California registered domestic partners have the same rights and duties as married spouses, per California Family Code:

297.5. (a) Registered domestic partners shall have the same rights,
protections, and benefits, and shall be subject to the same
responsibilities, obligations, and duties under law, whether they
derive from statutes, administrative regulations, court rules,
government policies, common law, or any other provisions or sources
of law, as are granted to and imposed upon spouses.

Homophobia is still very pervasive, and this explains how the vote went. Even among the age groups that one would expect to be more enlightened. This probably speaks to the newness of this issue. While some activists did fight for it in the first wave, it did not become a major issue until more recently. Ironically, this may be due to a more conservative turn in society touching gays as well as straights.

A straight woman acquaintance said to me on the issue, "It's a slippery slope, next people will want to marry their pets." Looking at her dumbfounded, I could only reply that her comment was asinine and dismissive of any person's dignity. Until then, I thought this woman was intelligent. I can only explain her comment as fear of change. At times, I wonder if gay marriage is viewed in the same manner as bi-racial marriages once were. Laws against them were struck down over time as part of the larger Civil Rights movement. It is a civil rights issue that we need to keep fighting for.

What that code doesn't say, is that domestic partners don't have to be recognized by other statesf they don't have domestic partnerships.

A marriage in CA has to be recognized in TX or any other state under the "Full Faith and Credit" clause of the Constitution. This means that they will enjoy the benefits afforded to "married" couples by that state. If domestic partners go to the M. D. Anderson Cancer Treatment Center in Houston for a bone marrow transplant they don't have to recognize any rights of the "partners".

So yeah, as long as you stay in CA. And as long as you don't care that you're being treated as less than by your government then it's all good in CA.

I can't take credit for this...I heard it from Stephanie Miller, but a good response to an assinine ignorant statement like that is "The slippery slope when you start writing discriminatiion into the Constitution and making it legal to take rights away....that's the slippery slope and who knows what would be written in next"

Right. Bill Maher talked about this on his show this past week and said that its moreso about religion than anything else. And just as he said "Black people love themselves some Jesus". Its very true. From what I've read, the organizations fighting no on prop 8 didn't reach out to the black community. So when some of them now want to blatantly show the racism that they have always had because 7 in 10 blacks voted against it, well get your organizational sh*t together. Just as Obama built a coalition, so does the gay community. It means reaching out to the many blacks who do support gay marriage. We do exist. But, when you don't go into the black community and say hey...we understand that you are culturally conservative about this but explain it in a humanizing way in terms of not being able to control who you love and not wanting to be separate but equal, you may slowly but surely build that coalition from blacks. Its not going to be a reverse 30 Yes and 70 No, but perhaps if it wasn't viewed by many as being a white struggle, the vote could've been closer to 50/50. This was something basic Republicans understood when they infiltrated black churches in 2004 with the issue of gay marriage. So there needs to be infiltration on the other side to reach those who are in those same churches, but do support gay marriage. I almost get the sense that we feel people are just supposed to bow down to this. And since some are so quick make the two struggles similar, there was no bowing down in the Civil Rights Movement. Black people DIED BY THE THOUSANDS so that I could have the rights I do. I didn't see any gay people getting sprayed down with hoses or having dogs let loose on them marching in the streets this past week.

Bottom line is that if I am head of any gay organization right now, I focus on building a working coalition and reaching out to minority communities and even discussing with church officials about why we the marriage between two gay men should be recognized as equally as the marriage between a man and a woman. Its called social acceptance and a reflection that times are changing and you adapt. But until these organizations are willing to do that, DO NOT be surprised when many blacks continue to vote this way when this issue comes up, and do not then try to place blame on these same groups that you never reached out to IN THE FIRST PLACE!!! Please!!! I'm so over this blame game crap.

The Full Faith and Credit Clause in the U.S. Constitution should work the same way on California's domestic partnership laws as it does on its marriage laws. So, technically speaking, there is no legal advantage to marriage over domestic partnership, even under the hypothetical that Seacraig raises. If the FF&C clause requirres recognition of another state's laws, which is basically what the clause says, then every state must recognize another state's domestic partners as well as married couples. But the FF&C clause does not operate in the automatic manner that Seacraig suggests--if it did we could all get married in Massachussetts and then move back to our home states and demand recognition as married couples. I don't think anyone has really tested this point by filing a lawsuit demanding recognition in Texas, for example, of a gay marriage performed in Massachussetts. That's because there are so many crafty legal arguments that can be made against such recognition, include the federal government's nonrecognition of such marriages,. Lawyers frequently refrain from filing lawsuits to prove legal points where the political atmosphere is unfavorable and the legal precedents are lacking, as they are in the case of gay marriage. I would think that calling a committed gay relationship a marriage helps toward recognition in multiple states, but it is no guarantee.

So, I believe that is why the strategy has been to focus on increasing the number of states that recognize gay marriage as a means of changing public opinion and, thus, putting political pressure on states that refuse and on the federal government. There is just no quick legal fix--any effective strategy must include well-timed, effective litigation (as happened in California), combined with effective political strategy to change the minds of people--something along the lines of what Ranchhand suggested above.

Getting back to a post I made several days ago about how the gay community shoots itself in the foot over this issue, even a quick look around the internet will reveal how things the gay community does are used against it on this point. I have found two separate posts on political message boards with the saracastic line "it's all about dignity" followed by a picture of two over-the-top drag queens or two guys in leather jockstraps hugging each other in the middle of the street (maybe at Folsom). Food for thought and discussion.

All demographics have their "out of the ordinary" types, so I don't think we need to blame drag queens and leather types, just as it's not proper to blame blacks for passing prop H8. I don't think you were suggesting that were you?



Hugh Hefner has been married a few times hasn't he?

If an anti-gay measure passes in Maryland, things are already in place for this passive aggressive approach.

If Marriage is so sacred.....

Tomorrow ( Monday night) on "Countdown" Keith Olbermann is going to have a special comment about the anti-gay marriage propositions.......I look forward to what he has to offer.

It's not about blame, it's about facing reality. I'm suggesting that, in this case, trotting out the usual bromides like "homophobia" will not work to change minds. There's a vast difference between demanding an end to harassment as outsiders, on the one hand, and demanding access to a privilege enjoyed by the majority. In the latter case, you have to convince those with the power over admission that they should want to admit you. And, I have to add this as well, marriage is not a right, it's essentially a privilege--the state issues you a license to marry, like you are issued a license to drive when you meet certain requirements. That's the reality of the situation, although careful appeal to the basic human desire to couple, and how marriage partially springs from that desire, can be helpful to securing the privilege.

I have to respectfully disagree with you on this issue. The whole point as to why religiously conservative people are up in arms about gay marriage is because they not only see it as an attack on a "sacred" institution, but also because they are convinced that their churches are gonna be forced to marry glbt persons, which runs counter to their religious convictions (and "rights"). Now whether or not this is a correct interpretation is really based upon one's religious (or non-religious) views for both gays and conservatives.



Now this I totally agree with you. I think that if our community is gonna convince moderate and open minded voters, then this is where our platform for gay marriage should run. This was the approach in Canada (if I'm not mistaken), plus the fact that their gay marriage laws stipulate that only the government is required to honor gay marriages & leaves it up to denominations/churches to follow suit or not. Right now, conservative denominations in this country feel that this issue is being forced down their throats--no pun intended. And although I disagree w/ religiously conservative people on this (and many other) issue, I certainly can understand the "forcing it down our throats" perspective, no matter how irrational it is to us gay folk.

I don't think throwing out the numbers of deaths is necessarily fair. Otherwise the Jews could bitch that slaves, African-Americans, etc. can't hold water to what their people went through. MILLIONS died and half of the survivors would have been thankful of a one-time hosing down or dogs being let loose on them. We can't use the numbers...

I am definitely being facetious, because all of this intolerance, hatred and ignorance is unacceptable. Noone has the right to treat someone else in this manner and I am disgusted that the use of the N-word is being used...noone has the right to demean someone because of their culture, biology. etc, etc.

This situation is so difficult to internalize on an individual basis. How I describe it is that I don't mind that someone recognizes that I am gay as long as it isn't how I am defined. However, when someone creates that as my only definition or imposes their beliefs system because I am gay, that makes me feel like a "faggot" or a slap in the face that makes me think- might as well call me that. I can see how this vote by the population in California would make some feel so upset that it's like being called a faggot or dyke.

None of this is acceptable. You can't answer apparent discrimination with hate itself. You march quietly. You move in peace. Let the haters wear their hats. But showing hatred and ignorance to Auntie Muriel from the Baptist Church isn't going to convince her of anything. It will just feed more hate.

Ahnold expresses his opinion.

More protests across the state of CA.

There was also a 12K+ march in Silverlake. I couldn't find the pix/article. But apparently it was a peaceful one.

True, but the point was about not equating the two movements either, because thats not fair. Again, many true colors came out as a result of the breakdown in statistics of who voted for and against prop 8. I am glad to have seen a few gay organizations put out statements decrying the racial intolerance that has been exhibited by those taking their anger out on blacks over prop 8's passing. Seriously though...this is EXACTLY what the right wants. They want to see the gay community implode over this and create deeper divisions as a way to lessen whatever coalition building they can get for this truggle. Its been picked up by many conservatives and seen as a triumph because of the division that is being shown now. I understand that these instances do not reflect the majority of people, but unless there is some kind of forum or conference addressing the racism in the LGBT community, I fear that this will set us back for awhile. Black gays don't feel included to begin with, but if you want to treat it like the pink elephant in the room, you're not going to the support you need.

Great Opinion in the LA Times on Prop H8.

I especially like this quote:

Not to play Martyr Monopoly, Kick, but conservative estimates of African deaths due to slavery are 4 million, the upside estimate is 120 million because no one was really keeping track of people getting thrown overboard to sharks or dying in their own feces, etc. Also, for every hose splash in the south there are many others who don't get acknowledged. I know at least 10 friends and ex-lovers whose relatives were lynched in the 1950s and they aren't in any book or movie or "Eyes on the Prize" special. When I did research on the topic in Birmingham a few years ago it was eye opening the number of people who were disappeared and whose legacy was retained in oral traditions. That said, no one holds the franchise on being oppressed, I think that's why different groups don't get along now because we are pushed to believe that freedom is scarce when it's not.

I didn't go to the lastest round of marches in LA because I had friends who were called the N-word and I didn't want to potentially subject myself to that type of abuse and harrassment. What I found interesting was that these attacks were made on people who come from a community that voted against their rights as well, so you have gay racism and black homophobia with no real sense of community either way. If no one understands the DL phenom by this point I don't know what to say.

The lack of outreach was also funny to me considering that in the media and elsewhere people of color are always depicted as being "more homophobic" than white people; since these conversations have been going on literally for years why wasn't more effort put into these communities? I know that with the numbers the black vote alone wouldn't have been able to change the outcome, but it would have been a start.

In positive news I go to a gay church and we had a cool service on Sunday about unity in the face of divisive temptation. Our minister preached on "oppression sickness" and how marginalized groups put down other groups when they get the chance to be included and listed Mormons, Catholics, Evangelicals of Color, as culprits, but he also spoke about how we can do better in terms of sexism, racism, and transphobia within our own community. I don't buy into Kuumbaya politics, even post Barack, (although it was a good 5 days) but seeing people's commitment to creating a unified and diverse coalition of resistance was inspiring.

"Marriage" is a very loaded cultural term that goes beyond religion and race. There is not doubt that some blacks can be shockingly homophobic- but so can many latinos. There have been some good points raised by other posters. There is not doubt that religious bigots exploited some basic fears-"Children will be forced to learn about homsexuals in school! " But we can not give up the fight on this important issue; we as a community must learn from this defeat. The image that we project may not be as posiitive as we think- we neede to fight ingonrance and hate.

If the African Americans who voted for Prop 8 were only 10% of the vote and primarily church-based religious folk, well then who would be the most appropriate group to initiate and follow through on reaching out to them? I'd say gay African Americans.

The passage of Prop 8 is all about religion. Blacks, whites, latinos - all voted for it...and all voted against it. This is about the role of religion and marriage in our lives. The separation of church and state is supposed to be fundamental but it's clearly not. Marriages take place in many scenarios besides churches. But when it comes to it being legal; it's all about the courthouse.

This issue is not about white gays and black gays - that kind of talk from either side just extends a divisive attitude and perspective. This is a legal issue and rights issue. It is about equal rights for all not whether this group or this community got their ass kissed enough so they agree. No one caters to me when it comes time to vote on issues - I take the time to research and read about the issues and propositions and candidates; it's called being pro-active and respecting my right to vote. All communities of people might want to consider this as a fundamental approach to elections.

I think we need to learn lessons from this failure and be ready for the next fight.

Ya know jay...its ashame that you felt you couldn't go to the marches because of the experiences of your friends being called the 'n' word, and didn't want to subject yourself to that. But, I understand. Cuz I'm not even gonna lie...had I been out there to support those wanting to defeat proposition 8 (particularly since I donated money to it as well) and someone called me the 'n' word...oh no..it wouldn't have been pretty at all. It would've been on and poppin. I just don't play when it comes to that. You are not going to call me that word and act like I'm supposed to just walk away because you want to lump all us black folk together. Ironic isn't it? Many of us don't like being lumped in as being a bunch of cross dressing, hip swishing fairies, but thats the way many of us are seen as much as we try and show the different sides of gay life. So my fear is that ANY attempt to get those on the fence black people, and even some who were willing to vote for it on our side has just been severely hampered by the reports of this. I wouldn't be surprised if the vote comes up again and the black breakdown is 90 yes and 10 no. Because this is only going to make many of those on the fence and even liberal black people say "See...true colors always come to light". Now I know that these instances are not the majority of people who feel this way, but I've heard too many stories since last week from black and latino gay friends and their friends who live in California and other states who have either been called the 'n' word, or have noticed racial tension at their hangouts that wasn't there before. Its just ashame cuz like I said...I know this isn't the majority of people doing this.

So, at the end of the day it does go back to your point about outreach. I mean who was running this thing? Knowing that African Americans are socially conservative about this issue, and knowing that they were going to come to vote in DROVES for Barack Obama, why on earth would you not have made a focused attempt to get into these communities not to just say vote no on prop 8, but hold forums to explain why this is important as a human rights issue. Ugh..it just lacks all common sense to me which makes me wonder how many black people are on these committees and boards. I surely would've hoped someone would've said "ummm..excuse me...don't you think we should go into black communities for outreach?" I mean that would be like getting someone to support an initiative making it illegal to have a gun unlocked in your home, and NOT going to areas that have a high concentration of NRA members. Seriously...I'm upset about the 70/30 vote, but I'm about as upset as the piss poor effort in terms of outreach.

All I have to say mdterp & jay is that I'm REALLY saddened by the fact that the n-word was used at the protests. And not to in any way defend those who did, I just think that people in CA out of anger or frustration were simply venting. In other words they needed to find a scape goat. Does that justify their unnecessary meanness? Of course not! I'm just simply trying to put a different perspective on what was unjustified outright racism. Believe me, I've been called, directly and indirectly, "beaner," "spick," you name it, in many parts of the country. So I know personally the pain that could inflict. But hey, I figure that humanity still has a LONG way to go in terms of racial blindness/insignificance. Go figure!

SCTrojan...I'm sure there is a lot of "simply venting" going on...but there is nothing "simply" about calling a black person the 'n' word no matter HOW ANGRY you are. It is completely unacceptable no matter the circumstances, and those individuals will NOT get a pass from me simply because they happen to be pissed off. Some of the messages I have read on gay oriented websites are downright disgusting. Its really bad. I am a frequent visitor to Rod 2.0 Beta, which is oriented to black gay culture and urban gay men and he had an interesting article about how bad its getting. I now have lost the little bit of respect that I had for Andrew Sullivan. All I'm saying is that they better get a hold of this fast because the conservatives will love nothing more than this division to continue. Here is one of the articles below courtesy of Rod 2.0

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://rodonline.typepad.com/rodonline/200...ne-black-g.html
Not One Black Gay/Lesbian Couple in "No on Prop 8" Ads. Why?

Despite questionable exit polling data, the mainstream media and its gay counterparts continue to blame black voters for the recent passage of Prop 8 in California—escalating tensions, prompting scuffles and racial epithets at street rallies as well as thousands of mean-spirited comments across the gay virtual community. While gay activists begin to debate the strategy executed by No on Prop 8, the obvious question arises: How much outreach was done to the black community?

Very little. Jack and Jill Politics slams the racist talking points pushed by revisionist hack Andrew Sullivan and sex columnist Dan Savage.

I followed ‘No on 8′ through Andrew Sullivan’s blog. I clicked on every ad that he posted. I never saw ONE that was pointed towards the Black community. If ‘No on 8′ was serious about trying to address the Black community, they couldn’t come out with an ad with Black gay folks who wanted to get married? With Black gay folks who wanted to be married and had children? California’s a huge state, and they couldn’t find 2 Black homosexuals and 2 Black lesbians with children who could have made an ad?

No on 8's lack of outreach to black voters is the subject of a much-debated Los Angeles Times op-ed by Jasmyne Cannick. "No on 8's White Bias" was the newspaper's third most popular story emailed yesterday. Cannick says she "wasn't inspired to encourage black people to vote against the proposition."

The white gay community never successfully communicated to blacks why it should matter to us above everything else—not just to me as a lesbian but to blacks generally. The way I see it, the white gay community is banging its head against the glass ceiling of a room called equality, believing that a breakthrough on marriage will bestow on it parity with heterosexuals. But the right to marry does nothing to address the problems faced by both black gays and black straights. Does someone who is homeless or suffering from HIV but has no health care, or newly out of prison and unemployed, really benefit from the right to marry someone of the same sex.

Then there was the poorly conceived campaign strategy. Opponents of Proposition 8 relied on an outdated civil rights model, engaging the National Assn. for the Advancement of Colored People to help win black support on the issue of gay marriage. This happened despite the warnings of black lesbians and gays that it wouldn't work. ... Putting nearly a quarter of a million dollars into an outdated civil rights group that has very little influence on the black vote—at least when it comes to gay issues—will never work.

Likewise, holding the occasional town-hall meeting in Leimert Park—the one part of the black community where they now feel safe thanks to gentrification—to tell black people how to vote on something gay isn't effective outreach either.

Cannick's position on marriage may be different than yours or mine. But the fact remains there was very little outreach done to the black community that is now being blamed for its loss. There were no black gay or lesbian faces in television commercials. Black celebrities such as Mary J. Blige who could have raised awareness in Inglewood and obtained free tv news coverage ... were deployed to pricey fundraisers in Beverly Hills. Few affirmative black clergy were recruited. Black celebs such as Danity Kane, Golden Brooks and Samuel L Jackson were buried in commercial rotation. The Magic Johnson robo-call urging blacks to vote NO was deployed only 48 hours before the election. Black gay bloggers—such as yours truly—were never contacted by No on 8, never included in any strategy, and, took it upon ourselves to raise money for the campaign.

Since the loss, the hurricane of racial finger-pointing, has outraged the entire black virtual community. Ernest Hardy, the influential LA Weekly and Flaunt film critic and author of Blood Beats Vol. 1 and Vol. 2, describes the "gay-ghettos of the blogosphere" as digital "KKK rallies" featuring "relentless, scaldingly racist recrimination and charges that Black folks are the most homophobic in America, the most backward, stupid and ignorant, undeserving even of the right to vote; the word 'nigger' has been freely bandied about on many of those sites, with 'moderators' absent at the wheel."

To be fair, there is more than enough blame to go around. If anyone deserves special recognition for pushing the meme of blaming black voters, and refusing to recognize the lack of outreach to our community, that would be revisionist gay conservative and racial fetishist Andrew Sullivan, whom many progressive and gay bloggers insist upon viewing as their assignment editor. Sullivan once famously wrote "brothers were welcome." We never realized how much.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Fix this sh*t. Thats all I'm saying. For too long black gays have been silent about the lack of support and inclusion they feel from mainstream gay organizations. Now when things don't go a certain way, its time to find a scapegoat for a population that only makes up 10% of that entire vote. No way. I have gone to a few forums on race relations in the gay community and I found them to be very productive. Many people are simply ignorant to a lot of whats going on, but others need to understand that this is not simply a struggle for white gays either. Its pretty messed up when you have black gays who weren't encouraged to tell other blacks to vote against proposition 8. So many seem to be wanting to blame black people for the passing of prop 8 when blame should be going to what an organizational FAILURE it was in terms of outreach to the same group now being scapegoated. Please. You had Mary J Blige at a fundraiser in Beverly Hills? WTF. Mary is a SISTA GIRL!!! Why the hell didn't you have her ass in Compton and other black communities I guess they didn't feel were "safe", and had her appealing to them. So frustrating!!

This has really stirred some major emotions in me. I feel discouraged to continue donating and supporting future initiatives when I feel as though I am not truly included in the struggle. Gay marriage has never been something high on my radar anway! I'm not even sure if I was a heterosexual, marriage would be high on the radar. I'm like Samantha from Sex and The City. Marriage just doesn't appeal to me in that way, but I think it is a right that should be given no matter one's sexual orientation. So for those of us who weren't really interested in marriage in the first place (and most of my and my boyfriend's aquaintances and friends aren't) but were willing to fight for it because of the principle, this bullcrap thats going on now is going to make a lot of us throw our hands up and say "f*ck you". That may not sound right, and it may be feeding into exactly what conservatives want in terms of divisions within the gay community, but it is what it is until the gay community starts being more inclusive. Perhaps this is exactly what needed to happen for this racial division to really come to light and make these organizations realize they need to address it. Sometimes you have to take two steps back before you can take three steps forward.

It seems to me that those who understand what went wrong this time should set up a separate fundraising effort for advertising, media outreach, etc. that targets all communities. Send the celebrities such as Mary J. Blige to places such as Compton, have the celebrity ads placed specifically with black radio, newspapers, etc., send pro-gay religious leaders into outreach with people who say they're against same-sex marriage for religious reasons, and so on. Essentially go over the heads of the "leaders" of the gay "community," so to speak, and take the message directly to the people.

And that effort needs to start now, not the next time equal rights for gays comes up for a vote.

So many great posts. I think one thing we rarely see, in terms of black folks, is out gay black people affirming that they are LGBTQ and proud of it. There have been a few notable instances, especially since Logo hit the air, and I know that people have criticized the fixation on visibility and the politics of visibility, but I strongly believe that the more out black, latino, asian, white, mixed, native american, etc. LGBTQ people, single, in couples, etc., in our society, the more we help to change attitudes. Changing and changed attitudes, especially among the youngs, are one of the reasons that Coloradans elected an openly gay Democrat to Congress; this probably could NOT have happened 4 or 6 years ago.

I feel your pain, frustration, and anger mdterp, believe me! So where do we go from here is the question? Do we let this bickering continue or do we turn this unfortunate situation into a life learning lesson? The glbt community must unite & reach out to every friggin person possible to change other peoples minds about our issues. Only then--perhaps--victory for ALL OF US GAY FOLKS will be cause for celebration. Let's not allow immature & ignorant behavior of others jade our hopes for the future. Hey, I have always said, "Until I see a black person in the White House then I will believe that our country is living up to its ideals!" That time has FINALLY come to fruition. & that fact alone has given me hope. Hope that ANYTHING is possible--including the divisiveness that Prop H8 has unfortunately brewed within our beloved glbt community...At least that's how I see it. I send peace & unconditional love your way mdterp...& of course, always, godspeed!

Thanks SCTrojan..you're a sweetheart. It is frustrating and there is a lot of anger being expressed in the aftermath of "prop H8" (good description you came up for it). Lord knows I don't have all the answers but the fallout has revealed some real issues within the LGBT community that will hopefully be addressed. You are right though. We have to unite and change people's attitudes. I'm going to need to see some serious changes in organizational and outreach approach though before I feel encouraged. When religion is the number one barrier we are fighting against, it is going to take that kind of focused and varied outreach in order to take these steps to get the rights we deserve as human beings who want to have our love honored equally.

As the leadership in the black religious community evolves their views of on gay issues may as well. Obama represents a sea-change in black leadership because of his willingness to openly and repeatedly support inclusion of us, even in black churches.

However the real momentum that will change views about gay rights in this country is that among the youth as demonstrated in this article in a student newspaper in John McCain's home state of Arizona.

Even young Republicans realize that opposition to gay equality is marginal compared to other issues which caused the Republicans to lose this presidential and several congressional offices.

This was mentioned by Keith Olbermann last night on Countdown:



Forget blaming the black community. Essentially, it's the older people who refuse to give up their prejudices who got this passed. The good news is, they're dying off and it won't be too long before they'll be unable to stop same-sex marriage.

I'm baffled by the "forget blaming the black community" comment. White Californians actually voted against Prop 8 51-49. Hispanics voted slightly in favor (not sure of the exact numbers, heard 52-48). What pushed Prop 8 to victory was the overwhelming 70-30 margin amongst black Californians. While Prop 8 passed because of every Californian who voted for it, African-Americans certainly deserve a fair share of the blame.

The passage of Prop 8 reveals the shaky ground that Democratic coalitional politics is built on. Democratic coalitions such as teachers, longshoremen, African-Americans, and gays all come together in our nation's biggest I'll-scratch-your-back-if-you-scratch-mine-fest despite having few mutual and at times contradictory interests. For example, the extortionist salaries of union longshoremen cause the price of goods to go up (yeah, just what underpaid teachers want), or in this case, African-Americans vote overwhelmingly against what gays view as the most fundamental of their civil rights. But I'm guessing that over time, gays will adopt the PC perspective on this issue, "PC" standing for Political Cowardice, not Political Correctness. Even though gay marriage was constitutionally eliminated in California thanks in large part to black homophobia, gays will in short order gloss over that conflict and instead demonize those who are easy to demonize, like the Mormons.

Time will tell just how effective the campaigns to boycott Utah (btw, what about the 38% of Utah residents who aren't Mormon?) or to deny the Mormon Church tax-exempt status will be. But it is interesting to note that organized boycotts are zeroing in on only some Prop 8 backers while completely ignoring others. It would require political courage to boycott black businesses in California, which is why no one is organizing to do so. Never mind that not one single Utah Mormon voted in California for Prop 8, unless of course they registered to vote via ACORN.

The only cohorts to vote for Prop 8 by a larger margin than African-Americans were Republicans (82%), White Republicans (82%), and Conservatives (85%). Quite the bedfellows you keep, BoSoxRudy.

As an aside, your posts are an absolute tour de force of right-wing talking points. It's pretty impressive how you can cram Sean Hannity opinions about the supposed black-gay fight, Mormons, the Democratic coalition (even though the Republicans are falling apart at the seams), political correctness, black homophobia, ACORN (??), and union longshoremen (???) into a discussion about Prop 8. It seems that you ARE Stephen Colbert. Bravo.

Oh my god. How completely ridiculous. How are you going to blame one group of people for the passage of something when all of the yes votes of those blacks who voted doesn't match the yes votes of those whites who voted? No one group should be blamed for this. It was a collaborative effort by sh*theads who want to deny others the right to the same recognition they have.

From fivethirtyeight.com

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Prop 8 Myths
Writes Dan Walters of the Sacramento Bee:


Last week, however, 10 percent of voters were African American while 18 percent were Latino, and applying exit poll data to that extra turnout reveals that the pro-Obama surge among those two groups gave Proposition 8 an extra 500,000-plus votes, slightly more than the measure's margin of victory.

To put it another way, had Obama not been so popular and had voter turnout been more traditional – meaning the proportion of white voters had been higher – chances are fairly strong that Proposition 8 would have failed.
Certainly, the No on 8 folks might have done a better job of outreach to California's black and Latino communities. But the notion that Prop 8 passed because of the Obama turnout surge is silly. Exit polls suggest that first-time voters -- the vast majority of whom were driven to turn out by Obama (he won 83 percent [!] of their votes) -- voted against Prop 8 by a 62-38 margin. More experienced voters voted for the measure 56-44, however, providing for its passage.

Now, it's true that if new voters had voted against Prop 8 at the same rates that they voted for Obama, the measure probably would have failed. But that does not mean that the new voters were harmful on balance -- they were helpful on balance. If California's electorate had been the same as it was in 2004, Prop 8 would have passed by a wider margin.

Furthermore, it would be premature to say that new Latino and black voters were responsible for Prop 8's passage. Latinos aged 18-29 (not strictly the same as 'new' voters, but the closest available proxy) voted against Prop 8 by a 59-41 margin. These figures are not available for young black voters, but it would surprise me if their votes weren't fairly close to the 50-50 mark.

At the end of the day, Prop 8's passage was more a generational matter than a racial one. If nobody over the age of 65 had voted, Prop 8 would have failed by a point or two. It appears that the generational splits may be larger within minority communities than among whites, although the data on this is sketchy.

The good news for supporters of marriage equity is that -- and there's no polite way to put this -- the older voters aren't going to be around for all that much longer, and they'll gradually be cycled out and replaced by younger voters who grew up in a more tolerant era. Everyone knew going in that Prop 8 was going to be a photo finish -- California might be just progressive enough and 2008 might be just soon enough for the voters to affirm marriage equity. Or, it might fall just short, which is what happened. But two or four or six or eight years from now, it will get across the finish line.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So sorry...I'm sick of the blame this group or blame that group game. Yes, the African American community collectively is probably the most homophobic, which is why you have so many black men out here on the DL. Religion is the unfortunate culprit and it has been reinforced through imagery in music videos, television shows, movies, and the image that the black male is supposed to be the hard, thugged out, big dick swinging, seed laying playa. Being a "fudge packing b*tch" is just not a way to survive in the black community in general.

One of the main reasons I am ECSTATIC about Barack Obama's win is because hopefully many of the "pants off the ass" generation of black youth will start pulling them up now as they have a positive role model that isn't an actor or a rapper or an athlete. Unfortunately, the Dr. Ben Carsons of the world aren't "cool" enough and don't get the exposure they should to be used as the role models they should be modeling. I hope they take notice of Obama's style because the brotha is smooth, yet Wall Street. He is very professional but still has that confident swagger about him that many black youth feel as though they need to have. Hopefully they will see that you can still have swagger and be very well rounded and cultured and open minded. Hopefully they will take note of his inclusion of gays and lesbians in their speeches. Lord knows my people have their issues that we must work on. I'm not even tryin to make excuses for the homophobia that clearly exists in the black community. However, I am not about to allow a group that represents what amounted to 10% of the total vote to be the blame for this. You better go try that foolishness on someone who will be dumb enough to buy it.

The bottom line is that each "YES" voter no matter if they were black, white, brown, or purple is the vote of a bigot who feels it necessary to deny someone the opportunity to be happy and equally recognized as a married couple. But of course certain people are looking for scapegoats instead of uniting, going back to the drawing board, and figuring out how to do a better job in terms of outreach and organization. But, I guess its to be expected from someone whose presidential choice took his grand ole time to support making Martin Luther King Day a national holiday. ::yawn:: Save it!!

I saw a report on CNN indicating that exit polls show that the under 25 African American vote went about 60-40 against prop 8. We really should be optimistic that change is inevitable. The passage of Prop 8 is just a temporary setback...

Maggie Thatcher used to say that she enjoyed nothing more than when her opponents attacked her personally, because it meant that they had no political arguments. golfer 25, you try to denigrate my post by saying that I'm spouting Sean Hannity's talking points, yet don't actually address the points I make. This isn't the first time a liberal here has leveled the "talking points" criticism at me (funny that these same liberals seem blind to the myriad posts that parrot the Obama script), and it surely won't be the last because it's just so gosh darn hard for the S&L crowd (sheep & lemmings) to think for themselves.

I am and always will be proud to be a conservative and to count conservatives as my friends. After years of shameless cronyism, pork projects, and financial recklessness, I can't say I'm all that proud to be a Republican, but I said before that I hope the 2008 election was the monumental failure the GOP desperately needed. As much as I disagree with many of my conservative and Republican brethren about gay marriage, at least it is an issue they're honest about. In contrast, Obama talks out of two sides of his mouth about gay marriage. He publicly states his opposition to gay marriage, yet paradoxically doesn't support bans like Prop 8. Amazingly enough, neither Obama's gay marriage opposition nor his bald dishonesty about the issue seem to bother liberal gays in the slightest. I would much rather deal with a political opponent who is honest about his beliefs because at least that honesty serves as a foundation for future discussions. But it seems liberal gays prefer a politician who says what you want to hear to your face while stabbing you in the back. I've never seen a politician glad-hand gays (who lapped it up like catnip) more shamelessly than Bill "Defense of Marriage Act" Clinton.

Time will tell, and if I'm wrong I am absolutely certain liberals will let me know, but what do you think will happen in 4 years if Obama faces a close election? Even with the economy in a total sh*thole, Obama's margin of victory was only ~6 points against a mediocre candidate who was a horrible campaigner. If Obama faces a better and tougher opponent in 2012 (Bobby Jindal, anyone?), do you really think he's going to do anything to upset African-Americans, who turned out and voted for him in record numbers? If blacks in California, one of the most liberal states in the nation, voted in favor of Prop 8 70-30, imagine how anti-gay African-Americans must be in more conservative Ohio, Virginia, and North Carolina (states, and 48 electoral votes, Obama carried but not by huge margins). Nah, Obama ain't grand-marshalling any Pride parades between now and 2012. But he says what you want to hear, and that's all that matters, right?

As for "certain people are looking for scapegoats instead of uniting," just who are you talking about, mdterp? Shouldn't you be directing those comments toward people like John Aravosis and organized boycotters like mormonsstoleourrights.com? You really should clean up your own backyard ...

By the way, I just had to throw in the ACORN jab to underscore liberal hypocrisy. Eight years later, liberals are still screeching about Bush stealing the election, yet the hundreds of thousands of fraudulent ACORN voter registrations don't seem to bother liberals a whit. And if you're saying it doesn't matter, bear in mind that Norm Coleman's margin of victory is down to a couple hundred votes, in a state where ACORN "registered" 43,000. If Al Franken "wins" the Minnesota Senate seat (which would bring Dems one seat closer to The Holy Grail of a filibuster-proof majority), surely liberals who so vehemently cry out for fair elections will still be ranting in 2016 about how Franken and ACORN stole the election. Yeah, sure they will.

I apologize on behalf of the board for not responding in a satisfactory way to every random point and irrelevant aside in your logorrheic posts. I guess it goes to show how intellectually bankrupt we all are.

And Bobby Jindal--the guy who participated in an exorcism? Come on now If that's the best the Republicans can do, they are in for a world of hurt in 2012.

Well it's not like the Republicans have a lot to choose from. I even heard one "expert" saying Newt Gingrich might be the person they turn to. How sick is that?!

Though I take pride in my own vast vocabulary, I had to look this one up. But only to be sure, and for clarity:

logorrhea
1. an excessive or abnormal, sometimes incoherent talkativeness. — logorrheic, adj.

TRL

Seeing as all you can come up with are these bizarre, distortion-filled rants against "liberals," I guess the old battle-ax would be enjoying things right now if she were a "liberal."

There's an interesting analysis of voting on Prop 8 in San Francisco by the Chronicle. They found not only race to be a factor, but also education level and age. And even on race, it isn't always what you think, because some of the largest anti-gay marriage vote in The City came from Asians. Precincts in Chinatown were very high in the Yes on 8 voting even though they also voted overwhelmingly for Obama. One of the Castro precincts voted 97-3% against Prop 8.

I know that people/newspapers are looking to understand what exactly "happened" w/ regards to Prop H8. & it's great that we now know what occurred. But gosh, all of these stats (e.g. how older, younger, blacks, latinos, asians, whites, conservative, liberal, etc, voters voted) are beginning to become a moot point. What's next? An article showing how ET & the aliens on the Close Encounters ship voted.

IMHO, it's time to move on, learn from this mistake, & figure out how to do a better job next time. Plus, as many have pointed out, the younger generation is much more open to our causes & the older generation is passing on. So the future IS on our side.

Great points!

Also, concerning Obama and gays, he mentioned gay people explicitly in his acceptance speech, he mentioned gay people in his victory speech, he has instituted rules that include gays and transgender people in his transition, and guess what, he hasn't dropped in his popularity among African Americans, young people, Roman Catholics, etc. So the conservative who suggests he won't participate in gay prides etc. is already on the wrong foot. Yes, he needs to get up off that "I don't believe in gay marriage" crap just as Biden and many Democrats (including Hillary Clinton) do, but they are leagues away from the pro-Prop 8, anti-gay marriage etc. hate of the GOP.

As for Obama and that 6.7% (7%) point margin, did BoSoxRudy still not grasp that Barack Obama is a young, black man with a liberal voting record whose background was smeared and belittled relentlessly by the opposition? Yeah, I know it was easy to miss, but... Nevertheless, he won by a greater margin than George W. Bush, the son of a previous president, a blithering idiot who had every advantage under the sun, did in either of his two elections, when he stole the first one from Al Gore, and when, as the media-beloved, Republican-Idol-in-Chief, he defeated John Kerry. Obama's electoral and popular vote victories, despite all the vicious crap that GOP threw at him, are and will always be impressive. 6.7% is pretty damn good if you ask me. 365 electoral votes, and counting....

And as for bans, if George W. Bush and the "pro-life" Republicans were so hard for banning abortion, why, when he was wielding near absolute power did he not just sign an executive order banning abortion? Oh, I know, because the Republicans would have lost by an even greater margin than they did last week.

I went back to re-read my posts, and they seemed clear and well-written. But hey, just in case I'm wrong, let me boil them down:
1. Barack Obama publicly opposes gay marriage. Even worse, he is dishonest about his stand on the issue because, in an Orwellian contradiction, he also opposes bans like Prop 8. Yet the President-elect skates by without a single criticism from liberal board members.
2. Despite horrible economic conditions for which he and his party were widely blamed, McCain (an awful campaigner, the worst since Dukakis) lost to Obama by only ~6 points. Because of both the number and magnitude of our nation's problems, the next 4 years will undoubtedly be difficult for Obama, which means the 2012 election will likely be a very tough race. If Obama wants to be re-elected, how can he push through a pro-gay agenda when his African-American supporters, who turned out and voted for him in record numbers, are overwhelmingly anti-gay?
3. John Aravosis is organizing to boycott the state of Utah and to strip the LDS Church of its tax-exempt status. Since Aravosis is the powerful political activist behind the Stop Dr. Laura campaign, which led to the cancellation of her television show, these are not idle threats. mdterp denounced the singling out of black Californians as the reason for Prop 8's passage (btw, I never said that blacks in CA were solely responsible, just that they deserved a fair share of the blame). So why is no one on this board denouncing the singling-out of Utah or the Mormon Church? And why is no one demanding, on this board or anywhere else, the boycott of black businesses in California?

I'll go so far as to stipulate that my previous two posts were incoherent ramblings. OK, forget them. How about specifically arguing these three points instead? Also, if these three points are so full of distortions, how about pointing out exactly what the distortions are?

It's amazing how you blame McCain for being one of the worst campaigners when he trounced his closest competitors two to one in the Republican primaries. Was he a great campaigner during the primaries or was his competition so bad that McCain was chosen by default. If you are upset with the way the election went, don't look at the Dems for your frustration, look to your own party for not finding a more formidible and appealing candidate.

And scene.

P.S. - I am from Ohio and Bush stole that too in 2004! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uxs8EiDX57Y

P.S.S. - I'd say to all Republicans what I've heard since 2000 - Get Over It Already! Support Your Country!!!!!

BoSoxRudy, I'm curious what you mean by "black businesses in California." Sounds borderline racist to me. Care to elaborate?

BoSox - I think you're a sweetie but....your points are overly broad and not well thought out.

Obama's religious beliefs, as he said, show him to believe that marriage is between a man and woman. But, prop 8 is a state thing and Obama clearly said he doesn't believe that an amendment to the California constitution is necessary or right. That works just fine for me as his personal beliefs are one thing but he doesn't intend on imposing those on a state constitution or another state's population. Religious beliefs are meant to be private and separate from state policy. We know that - that's the whole point of all this...on one hand...Of course I hope that Hillary and Barrack and Biden all come out much stronger in favor of equal access to marriage for all as soon as possible but one step at a time..at least they're inclusive and ever growing in their willingness to talk about gay people in a much more forthright way. Our day will come. Our day is now.

Obama won by 6% points nationwide in the popular vote - that's millions and millions of votes. He won by a remarkably large number in the electoral vote...it's only been written about a hundred times since the election - come on now, you know this.

African American voters are not overwhelmingly anti gay. A very large percentage of older african americans in california decided that gay marriage wasn't right due to their religious beliefs. That's a whole different thing. Again, you try and paint very broad strokes very superficially on this point - nuance and details do count. They need to be educated on just what this means to all gay people...white, black and otherwise! Equal rights for all means just that.

The Utah based Mormon church holds the following honors: one of theirs originated, organized and wrote prop 8 gathering a coalition of churches together to campaign against homos through a series of dirty low down ads lying and deceiving the public - not to mention raising countless millions in support of this bogus proposition. I would happily promote a boycott of anything and everything Mormon related even yes, the state of Utah though I don't think that's necessary. If you want to be fully educated on this - why don't you read about the man behind prop 8:

http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-sto...d-proposition-8

And just how much the Mormon church was behind this:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/15/us/polit...amp;oref=slogin

Tomorrow is a 50 state protest! Go and make some peaceful noise for equal rights and get off the blame game...We apparently need to keep educating many older americans as well as conservative americans of all colors that we're not willing to be treated as second class citizens any longer. Get over this blame shit and get on with the future...and i'm talking to all of us including myself.!

http://www.couragecampaign.org/page/s/JoinTheImpact

I am so glad I put BSR on ignore. Makes the OS board experience that much better.

Aw, BoSox, you're so cute when you play the sore loser roll! Enjoy the next four years!

This is actually why I come here and mix it up with you guys -- because if not for the very few conservatives, this board would become nothing more than a liberal echo chamber. You would all be sitting around agreeing with each other, patting each other on the back, and passing the Kool-Aid. Liberals absolutely cannot bear to hear someone who disagrees with them. If liberal board members are putting me on "ignore," then I know I'm doing the right thing.

As for SFTom's comment, "Sounds borderline racist to me," oooh, that's a shocker. Anytime a conservative is discussing a racial issue and a liberal doesn't like what he's hearing, the conservative is accused of being racist. It is more predictable than the sun rising in the east

"African American voters are not overwhelmingly anti gay" ... huh wha??? I don't care what demographics amongst black Californians voted for Prop 8 or why, 70% is still 70%, the kind of overwhelming margin that makes professional politicos salivate. Would you be so quick to defend California Republicans, who voted 80% in favor? After all, what's 10 percentage points between friends?? Bryan, you offer up this kumbaya vision of gay/black harmony, and you say my ideas are overly broad and not well thought out? Uh ... ok. Back to the subject of boycotts, it is glaringly inconsistent to boycott the entire state of Utah (props to Bryan for declining, but Aravosis is full speed ahead) yet not boycott black-owned businesses in California. Heck, throw in a boycott of Asian businesses too (btw, I was born in Manila, although I'm sure someone will still find a way to twist that around as racist too), since apparently Asians voted in huge percentages for Prop 8. But there will be no organized boycotts of black or Asian businesses. African-Americans are a key coalition to liberals/Democrats. Asians maybe not quite, but there's some potential there. Liberals love all this talk of unity and healing, and liberals do believe in reaching out, but only to some groups, not all. Because Mormons will always be conservative and Utah will always be a red state, f*ck that unity and healing sh*t, it's totally cool to defecate all over them, right?

OK, I realize that 6% thing ended up being a distraction. But do any of you believe that re-election in 2012 is a guaranteed cakewalk for Obama? With the kind of problems he'll be dealing with, you gotta be kidding. I don't see an Obama administration pushing through any sort of meaningful pro-gay agenda at the risk of turning off African-Americans. They won't vote against Obama 2012, but they might stay home. He didn't win big electoral vote states like Ohio, NC, Florida, and Indiana by huge margins. And the African-American populations in those states are likely, if anything, more conservative than in California. Obama is a go-along-to-get-along guy. He sat through some ~500 services in Jeremiah Wright's church, untroubled by Wright's virulent anti-American hatred, because Wright's church was the right church for an aspiring Chicago politician. Obama threw Wright under the bus only after Wright became a national embarrassment. Obama didn't walk out when the Khalidi dinner turned into an anti-Israel hatefest, nope, just went along to get along. Obama knows in 2012 he will likely need African-Americans to turn out and vote in the same massive numbers they did a couple of weeks ago. Will he risk that much-needed support to take a tough and unpopular (to some) stand on gay rights issues? I hope I'm wrong because he will be our president for the next 4 years, but his track record indicates otherwise.

Bryan, interesting argument about Obama's take on gay marriage and the states. Don't agree with all of it, but it's waaaaaay too late for me to get into it now. Might post tomorrow (as an "oh goodie!" cheer erupts amongst the liberal board members ).

Actually, there is no need for me to put BSR on ignore, or anyone for that matter. While vehemently disagreeing with his positions, I respect his and everyone else's opinions (even though sometimes I want to reach through the computer monitor and crack his skull). Its interesting to hear positions of other people because it forces me to either reinforce or question what I may believe. Its the reason I was on the debate team and mock trial in high school. I like that banter back and forth. I agree that it would be boring if everyone agreed with everything all the time. I don't know...thats just me. I know when I always dated someone or got in a relationship, I looked for guys who would be able to challenge me. My boyfriend and I disagree on various life issues, but I love the challenge. We can disagree and yell and get all heated, but at the end of the day we still laying next to each other at night in bed and it doesn't affect our relationship. I'm sure BSR is a decent person who I could argue with and then turn around and go have a beer with. Just because our politics differ doesn't mean he's an all around sh*tty guy that has to be ignored. But again, thats just me. If others feel that he needs to be, then thats their comfort level. BSR doesn't mean anything to me to where I feel as though I have to ignore him. If I wanted to ignore him I simply wouldn't respond to anything he said. But, he doesn't mean anything to me, nor does he have the power to bring me out of my character, or waste time going through the process of setting him on ignore. Bottom line...its all about respect in the end. Now of course there are some people's positions about things I simply cannot defend. I do not think BSR is a racist. He's no Rush Limbaugh, whom I believe would love to go back to slavery or Jim Crow. If I didn't know it was BSR I could easily think it was Michael Steele, the former black Republican Lt. Governor of Maryland. But, he's like many conservatives right now...frustrated and wondering how his beloved wing of the party is crumbling to pieces

As for boycotting black businesses? Well BSR...you make it sound too general. If I found out there was a black church or black owned facility that gave money to support prop 8, or was preaching about saying yes to it, you are damn right I would boycott it by not giving them my business, and encouraging everyone else to do the same. Cutie patootie Ashton Kutcher was on Real Time with Bill Maher last night and he said that something like this shouldn't even be on a ballot, and Dan Savage (who is now backing off his race baiting bullsh*t talk) had to point out to religious zealots that the definition of marriage has changed throughout history. Religious nuts like to point out how its all about a man having the sperm and a woman having the egg and all that. But, as was pointed out by Dan, lots of marriages occur in which children are never produced (either because of choice or infertility). Religion just doesn't seem to want to change with the times, and at the end of the day that is what this all goes back to. It is religion no matter the color of one's skin. Religion is the force that is going to continue making this battle so tough.