WTF California? High Court Upholds Proposition 8

By Kate Kotler

In a much anticipated (or dreaded) ruling, the California Supreme Court announced this morning that it is upholding the "voter approved" amendment to the state constitution that bans same-sex marriage. The only solace in this ruling is that the Court also ruled that the 18,000 same-sex marriages that occurred between the May 2008 ruling that legalized same-sex marriage and the passage of Proposition 8 on 4 November, 2008 will be recognized as legal marriages.

It is shocking that a state considered by many one of the most progressive in the union, leading the way for the nation in the cause for equal rights, would or could pass a ballot proposition which is so clearly designed to deny its citizens basic civil rights. The decision could be construed as ironic, even, considering California history: In 1948 California was the first state in the nation to lift the ban on interracial marriage.

Decades before same-sex marriage was to come to the national political stage, Californians voted down the 1978 Briggs Initiative. This initiative was known as Prop 6, and was ballot measure attempting to prevent queer people and their supporters from teaching in the California public school systems. The charge to defeat this initiative was lead by Harvey Milk, the first openly gay man to be elected to public office in California.

It was thought that the decision to legalize same-sex marriage recently issued in Iowa, Vermont and Maine would positively affect the California Supreme Court's ruling. Sadly this was not the case, as the Court upheld Proposition 8 in a 6-1 decision, stating that it is the right of the voters to substantially change the language of the state constitution via the initiative process.

Proposition 8 only passed by a 4.6% margin; and, is hardly considered the "will" of the California voters. LBGT activists were prepared for today's decision and are mobilizing to return this issue to the ballot in either the 2010 or 2012 fall election.

Matt Coles, the ACLU Director of the LGBT project, issued a video statement via the ACLU website this morning. Says Coles, "We're going to keep fighting to get rid of Proposition 8 because this is about a fundamental American value: The right all of us have to live our lives as we see fit without having someone else's morality imposed upon us."

While today's decision is extremely disappointing, it is important that those opposing Proposition 8 not get mired down in mourning the loss; as the most concrete way to repeal this decision is to educate voters and appeal to their sense of equity, asking them to join the fight to restore equal rights to all Californians.

For more information on how to become involved in the fight to have Proposition 8 repealed, please visit our friends:

The American Civil Liberties Union
The National Gay and Lesbian Task Force
GLAAD
The National Center for Lesbian Rights

Image from Slate.

POSTED IN: NEWS
Tue, 26 May 2009 19:28 (GMT+00)
8 Responses
1.

The entire thing makes me sick to my stomach. What a gross misrepresentation of what it means to be an American. However, California isn't the only one we should be furious with today. At least they got to this stage. Most states still stick their heads in the sand and pretend "the gay" doesn't exist.

Natalie
Tue, 26-May-2009 20:48 GMT
2.

If you are in the SF Bay area, you can join us at San Francisco City Hall at 5 pm (PST) today to voice your disappointment in today's CA Supreme Court ruling upholding Proposition 8.

Elsewhere - please check F.A.I.R. to find rallies in your area:
http://www.faironline.org/

Kate
Tue, 26-May-2009 20:50 GMT
3.

@Natalie -- you're 100% right -- this is progress. Frustratingly slow progress, but progress none the less. I think that only positive of today's decision is that it will mobilize people across the country to take up the issue of equality in their own communities.

I moved to California five years ago because I believed it to be one of the most progressive, liberal states in the country; and, I'm wholly disappointed that our populace would let such bigoted legislation pass in the first place. I think that 52.3% of the people in California who should be hanging their heads in shame today.

And, yes it makes me sick to my stomach, too. :(

Kate
Tue, 26-May-2009 20:55 GMT
4.

"deny its citizens basic civil rights." Marriage is not a civil right. Why do you have such a hard time with the fact that we said no, you say "it passed" but not by enough for you? It would be great if you moved on to one of those states that better suits you. What a wonderful world it would be if everyone agreed with you, no debate, no differing opinions, beliefs or thoughts. How dare you tell me I should hang my head in shame because of what I believe in.

Leann Parker
Thu, 28-May-2009 05:11 GMT
5.

Leann - don't inflict your beliefs or morality on the general populace. You have a right to lead your life the way you choose too, you don't have a right to dictate how others lead their lives. There is a difference between holding a differing opinion and using that opinion as the basis to exclude a group of people from an element of society.

Where do YOU get off telling people who they can love and marry? How does this personally affect your life? What right do you have to interfere in the personal lives of others?

What are you going to do next? Legislate who can have children? Legislate where people are allowed to live?

As my eloquent friend Eugene wrote on Tuesday:
"The scary thing about today's ruling is not whether or not these CSC judges are for or against gay marriage; because, that's not what it was about. It's that a vocal minority of a population can fund, lobby and pass a measure to strip constitutional rights away from its citizens. Whats next? Banning the immigration of a certain race of people? Measuring how black you are, thus how much freedoms you are given by sticking a pen in your hair? Or how about stealing the property of law abiding citizens and sending them to interment camp because of their ancestry?

When you allow a group of your population be oppressed, you are allowing yourself to be oppressed."

Frankly - your argument is old and tired. Who cares what you believe? Believe what you want and teach your children directly if you like... Don't enforce your beliefs on other people. WHY DO YOU CARE IF GAY PEOPLE GET MARRIED? How does it hurt you Leanne? It doesn't - that's right - IT DOESN'T.

And, you should hang your head in shame because the stance you're taking is a very bigoted one. As I have pointed out: many many many times in American history the "majority" of the population has been in support of something bigoted, racist, exclusionary and WRONG that at a later time people have looked back at with great shame. This is one of those times in our history as a state and a country where future generations are going to be really ashamed...

And - you - personally - are only making yourself look like a narrow minded, bigoted fool by making comments.

Yes - it didn't pass by enough. And, the only reason it DID pass by 4.2% was because of interference from non-Californian lobbyists who spread divisive and egregiously incorrect information to targeted groups of voters (minorities and non-English speaking) that played upon old, untrue societal fears.

It barely passed and eventually Prop 8 it will be repealed.
"Separate but equal" is an outdated philosophy which is WRONG. Shame on you for promoting it.

Kate
Fri, 29-May-2009 00:41 GMT
6.

Gee, you are so upset. So you attack me personally? That is quite a leap from my believing that marriage should be between a man and a woman to my being Hitler, are you fucking kidding me? What a viscious little bitch you are. That is not a discussion or debate and this is not your platform. There can be no differing opinions? What you have written are your opinions, thats fine but don't attack me because I don't agree with your opinions. Minorities and foreigners are stupid in your opinion? The black vote said no to gay marriage, and you are saying that it is because the black voters have no thoughts or opinions with any value or intelligence

Leann Parker
Tue, 02-Jun-2009 02:13 GMT
7.

..."old untrue societal fears" such as?? Such as?? Try to make your points rationally without attacking people with differing opinions, thoughts and yes beliefs. And your conspiracy theories, isn't it just possible that there are more voters in this state that want "marriage" to remain defined as between a man and a woman...as does our President? Try being alittle nicer and having a decent discussion.

Leann Parker
Tue, 02-Jun-2009 02:22 GMT
8.

Where did I call you Hitler? This "vicious little bitch" thinks this is a case of do unto others as you would have done unto you, dear. I'm not the one calling names.

I'm not attacking you, I'm expressing my BELIEF that you're wrong. I am speaking out vehemently against what I believe to be wrong. I am not condemning you - believe what you want - I'm saying it's WRONG to force your morality onto others.

Personally, I'm against many things on from a moral perspective that I support in the political plane. BECAUSE IT IS NOT RIGHT TO INFLICT MY MORALITY ON OTHERS.

Same-sex marriage doesn't hurt straight people such as you and myself. It doesn't denigrate the commitment between opposite sex married couples. It doesn't affect anyone in any way except the people who are being denied the right to have it recognized by the greater society.

What old, untrue societal fears? Hm, let's see: that homosexuality is "contagious." Specifically: that if same-sex marriage was legalized that religious officials would be "forced" to perform same-sex marriages and jailed if they refused. That same-sex marriage would be "taught in the public schools."

Both lies. Both perpetrated by a conservative lobbying group out of Utah. Both designed to play upon the fears of those less informed about the politics of this issue.

I don't think that minorities are stupid and I never said that. I said that a very savvy lobbying group attacked with misinformation in *very specific* demographics with the design to play upon the fears of people who were less informed about the proposition. It's not unreasonable to suggest that playing upon high emotional stakes is a method used to manipulate voters - it's done all the time.

The margin is narrow and believe me, those in favor of same-sex marriage have had their eyes opened as to where they need to be working hardest to correct that misinformation for the next opportunity to repeal the proposition.

Differing opinions are fine and well. My opinion is that this is a time in history people will look back upon decades from now and be ashamed of the fact that they or their relatives or the people of their community supported legislation which is bigoted and just plain old wrong. You are free to disagree with me. I'm sure I'm not the first person, nor will be the last person in the world to speak out against the "perceived majority" and be told that they are wrong... You're trying to shut me down by saying that I'm being disrespectful - I'm not - you're trying to tell me I'm irrational - I'm not. I'm perfectly nice, frankly and you're the one being combative.

Cheers.

Kate
Wed, 17-Jun-2009 19:42 GMT

Add Comment

Note: Your email address will be verified but will never be published on the site.

If you are a registered user, please Sign In.




The opinions expressed by the author and commenters are their own and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of BitchBuzz or any employer or organisation. The aforementioned are not responsible for the accuracy of content published.

social feed

@BitchBuzz: The [Digital] Revolution Will Be Gendered - from @katelaity on BitchBuzz Tech http://t.co/5bkxZo0x
09 Feb @ 10:46 GMT

search



buzz we love

Bitchin' Lifestyle
Vikki Chowney
Bangs and a Bun
Vintage Patisserie
Pop Justice
The Other Woman
Pamflet
Gala Darling
Red Velvet
Shape What's to Come
Bird's Eye View
Gala Darling
Bake & Destroy
Kris Atomic
Mark Johns
Garfunkel & Oates
India Knight
Kate Nash
Erin Gibson
Sarah Lacy
Vegansaurus
The Boss of You
Meantime Brewery
Make and Do with Perri