While the result for Prop 8 hasn't been "officially" declared (won't be until Dec 9th) it's currently passing by around half a million votes. I don't imagine that that gap is going to be bridged.
There are myriad theories being thrown around as to why, in California, the "Left Coast," could such a measure have passed?
1. The text of the law was confusing. People thought a "Yes" vote was a vote in FAVOR of Same-Sex marriage.
2. Minority voters, the vast majority of whom were Barack Obama supporters, are by vast majority against same-sex marriage.
3. The Mormon LDS Church out of Utah organized a massive effort to pass Prop 8 in California.
Theory #1:
From my personal standpoint, the text of this law was made very clear. In California, they do a fantastic job at (attempting) to educate voters. Every registered voter gets sent a big packet in which the full text and approximate cost to taxpayers of each proposition is detailed. Additionally, an analysis by supporters on each side of the issue is provided. The ballot measure of Prop 8 clearly read, "Eliminates Right of Same-Sex Couples to Marry." Below that, if that wasn't clear enough, were the words: "A yes vote on this measure is a vote to eliminate the right of same-sex couples to marry."
When I went for early voting, there was a 2.5-hr wait. Somebody had been thoughtful enough to lay out additional voter information guides, and I had plenty of time to read up on issues on which I was still rough.
Now, if somebody had moved and didn't update their address and if they didn't watch television or read the newspaper for the last six months, I could see them being confused by a potential campaign of misinformation. It's possible. However, if you look at the map of California counties and how they voted, there is a very clear pattern in the image to the left - the red counties (who voted No) are primarily on both the coast and bordering Reno, Nevada, and the green counties (who voted Yes) are in the more rural, mountainous and desert regions. 
Theory #2:The image beside this paragraph is CNN's map of votes for president in the 2008 election. Barack Obama passed by a large margin in the state, and some people were hoping that this meant that Prop 8 would fail by a large margin as well. There is a large problem with that hope, however. Barack Obama does NOT support gay marriage; he supports civil unions and is against a federal definition of marriage.
From CNN:
Barack Obama Opposes same-sex marriage, but also opposes a constitutional ban. Says he would repeal the Defense of Marriage Act and voted against the Federal Marriage Amendment. As stated on the Obama campaign Web site, he supports full civil unions that "give same-sex couples equal legal rights and privileges as married couples, including the right to assist their loved ones in times of emergency as well as equal health insurance, employment benefits, and property and adoption rights."
California already has domestic partnerships. Perhaps the majority of Obama supporters believed that DPs are "enough."
To my confusion, shortly before the election, Obama shifted his position on same-sex marriage and asked California voters to vote NO on Prop 8. Did he mean a state constitutional ban or a federal constitutional ban, or is he just trying to have his cake and eat it too?
Side note: What good is a cake you can't eat?
I've heard a few of my colleagues mention that (some) minorities see Prop 8 as an issue for "rich white folks." The stereotype is a gay white man with disposable income, who has to worry about passing on health insurance, life insurance and inheritance. The theory goes that a lot of minorities don't have these luxuries to pass on, so they do not sympathize with this person. There isn't much to back up that theory, however, as, just from a quick look, the most diverse areas of the state were the ones with the least support for Prop 8.
Theory #3
According to some sources members of the Mormon LDS church (both inside and outside of California) contributed $20million to the "Yes on Prop 8" campaign. With over $70million (Whoa!) being "thrown" at this issue on either side, that's a pretty hefty chunk. Some, because of this effort, want to challenge the tax exempt status of the Mormon Church. Far be it for me to further interpret the law, but I imagine that a congregation willing to part with over $20million of life savings, college funds, etc., is not going to be stopped by having to pay taxes. Furthermore, this effort will only further alienate the LDS from the LGBTQ community, if that is even possible.
There is a lot of hurt and anger right now from many on the "No on Prop 8" side. Some fight back with litigation against the constitutionality of the proposition (again). Some fight back with questioning the tax exempt status of the Mormon Church. Some fight back with threatening to stop paying state taxes (i.e., Melissa Etheridge).
A very moving editorial was passed on to me that I'd like to share.
Even outside of Prop 8, I think we should all be careful not to propagate bigotry and hate with more bigotry and hate. After all, this is an issue about love.
No comments:
Post a Comment