go through. It'll be a sad day for us all...

- Link -

Oct 09 12:14 AM

maverickcj_ca wrote:

Why won't the organizations against Prop 8 do something about this???? They have raised money, the can put out commercials!!

Oct 08 9:26 PM

spartanrda wrote:

I did not realize the polls had changed. I hope this bill fails. I want to get involded but I am not sure how!

Oct 08 8:25 PM

GigoloAssassin wrote:

Yeah ive seen the pro prop 8 commercials, and i thought it was insulting and ridiculous; the commercials makes it look like WE are the ones persecuting whoever supports the propostion.

Oct 08 7:23 PM