Tag Cloud
Friday, February 10, 2012
Prop 8 decision: initial reaction
by Jonathan Mendick, published on May 26, 2009 at 5:21 PM
Storyline: News in Sacramento
Loading images
There was a strange combination of emotions in Headhunters Video Lounge and Grill around 10 a.m. when the California Supreme Court decided to uphold Proposition 8, the state constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriages. Perhaps it was the nature of the initial announcement, which was shouted by an on scene KOVR 13 reporter while hearing the breaking news through a cellphone.
Several people cried, but most didn't have time to react, because stations like KXTV 10, KOVR 13, and KTXL 40 were already on the scene videotaping and interviewing people about their initial reactions outside of Headhunters. After the crowd of nearly 100 calmed down a bit, Laurie McBride and Paul Curtis of the No on Prop 8 Fundraising Committee explained the decision, which was a 6-1 decision to reject challenges to Prop 8, and a unanimous decision to have existing marriages remain valid.
"I hope they repeal Prop 8, but the reality is we're prepared if they don't," said Tina Reynolds of Equality Action NOW in an interview minutes before the decision. Through a megaphone, she led the crowd in cheers before and after the decision at the grill and video lounge.
"We are filled with hope. This is not the end, this is just our new beginning. We are going to have true equality!" said Reynolds to a fervent crowd after the decision.
"I'm not at the point of my life where I'm ready to get married, but there are plenty of people I'm surrounded by who are," said Jade Baranski, 23, of Equality Action NOW. "And I feel like their love is being invalidated. This is our generation's Civil Rights Movement."
Later, an 11 a.m. press conference in front of the Sacramento Gay and Lesbian Center featured speeches from Gretchen Bender, President of the Sacramento County Board of Education, Dave Jones of the State Assembly, and Doreena Wong of Asian Pacific Islander Equality, along with several religious leaders.
"This is the first day of a new movement to show our state and the whole country that freedom, family, and civil rights should never be the subject of a popularity vote," said Bender, who married her wife during the six month period before last November, and has a 4-month-old child.
"18,000 lesbian and gay couples living in our communities throughout the state of California [are] demonstrating each and every day that they can love just like love everyone else," said assembly-member Jones to a cheering crowd in front of the Gay and Lesbian Center of Sacramento. "[Because of] the incongruity of that with this decision, I am confident that we will prevail."
"50 percent of me is really happy because I get to stay married, [because] my partner and I got married last October after being together for 18 years," said Jason Lindo, who brought his framed marriage certificate. "Part of me is really pissed."
"I'm now in a completely unique and, I find, repulsive, legal category," Lindo added. "Having something the rest of California can't have, just because I happened to be available for a wedding within that six months."
Read the court's press release on the decision here.
Equality Action NOW has the following events scheduled for tonight:
Until 5 pm: Sign making at the Gay & Lesbian Center (Headhunters will also remain open) – 20th and L Streets
5:30 pm: Rally – 20th and L Streets
6:30 pm: March to the Capital – West Steps of Capitol on 10th and L
7:00 pm: Capitol Program begins
Conversation Express your views,
debate, and be heard with those in your area closest
to the issue.
Leave a Comment
I for one could care less about this issue, I think we should allow gays to get married so they will have nothing more to complain about. A true conservative, who believes in liberty, believes that adults should have the right to do as they please. Unfortunately, this issue is much more complicated than just the right to marriage. The Gay/Left agenda is to teach homosexuality to children starting at the age 5 and to "normalize" and "mainstream" acceptance of homosexuality amongst children. (And NO I don't mean they are recruiting children for sex..per se) If they would just leave my children out of the issue, I would support their rights 100%. The reality is though that gay marriage is just one aspect of the Lefts overall political agenda. So put some protection in for parents and for churches..and put it back on the ballot, it will pass with flying colors.
Also, another good argument is that in reality this issue only affects 5-8% of the population...(I know there are more gays than this..but not all will get married) why should a very vocal small minority force their political agenda on the rest of the populous?
In California there is no legal distinction between "married" couples and domestic partnerships, the Court made it clear that gays should have all of the same rights and protections afforded to traditional married couples. So it all boils down to semantics...a word.
Feel free to introduce yourselves as "married" or wife and wife...or husband and husband... who cares... no one else will...and with 18K others legally allowed to use the term...NO ONE WILL CARE! Try it sometime! Tell people you are one of THEM for gods sake!
Once you boil down the issue all that is left is that..this is NOT about the WORD marriage it is a much broader political agenda.
Do you mean teach tolerance towards homosexuals at school? In real life, issues of sexuality don't come up at school until kids are on the verge of puberty. I don't see how the issue of gay marriage will have any influence on sex education policy. You might argue that legalizing gay marriage will have an effect on the broader culture, which in turn will eventually filter down to sex ed policy, but the proposition that gay marriage advocates have a hidden agenda to teach kids that homosexuality is normal or mainstream seems to me a lot like paranoid propaganda.
According to opinion polls, it is young people who are on the leading edge of gay acceptance. For young people, gays are like the internet. They have a hard time imagining a time when there was no internet or gay people living together openly. They have grown up in a culture where gays are out of the closet and most people don't expend much effort repressing this fact. Kids don't need to be tricked into thinking gayness is a normal expression of human sexuality, because there is always at least one gay dude on America Idol. Gayness is normal to them already.
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=96803
I don't have a problem with teaching kids that homosexuality exists, when they are old enough to understand and comprehend the subject. As a parent I should be able to determine when that time is, not a liberal school system.
California has gotten a lot bluer in the last decade, which means that California leans Democratic in state and federal elections, but most Democrats holding high office won't actually support gay marriage. Obama, for instance, was against gay marriage.
California does have its liberal enclaves, but you've got to remember California is still a stronghold for sun-belt conservativism. We gave America Ronald Reagan after all.
As I like to say: when you get right down to it, California is a rope stretched between Disneyland and Hearst Castle--a rope over an abyss.
Where is the discrimination? Everyone has the right to marry someone of the opposite sex.
Does the government have any role in protecting social values?
If not..are we going to then have to revise many of our existing laws that are based on community standards or social values?
This isn't an argument about social values - in the slightest. If we truly wanted to address that issue, we as a society would be outraged at how some people choose to parent (or not.) We would not allow homelessness, and would in fact have a moral police to lock up anyone not contributing to society (there's plenty of people like that out there, as you know...)
The question is, who are you to determine what's appropriate in terms of how others live? The reality is, the union of *anyone* doesn't affect who you are, or how you live. You have direct control over you and yours, and it really is enough for you decide that it's simply not for you. Live and let live.
I believe in most cases, the vehement opposition to homosexual marriage is largely grounded in homophobia. That it's been wrapped up in ideological values is convenient, but fear is driving it for the most part. The campaigns in support of Prop 8 fed this fear by lying to the public. These campaigns are another point of contention - for obvious reasons.
The discrimination comes in two parts - first, the plethora of homosexual individuals who were allowed to marry - and whose marriages are still valid - have been granted a right that others of the same sexual preference cannot have. Second, 'Domestic Partnership' does not allow all of the same rights as traditional marriage does.
In summary, I see no legitimate harm in allowing two people of the same sex to wed. It also seems to me that most people on the opposing side of this argument are either very closed minded, or very invested in their religious ideologies. I have no problem with the latter, until they begin using their ideological doctrine to tell others how to live.