http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/results/polls/#CAI01p1

African-Americans voted to ban gay marriage in California by a huge margin, 70% yes to 30% no. This is a worse number even than people older than 65. Yesterday I was pretty bitter that blacks got to enjoy their big moment while simultaneously deciding to grind our faces in shit, but that's not a productive analysis when so many other groups also voted against gay rights.

Where do we go from here? What will it take to change black voters' minds?

It's not just African-Americans; many other segments of the population that voted for Proposition 8. I think it would behoove the gay community, and especially gay men, to take a long look at themselves and see what they might be doing that would make people want to keep the word "marriage" to themselves (since the major effect of Proposition 8 was not to take away rights but to keep a label for male-female relationships). Here are some thoughts I had this morning. I think many people think of "marriage" as a couple making a life-long commitment that includes a vow of monogamy, is often the beginning of a family involving children, and foreshadows active involvement in the greater community rather than a narrow segment of society. (Of course, "marriage" also has religious meaning, but my sense is that to many people the religious meaning is of less importance than the practical meaning.) So, if I am correct about what "marriage" connotes to many people, I wonder if there is anything that the gay community (and gay men in particular) is doing that makes people think that, perhaps, the desire to claim the label "married" does not equate to a true desire to live a married life? Hmmmm .... flamboyant gay pride parades? Bath houses? Are there any highly visible "gay" charities that are actively and visibly pursuing the betterment of children?

One really has to wonder how the black community would feel if we were to hold a vote on whether or not to re-institute segregation.

How the hell is it that matters of civil rights can be left to a vote? Doesn't that sort of negate the entire purpose of a constitution? What if LBJ had decided that equal rights were too politically contentious and decided to simply let the southern states hold their own votes?

f**king ridiculous.

A few things. I felt the way you do now in 2004 when my home state of Ohio banned same-sex marriage, common law marriage, and domestic partnerships. Still in affect, if I were with my ex-partner, it'd be 6 years now and we wouldn't have equal rights. What was depressing about 2004 though was that I knew if it went to the Supreme Court a Bush court would throw it out. Prop 8 is not going to stand legally and we have a fighting chance now that Obama is President Elect.

As for your bitterness - I get the irony. My straight black female friend said she saw Mexican immigrants with Yes on 8 posters in their windows and she was pissed because they have people living in their apartment illegally and had the audacity to try and speak against someone else's rights. Another black progressive friend pointed to the hypocrisy of Mormon bigamy or the Catholic syndicate protection of child rapists yet they funded commercials making us out to be monsters. One of my white friends says that he hates Orange County because it is full of rich white supremacists who want to oppress everyone, including gay people. But we can't pass the buck; in terms of the electorate, we're pretty close and have only a few minds to change. We just have to do the work.

In regard to "blacks having their moment" I think by making the comparison, which we gays often do, it invites people to shut down.

Progress takes struggle. The first African slaves were brought to this country in 1526. 1526!!!!! That's 482 years of struggle, living as slaves, being hunted for sport, existing under apartheid, lacking the right to vote, facing subtle discrimination, etc. in a country that we didn't ask to come to, but accepted and grew to love despite it not loving us equally. We are the bastard stepchildren of the American dream and Barack opened the door and let us see that we could come to the table and eat with our sisters and brothers, our fellow Americans and not feel less than, not feel scorned, not feel dismissed, not feel ignored. We have organized and fought for our humanity and liberty from the beginning and Obama's election is the fulfillment of the hope and the dream of a slave who lost their home and felt that they had no country, no nation, no abiding place.

The Gay Civil Rights movement began in an expansive way with the Stonewall Rebellion, which was in 1969. That's 39 years. And sodomy was against the law in several states until 2003, fives years ago! That's not very long. And if we want equality under the law, we know that it's going to be a fight and it takes time. The NAACP came out against Prop 8 and several other black organizations, but it's just about doing the work and having conversations. How much money did David Geffen give to fight 8? I know quite a few gays who don't even believe in marriage and others who feel that Civil Unions are civil rights because it offers the same legal protections. So I don't think it's about changing a single group of people's minds, it's about changing our message and using the power we have to fight for what we believe.

I am hopeful that we will live to see this world get even better for everyone.

Ok...I had to marinate on this one for a minute cuz had I written what had immediately come to mind after seeing a couple of these comments it wouldn't have been pretty. First of all, I am black and gay and DON'T appreciate the fact (GOLFER) that your comment makes it seem as though the gay rights struggle is reserved for white people only (I'm assuming thats what you meant by "blacks rubbing our face in shit" comment). Secondly, that kind of comment is EXACTLY the reason why there are separate gay pride parades geared toward blacks and latinos. Most out blacks have never really felt included in the gay rights struggle and did not believe that any particular issues that affected the black gay community were being addressed at all by the larger, predominantly white headed gay organizations. I was very disappointed that those gay ballot issues went against us. But, I already knew that one of the direct results of the high numbers of African Americans who voted for Barack was going to mean gay ballot initiatives were going to be in trouble.

The African American community is very conservative and intolerant when it comes to issues of homosexuality. This is something that has been instilled because of societal stereotypes and church reinforcement. It is one of the reasons Bush won re-election in 2004. The Republicans smartly put that gay marriage stuff on the ballot in Ohio. Analysts have said before that if Kerry had a little bit more black support, he would've won Ohio. I also know some blacks who vote Republican simply because of abortion. So, when it comes to social issues, many blacks are just culturally conservative. It is very unfortunate, and is something that I hope can die out with each generation.

Now Dan85, I'm glad you seem to think things are f*cking ridiculous because your comment about how would African Americans feel if "we" had a vote to reinstitute segregation is f*cking ridiculous (ok I guess I needed more time to marinate on this but oh well I've started typing now). Anywho...comparing segregation based on an external feature that you can't hide as opposed to something that you can hide (i.e. homosexuality) is absolutely a ridiculous comparision to make, and I'm sick of the two being made as though they are equal struggles. No one's gay ass no matter how flamboyant they were has ever had to go to separate bathrooms, restaurants, schools, forced to sit in the back of the bus, were hosed down on a regular by police, had their houses raided and burned to the ground by KKK, lynched,WERE OWNED, had no right to vote or have property, etc etc (the list is too long).

Now I understand people's frustrations with this....I really do. But some comments I'm just not going to tolerate. So perhaps what the "mainstream" gay community needs to do is figure out a way to be a bit more inclusive when it comes to people of color, instead of the many who have their f*cking noses up in the air not wanting to include people of color in the struggle. IN ADDITION, gay people of color could do more themselves to outreach to mainstream gay organizations to find common ground. It takes two to integrate so I'm not putting all the blame on one side. Gay people of color need to simply make contact and come up with platforms so that all gay issues can be put on the forefront. But, one step at a time I know. It will take some time. But please...I see racism and prejudice in the gay community ALL THE TIME. So not only are we fighting the struggle skin color wise whether you are gay or straight from everyday interactions, but if you are black and gay it also comes two fold. Cuz there are plenty of white gay folk who want nothing to do with my black ass; I even sense it on this message board (not saying anyone who has posted here, but some other posters) So trust and believe...you STILL have it better than we do because of that. Obama's ascension to the Presidency doesn't mean that the racial struggle is over either. DO NOT get it twisted.

Edited to add: Oh lord I just went back and read that. I apologize for the cursing yall. I curse like a sailor. Its not directed towards anyone...its just how I express myself, particularly when I'm perturbed. I know I need my mouth washed out with soap, but my mother curses something terrible and I truly get it honest from her. So please don't take offense. I'm not cursing at you. I'm just cursing cuz thats just what I do. My bad.

Blaming the African American community or the Hispanics is nonsense. There was a very focused, very deliberate campaign orchestrated by the Mormon church and other religious based organizations - and it was based on fear. And it worked. Over and over again it was hammered into people's minds that gay marriage somehow eroded traditional marriage; over and over again it was hammered into people's minds that the gays wanted to teach the children about all things gay. The Yes on 8 campaign was clever and deceitful and horrible - but it worked. Black and Latino families are generally very religious and revolve around the church - therefore the campaign targeted them effectively. We all know how ludicrous the arguments are against gay marriage but many people don't get it.

And it not's over - now is the time to revoke the Mormon church's tax exempt status:

http://www.mormonsstoleourrights.com/

Also, sign this petition to go to Gov Arnold:

http://www.petitiononline.com/seg5130/petition.htm

Stop blaming and keep working towards equality!!!

mdterp,

Obviously it is not fair or productive to pin the blame on black folk for Prop 8 passing--white Republicans voted 80% in favor and make up a much larger portion of the population, so they are just as culpable if not more so. I am just being honest with my snap reaction to those exit poll numbers and the huge contrast in reactions to Obama's victory and Prop 8 passing. I went from almost giddy to depressed in the space of an hour, and there is only one group of people who voted FOR Obama and FOR Prop 8 in large numbers. In the future it is critical for movement leaders (if there is a "movement" and if it does have "leaders") to understand why blacks voted the way they did and to figure out how to help them come around as quickly as possible.

I am glad you both vented and made constructive suggestions and hopefully the thread can continue with a little of each.

For my part, I apologize for the first statement. For what it's worth a lot of people have been doing a lot of stewing today and emotion got the better of me. Although I do believe that the black community needs to take a long, hard look at their prejudices, my comment was, at the very least, insensitive, especially to blacks in the gay community.

Golfer25 - I'd also like to point out that Obama's victory isn't primarily a victory for black people - it's above all else a victory for this country. We chose a smart contemplative man set on Uniting the country. Our new President is a victory for all of us.

And perhaps the rest of the world can stop despising us now.

I couldn't agree more with that comment Bryan. Let us not forget that Barack Obama is as much white as he is black. He is biracial. In part, he is a symbol of the incredible diversity that makes up this country. In a way its ironic that he is a product of something that is still often looked down upon (i.e. interracial relationships) When you looked into that crowd in Chicago you saw so much diversity. It was always present at his rallies and when you saw the celebrations from around the world, it was so diverse. Something that I think is often left out of the Civil Rights Movement are the whites who marched alongside blacks, as well as some who lost their lives for that struggle. Well, Obama would not have been elected last night without white support. Blacks could not do it alone. So thats why Bryan is right...it is a victory for all of us. He included gays in his victory speech and that should be a good sign as opposed to what we wouldn't have heard from McCain and Sister Sarah (who apparently didn't know that Africa was a continent instead of a country )

I'm white, but I agree with mdterp01 that we can't equate race with sexuality when it comes to discrimination. Race is not only much more apparent, but racism is far more invidious than homophobia.

What bugs me is the naive notion that simply labeling something a "civil right" should automatically lead to legal recognition of that right by the government/populace. Check your history men. African-Americans fought and died for centuries to finally get a law passed that guaranteed civil rights. It's about politics--convincing others of the justice in your claim. Protesting and other tactics are useful to the extent they bring about a change in thinking of the population in general, so that your cause is seen as just, and the continued failure to acknowledge those rights would be an gross injustice. Changing the minds of a diverse group of people takes a hell of a lot more than just repeating "but it's my civil right!" It's a civil right only when the law says its a civil right--that may sound harsh, but that's the truth.

What happened in California was that the people decided that the state Constitution, which is not given to us by nature or God, should be rewritten to overrule the Cal. Supreme Court's interpretation of one part of the Constitution. The people have the power to do that, based on my legal training and 20 years of law practice. That's how slavery was abolished, that's how alcohol was first prohibited and then allowed under the U.S. Constitution. The amendment process, thus, can work both ways--it can give or take away rights.

I could be wrong, but I think the legal attacks on Proposition 8 will be futile, and I think it is borderline wishful thinking to hope that the election of Barack Obama will make any difference in this fight. There's nothing he can do regarding the Constitution of California, or what the voters of California decide--that's the whole point of a federation of independent states. As I see it, the only way to challenge Proposition 8 would be to ask the U.S. Supreme Court to find that Prop. 8 violates the right of privacy in the U.S. Constitution (the scope of which is highly contested). The chance of that being successful are terribly minimal.

So, this will be a political fight to sway the minds of voters, which I think can be done (many younger people are very sympathetic to the rights of gay people). A fight like this takes cunning, strategy, clear-thinking, and effective execution. The opposition is more than happy to have gay people marinate in self-imposed victim-based thinking.

P.S. Seeking to revoke the Mormon Church's tax-exempt status is a complete waste of time--it will NEVER happen, and sending a petition to Governor Schwarzenegger isn't going to do anything. The change has to begin WITHIN THE GAY COMMUNITY. If only there were a gay version of MLK, Jr.

I think the marriage issue is going to languish in the mud as long as it stays narrowly focused.

Let's face it, the Yes on 8 people (the one's who put it on the ballot) weren't really fighting against gay marriage. They were/are fighting against gay people. Conversely the issue for us wasn't totally marriage, it was basic civil rights.

When one feels that a group doesn't deserve to exist they can then set about using the law/government to destroy that group.

Being a long-time San Franciscan I am prone to the more militant response and agree that the tax-exempt status of ANY non-profit (especially churches) group that participated in a political issue should be examined.

This thread is exactly why I abdolutely love Al Sharpton.

He espouses that gay marriage is a civil rights issue because he runs on a civil rights platform and equality is equality.

If we can start utilizing these terms in unison, maybe the black and other minorities will understand our argument is equivalent to their own struggles.

Seacraig, respectfully, yours is the type of overreaction that is totally unproductive. I don't think the Yes on 8 people put the measure on the ballot because they are against gay people in general. I'm willing to bet that most of those who voted for Prop. 8 both know and like gay people, and would join gay people in resisting any effort to roll-back domestic-partnership rights. Prop. 8 was about preserving a traditional meaning of the word "marriage," about which many, many people have deeply-held emotions. To win politically, you first have to do your best to truly understand your opposition, rather than slapping an easy characterization on them.

Civil rights should never be put to a vote, because every minority group will be subject to the tyranny of the majority.No one is ever going to give you rights willingly if they see it as an infringement on their own rights or privleges. You have to fight and advocate to win those rights in the legislature and the courts and in the media.

I, in no way, believe that all of the people that voted for the measure are against gay people. I do fully believe that those who put the measure on the ballot are totally against us. In order to be able to deny someone rights you have to believe they are less than. Further, gay people marrying doesn't effect straight people in any way whatsoever so how does it erode the term marriage at all.

Respectfully, which traditional marriage do you think they're trying to preserve? The one where women are chattel and have no rights? The one where a bride is told whom to marry? The ones where 13 and 14 year old kids get married? Or the current "roulette" marriage that straight people practice marrying one after another after another? All of those examples were the "norm" at different times in history.

I'd venture that most people who use the phrase "traditional marriage" believe they're talking about the fairytale version shown where they live happily ever after.

Again, in order to be able to wrap you mind around denying a group of people the same right that you have you HAVE to believe they are less than and don't "deserve" it.

I understand that people have deeply held religious beliefs. I understand the Madisonian concept of the "tyranny of the majority". I don't believe that playing the game by their rules is the most effective strategy. We should call this what it is....codified discrimination.

You don't need to convince me, since I voted against Prop. 8. You need to convince those who voted for it. I highly doubt that putting down marriage as some sort of sham and then becoming overlying dramatic about your victimhood is going to do much good.

I am not saying that this should be all-inclusive, but we need to start bringing up the fact that the GLBT communities' access to marriage and equal rights inherent to marriage is in the same family as access to full civil rights.

This conversation needs to bridge the understanding to the African American community. Those who are both GLBT in addition to cultural/racial minorities would be the perfect leaders in this conversation.

It is possible that because many GLBT minorities seem to primarily identify first racially and culturally, that the success of Barack Obama will melt the edges of that outer shell and allow for more access to deeper identification inclusive of engaging with the GLBT community more strongly.

Ain't that the truth?! Detroit is living proof of that statement.

Eddie- as a Detroiter, I have to laugh at this because it is so true!!

One of the funniest experiences I ever had was when I was working in the clinic and there was an African American woman in one area and a Chaldean gentleman nearby, but facing an opposite direction.

She was in pain and claiming "Praise Jesus, Praise Jesus" one second, then received a quick cell phone call (on vibrate) and stated quite loudly "I'm gonna killa that Motha f**ka." and hung up.

The Chaldean turns to me in his thick accent and whispers- "That is no good to be calling Jesus a motherf**k." I was drinking water and almost spit it out right there....

I thought Prop 8 also made a hit on domestic partnership rights too? Glad to hear it did not.

I don't know the answer to making inroads with the black community, but it's going to take awhile especially with so many staying in the closet. Just take a look at how AIDS has effected that segment of our population due to the closet and the down-lows.

I looked at the exit poll results and what suprises me most is the age break down of the vote. I know that with people under 30 the majority voted no to Prop8 and that comes as no surprise. But why are the groups 30-39 and 40-49 worse than 50-64? You would think each generation would be more tolerant not less.


-----------Yes-
30-39---- 52%
40-49---- 59%
50-64-----51%


If voters in the 30-49 age group, a very large group, voted the same as those 50-64, it might have made a differernce.

And what is interesting about that break-down of yes votes is that the age-groups with the higher percentages were those which were much more likely to be still in the process of raising young children, which suggests to me that a sense of community and protectiveness, which are at their peak at that time, are more likely to predict how someone will view the right to marry than religious beliefs. That's why the ads showing the children going to the lesbian wedding at SF city hall, coupled with Mayor Newsom's ill-chosen "whether you like it or not" speech, were likely quite effective.

I think that back in the '70's, when the Gay Rights movement was making big noise and big strides, or in the '80's when AIDS activism was at its peak, or even in the '90's when it seemed like there was much less reason to act up, I don't think same-sex marriage was that important an issue... with gay people, much less society at large. This is really a very recent issue, that has moved very quickly in certain places, and we see same-sex marriage in a number of countries despite the fact that homophobia still exists in those places, such as Canada.

It was only very recently that gay marriage was even possible in California. But before then, a mere few years ago, was anybody all that upset? But what's unique about this situation, and what may help 'rally the troops,' is that this is a 'right' that has been taken away.

If you never had marriage, you don't know what you're missing. But if you have it, and then somebody takes it away, then you realize how important it is.

But the positive side to this is that maybe some of the anti-gay marriage people might start asking themselves Why is marriage so important to the gays? And maybe they might realize that accepting that we have the right to marriage actually *strengthens* the institution of marriage.

===========

But going back to what was mentioned above. Somewhere on the Internet I read today that Prop. 8 may have suffered the Bradley effect. And while the polls may have made it seem like it was going to fail, perhaps many of those "undecideds" were really people who wanted to vote Yes, but wouldn't say so openly to pollsters. Even people who are anti-gay know it's politically incorrect to say so. But in the privacy of the voting booth, the prejudice comes out.

So I'm of the group that believes that the Yes vote has more to do with homophobia than it has to do with 'preserving the sanctity of marriage' or any such nonsense.

============

And did I read that 1/4 of the population of San Francisco (who would be more familiar with the gay community than any other city) voted Yes?

I did quite a bit of volunteering and phonebanking for Obama in California, and came in contact with a lot of the No on 8 people. Here's what they were telling me as late as last weekend, just days before the election. Often times, they would be talking to voters and hear the following: "Oh the gay marriage initiative? I'm definitely voting yes because I think gays should be able to get married too." And then they would have to be told, "Wait. No, no, no. If you WANT gay marriage to remain legal, you must vote no." I was told by several different people from No on 8 that voters were confused a lot, and they thought they had to vote yes if they were for gay marriage, when in fact they had to vote no. The proposition was confusing, and we all know that many people don't bother to read each proposition or try to understand it before voting. I think this caused major problems and possibly even enough to change the outcome.

Also it was with a lot of sadness today that I read in USA Today that there were only 2 voting blocs in the nation that voted in lesser amounts for Obama than they did for Kerry 4 years ago. People over age 65, and gay/lesbian voters were the only ones who voted for Kerry in greater percentages than they did for Obama. That's sad and makes me think racism reared its head among gay people who didn't want to vote for Obama. I can't imagine any reason why gays would gravitate towards that McCain-Palin debacle.

It's hard for me to digest the fact that other people (heterosexuals, racists, evangelicals) have the ability to vote in a system that denies me rights afforded to others.
That is the way our system works right now and I have to accept it as it is now but that doesn't mean I have to lay down and die because a few states passed these ammendments.

This is far from over. I really believe that. It is a battle that will engage us and generations to come for a very long time. I heard on CNN last night that there are still 30 states in the USA where you could be fired for being gay.

President elect Obama stated several times he would only appoint judges to the supreme court who were sensitive to gay and lesbian issues. He also said that about womens issues.
This election was a huge win for us and I believe the beginning of several of these cases going to the court and the chances of these rulings being in our favor are pretty good if we get some key appointments.

It's a new part of our journey and like the racial issue it's just another step toward equal rights for all.

Hopefully in the end the Constitution will be upheld.

Seems to me that our anger, frustration and disappointment is being directed @ the wrong people. These are the real culprits of Prop 8's passing, plus some of the other conservative denominations.

Edited for the following:

Don't forget to check out the photos from the protest (if you haven't already).

Exactly SCTrojan. Prop 8 was a religious attack on gays. It was not about marriage. This is supported by their advertising: Homosexuality will be taught in schools, churches will have to marry gay couples, etc...

I believe the reason why gay marriage is the big deal that it is, is because the Supreme Court has failed to recognize our community as a protected class. Therefore the "equal protection" and other clauses only apply in the broadest sense. The marriage that is in question is civil marriage, the one the government sanctions and then bestows certain benefits on that married couple.

It's true that some jurisdictions have created domestic partnerships with (allegedly) the same rights as marriage. It's a separate, but equal solution. It still makes domestic partners second class citizens. It would be like telling the Mormons you can't be a religion but we'll create this other category that you can register for and it's just the same.

For years the issue was the military, now it's marriage and adoption. All of these issues are a subset of the greater, and main, issue.....equality for all citizens. And the majority never willingly gives up any of their power.

last tuesday was two steps forward, and one step backward.

i don't know how a black person feels, but i felt their euphoria last tuesday. i felt a sense of liberation, that anything is possible. even for gays.

yes, anything is possible. it's possible to take away a legal right. it's possible to overturn a supreme court ruling. 7 of 10 blacks voted yes to ban gay marriage. amazing. after what they've been through, you'd think that they'll be more sensitive to gay issues/rights, but they're not. one black woman was interviewed and said that she voted yes to protect her family. protect from what? how does gay marriage threaten her family? do gay unions destroy families?

i don't think i can ever be sympathetic to their issues again.

Yeah, but that lady's answer about "protecting her family" was not limited to any particular race. If there's any common feature about those who supported Prop 8 was the fact that they were mostly religiously conservative--regardless of race. Just sayin...

Edited for the following:

I just wanted to add that at this stage our community must start thinking about much more productive strategies for winning over this nation about our rights. That may involve communicating & sitting down with many that we disagree with. And I think it's gonna have to start w/ the churches. Obviously, we're not gonna convince all conservative churches or denominations. But we can start considering such things as:

1. What can we do differently next time to convince others about our struggles?
2. How can we assist our cities/towns, states and country with understanding our sense of being unequally treated & unprotected by the laws of the land?
3. Where can we find better advertising managers for our political campaigns?
4. How can we convince the majority of voters that our causes are not a threat to them, their families or the country?
5. What are our options at this point re: marriage equality in CA or any other state?

I mean the list can go on. Some of the above questions will force us to look @ ourselves--individually & collectively--w/ brutal honesty & deep introspection. And that may involve changing our image or how others perceive us externally. As much as I think that people have the right to express themselves as freely as they'd like to, I also think that running around naked @ gay parades, watching someone getting spanked by a paddle @ festivals, or wearing full S & M attire out in broad daylight does not help our overall image. In addition, I think the key thing is that we must consider productive alternatives at this point & not ones that are counter-productive (like making this a race issue). Plus, we need to look at what has worked, historically, in this country for other marginalized groups. Finally, I think patience and perseverance are gonna be needed by all of us unfortunately. Things are simply not gonna change overnight. On a side note, Prop 8 was not far off from being defeated even considering the fact that large sections of certain groups voted for its passage. That to me states that we are close but need more work.

Those are my thoughts of the day...Godspeed to all!

It is really unfortunate that given what just happened on the Presidential level, that these propositions failed. It does look like its going to take some time, maybe be a little while before the struggle for acceptance of gay marriage takes root. Hurdles need to fall one at a time. Maybe right now, seeing what just happened with Obama, we need to take a step back for a moment, pause and reflect and then plan on advancing another strategy at a later date. I know how much this hurts, esp. given that there have already been any number of gay marriages in California. From what I know the younger generation couldn't give a rats behind about gay marriage, they're open for th emost part, and I suspect its the older generations that still have the most fear about this..it looks like victory must be in baby steps. One step at a time.

Keep in mind also that Proposition 8 only changed one thing--the definition of "marriage." Gays still have the right to form civil unions in California, which give them all the rights and obligations of marriage. And even if Proposition 8 had failed, it wouldn't have made any difference at the federal level, where gay marriages are not recognized regardless of what a state does. Proposiiton 8 was basically symbolic; it did not change any actual rights (or duties).

Excellent pt SFTom!

I'd be OK with the civil union thing if everyone married in CA only got to be recognized as being in a civil union. Separate is not equal.

Harvey Fierstein's take on Proposition 8.

Great post canmark!

How about take government out of the marriage business altogether. Everyone. Gays, straights, whatever. No more "marriage" sanctioned by the government. After all, don't we have a separation of church and state? Make EVERY union a civil union. Let the churches have the weddings. Along with those civil unions, equal rights for all. Remember, it is LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL. Not just for some. Until we all really live those words, they will be empty words. As for blacks, I live in the blackest city in this nation, Gary, IN. I have found that just like everyone else, some people are tolerant of gays, some not. It just depends upon the person. That is my humble experience.

To clarify something maybe everyone already understands, but whether a state like California recognizes gay marriage has nothing to do with the federal government or the I.R.S. They can and would still ignore such marriages. A change in federal law would be needed for that to change.

And that is exactly what needs to be done. Something on the federal level, so we don't have to dick around with a**holes from all 50 states. Put this puppy to bed.

The L.A. Times wrote an article on this issue:

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-ga...0,1601616.story

I agree that eventually Congress or, more likely, the Supreme Court will step in and mandate some kind of civil union recognition on a federal level. Then it's a short jump to requiring marriage. But that's not going to happen for a long time.

I hate to say it, but I think the possibility of a change in federal legislative policy is much less likely than on the state level. One of the main effects at the federal level of including gay partnerships within the definition of marriage would be to enlarge tax breaks--i.e., reduce tax revenue. The legislature won't be motivated to do that. And gay marriage, as we all know, is an incendiary political issue akin to immigration. Basically, no legislator is going to want to sponsor a bill on this issue because it is political poison (that's why immigration reform went nowhere). Also, legislators have an easy exucse not to take it on--family-law issues are generally left to the individual states to decide. So, I think we can assume the federal legislature would never take on this issue.

The U.S. Supreme Court might someday find that there are due-process or fundamental-right issues that render state laws unconstitutional if they don't allow same-sex marriage. But the whole idea and scope of the right of privacy allegedly in the Constitution (which doesn't mention a right of privacy or fundamental rights) is very highly contested. There would have to be a groundswell of lower courts finding that gay marriage is a "fundamental right" before the U.S. Supremes would begin moving in the direction, in my opinion. That's why California was so important.

That's why I think the gains to be made by way of legal challenges are rapidly diminishing, and that the gay community needs to begein to change minds at a grass roots level as to why they deserve the right to "marry" (although they basically have most of the rights and duties associated with marriage in California already). In my opinion, that requires shrewd strategy and more than just marching in the streets.

N-Word Hurled at Blacks During Westwood Prop 8 Protest

Mmmm Hmmm...this further highlights the racism that exists in the LGBT community, and I'm afraid that the sentiments over how blacks overwhelmingly supported Prop 8 (although only making up 10% of the total vote) will only halt any attempt at improved race relations in the LGBT community.

A "symbolic" endorsement and constitutional enshrinement of "separate but equal" status for gays IS significant, especially when it marks a step backward and sets the dangerous precedent of fundamentally alerting a constitution to exclude/perclude certain groups' rights, rather than positively state what rights are enshrined for every citizen.

The damage done by this proposition is significant and I would seriously question the motive of anyone, especially someone in the gay community, who intends to argue otherwise.

Use of the N-word is wrong. Plain and simple.

Although the media is partially to blame for the sort of "stoking the fires" and throwing that 70/30 number on the news.

I do think that a sense of resentment within the GLBT community is somewhat understood. I don't have any statistics, but the GLBT community seems to understand the marginalization that occurs with the minority position. The assumption is that the African American community would understand this position and never vote to decrease individual rights of any kind. I think it kind of smarts a bit.

But this ignorant behavior is plain wrong and unacceptable.

This makes me think of when Al Gore lost in 2000- if he would have carried his home state of Tennessee he would have won. He mentioned having to go back home and mend some fences.

This is what we need to do- we need minority leadership within our GLBT community that will represent their individual needs. We need to continue outreach to our straight youth and straight minorities.

Because there is such a small margin between full marriage rights and none- we need to melt the edges of each area that is voting against the measure. If we can bring the African American community to 50/50, that will help us, but it will require change from each group to achieve our goal.

I think this quote from the LA Times article that golfer25 posted says it best (which is basically what I said on my earlier post):



The only other thing I would say is that we need to start reaching out to all religiously conservative people (& not just our black brothers and sisters) & make them realize that glbt issues affects everyone, including people they love in their communities. All minorities in this country would especially understand and empathize with this reality.

Let's be clear about marriage.

It has nothing -- absolutely nothing -- to do with religion. It is the states that issue marriage licenses, not the churches. A couple must have a license before all the fancy church ceremony, expensive white dress, cake, presents and reception have any generally recognized validity. Also bear in mind that the opposite of marriage, divorce, takes place in a court, not a church.

On a slightly different note, I'm disappointed in the marches that have taken place thus far here in San Francisco. Last night a couple of thousand people marched from Civic Center to the Castro, to Dolores Park, which is on the edge of the Castro.

Why all this preaching to the choir?

The marching should take place on Sunday mornings (or whenever the Mormon sabbath and religious services take place) from Civic Center (or where ever) to the Mormon church in Pacific Heights. A couple of thousand people outside singing "We Shall Overcome" and doing some chanting would get their attention. Do this at every Mormon church and temple in the land. (I'm picking on Mormons, but the Knights of Columbus should get similar treatment.)

To be honest we should have done this before the election when it became clear that the Mormon church and other zealots were pumping money into California to pass Prop 8.

THANK YOU!!! Obama is the president of the ENTIRE UNITED STATES! The majority of voters for Prop 8 were WHITE. The Mormon Church bankrolled this hateful proposition and it received strong support from the Republican Party. Anti-gay measures also passed in ARIZONA (which has a very small black population), ARKANSAS, and FLORIDA. In all four states, the majority of voters for these anti-gay measures were WHITE conservatives. Should we "segregate" white conservatives? Why are they being let off the hook? The Mormons, Evangelicals, and Roman Catholics that pushed this crap deserve to be denounced. McCain and Palin were strongly in support of these measures. Our new president and vice president are NOT. This is a cause for celebration not only for BLACK people, but for ALL Americans.

And some of us are Black/Latino/Asian/Arab/Mixed race AND gay/bi/trans/queer. Not all LGBTQ people are white. It's 2008 so let's drop that notion once and for all.

While all of the marching in the streets over the last week might be considered a cathartic response to the horrible outcome of Proposition 8, if the gay and lesbian community really wants change to occur, we need to stop marching and start organizing. That organization needs to include a dispassionate demographic examination, county by county, precinct by precinct of where and why things went wrong.

If such an examination indicates that reaching out to the African American community is necessary, then a strategy should be defined to do just that. If the examination reveals other religious conservatives need to be reached out to, then a strategy should be defined for that as well. We basically need to get back on the horse from which we just fell.

In the meantime, I'm wondering if anyone has done a legal analysis of differences between all of the California laws that apply to married couples and not to same-sex couples registered as domestic partners? While the term "marriage" is obviously a red flag for many, a goal of eliminating any differences in California law might be reasonably attained, with an organized response.

Freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor; it must be demanded by the oppressed, said Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.

There are valid points for both civil disobedience and negotiation.

And I think it's dangerous to demonize the African-American community when the true opposition is organized religion. The basis for denying GLBT people equal rights are the "stories" in the Bible.

I couldn't agree more!