SF Chron: Effort intensifies for same-sex marriage ban

[Tesha]

Source: San Francisco Chronicle

Effort intensifies for same-sex marriage ban

Matthew Yi, Chronicle Sacramento Bureau

Friday, April 25, 2008

The battle over same-sex marriage in California heated up Thursday, when
supporters of an initiative to ban it in the state's Constitution submitted
more than 1.1 million signatures in an effort to qualify the measure for
the November ballot.

Representatives of a conservative coalition called Protect Marriage
delivered boxes of signed petitions in each of the state's 58 counties.
Opponents immediately pledged to wage what is expected to be a costly
campaign to defeat the measure if it goes to voters.

In the next several weeks, county and state officials will make sure
the signatures are valid. To qualify for the ballot, the measure needs
at least 694,354 signatures, or 8 percent of the votes cast in the last
governor's race. A spokeswoman for Secretary of State Debra Bowen said
the verification process could last until the middle of June.

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger said two weeks ago that he would fight such
an initiative, and the state Supreme Court is weighing whether to overturn
or leave intact Proposition 22, an initiative approved by California voters
in 2000 that barred recognition of same-sex marriage in the state. Justices
are expected to rule in June.

<more>

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/04/25/MNIF10BFT8.DTL

[xchrom]

1. ...

:grr: :nuke: :grr:

[JerseygirlCT]

2. Yeah. What you said. nt

[Tesha]

3. I know what you mean.

I really wish we could just separate our "nation" into
the United States and Dumbfuckistan.

I found it odd that this story should come up now. Just
a day or two ago, I was reminded that a pair of friends
of ours will be celebrating the fourth aniversary of
their Massachusetts marriage in a short while, but oh,
we can't allow that sort of thing to spread, can we?
It might imperil some straight "marriages"!

Funny, but in Massachusetts, frogs never fell from the
sky, the Charles River may still be some dirty water
but it never ran red with blood, and, most shocking of
all, the divorce rate in Mass is still lower than for
many of these "Gawd-fearin'" places that ban gays from
getting married or united. I'm proud of New England;
with the exception of Rhode Island, all of the New
England states have either civil unions or full civil
marriage.

Tesha

[Tesha]

15. Ha! As it turns out, even the Charles River ("Love that dirty water!") is cleaner than it's been!

http://yosemite.epa.gov/opa/admpress.nsf/0/6146011fdd43622985257436005616ba?OpenDocument

Grade from 2007 Monitoring: B++
Release date: 04/25/2008

Contact Information: Ken Moraff, [phone]

(Boston, Mass. - Apr. 25, 2008) – As volunteers flock to the Charles River tomorrow for
the annual spring clean up event, and paddlers arrive for the “Run of the Charles” canoe
and kayak race, EPA water quality monitoring data show that during 2007, the Charles
River had it’s best water quality for boating and swimming since the intensive Clean
Charles Initiative began in 1995.

EPA’s grade for the lower Charles River this year is the highest-ever: a B++. The unusual
grade reflects that coordinated efforts by government and local groups have had continuing
success reducing bacteria levels – helping to restore the river to ecological health. Although
we have made good progress reducing bacteria levels, there is growing concern about
elevated levels of nutrients, especially phosphorus, which requires more work to address.

"We can all be very proud that our hard work to reduce bacteria levels in the Charles River
is paying off,” said Robert Varney, regional administrator of EPA's New England office. “We
still have work to do – especially regarding nutrients from stormwater pollution – to solve
problems including the algae blooms that have occurred the past several summers."

<more>

---

Clearly Dog is taking out his fearsome wrath on gay-loving Massachusetts!

Tesha

[pahdonky]

4. ass hats attempting to step on our pursuit of happiness

this is why we need equal rights......not special rights....

http://365gay.com/Newscon08/02/022208fla.htm

i'm not interested in embracing this kind of frustration....

[Turbineguy]

5. Hey it worked last time

for the GOP.

[closeupready]

8. Bingo.

You win!

Just what I was thinking. :mad:

[hunter]

6. "Protect Marriage" from what?

I just don't get it. Two adults love and care for one another and they decide to get married. That's a good thing and the relationship deserves to be recognized and protected by our legal system.

Furthermore, this legal recognition will remove much of the trauma so many young people experience as they come to realize they are attracted to people of their same sex. Seeing married same sex couples accepted within their community emphasizes that these young people too will be accepted into their community, not excluded for the arbitrary reason of their sexuality.

Bans of same-sex marriage belong in the dumpsters of history for exactly the same reason as bans against blacks marrying whites and other violations of human rights.

I've no patience with this "Protect Marriage" violence and repression. It's the twenty-first century and anybody supporting same-sex marriage bans is living under a cloud of self-imposed ignorance and hatred. It's time to drag these poor impoverished souls out into the sunshine.

Anyone who asks me to sign a petition to ban gay marriage, or anyone who even suggests they support a banning gay marrige, is going to get heated argument from me and I'll treat them exactly as if they'd suggested something equally offensive to my sense of justice.

I wear my rainbow flag here on DU because I believe marriage is a basic human right.

[Tesha]

7. Protect marriage from their own urges.

But it makes you wonder if a better way to "protect marriage"
might be to outlaw divorce, or make it a bit harder to enter
into a marriage in the first place.

Tesha

[closeupready]

9. Exactly. Most of those who seek to ban same-sex marriage fear their own homosexual desires.

And keeping same-sex relationships taboo helps them keep personal tabs on that "danger zone".

[nichomachus]

10. Someone needs to post the petitions on the Internet

When the same thing happened in Massachusetts, a group there posted on the Internet the names and addresses of everyone who has signed the petition. It caused a shit storm, but their argument was that you have a right to know if you're living next door to an anti-gay bigot. And, since the petition is a public document, there is no privacy issue involved.

Also, it gave people a chance to see whether their name had been added to the petition without their knowledge, as I suspect mine might have in this case. I'm trying to find out how I can determine that.

[Tesha]

12. I think that remains an excellent strategy.

o http://www.knowthyneighbor.org/

Currently, they have coverage for Oregon, Florida, and
Massachusetts, but they're soliciting for help for any
state inthe nation:

o http://www.knowthyneighbor.org/national/

Tesha

[nichomachus]

13. Thanks so much for that link

I couldn't remember the name of the organization. I've already sent them an email to see what can be done.

[Tesha]

14. You're welcome. (I still get their now-occasional mailings.) (NT)

[Prophet 451]

11. Assholes

We have same-sex marriage here. Technically, it's referred to as "Domestic Partnership" but pretty much everyone has referred to it as marriage since day 1. It was written into the law when it was enacted that in all legal respects, it carried exactly the same right and responsibilities as civil marriage, it's even processed on the same paperwork. Effect to British society: Zero.

We allow gay people to openly serve in the armed forces too. A few of them have even married. One of the very first same-sex marriages here was between two Army officers (female, as it happens) who got married in full dress uniform and looked very smart too. Effect on the British armed forces: Need to build a few more married couples quarters but otherwise zero.

Officially, there is a 15-day waiting period between registering intent and actually marrying. One same-sex couple was granted a waiver of that waiting period so they could marry before one partner succombed to terminal cancer. Sadly, he died the following day but he died as a married man. As he passed away, his husband held his hand and tried his best to comfort him. In the end, I think that's what marriage should be about. Not taxes or property but that, in the very worst of times, someone will hold your hand and tell you they love you.

[crimsonblue]

16. Sigh...

Sexual orientation is like ice cream; you like what you like and there's nothing wrong with that. To deny two consenting adults the right to form a legal bond is ridiculous if only on the grounds because the arguments against it are "It's sinful" or "It ain't natural". Well guess what, "sinning" is a religious thing, and therefore you have no right to judge someone else because of this little thing called the First Amendment. Second, it wasn't natural for a group of men to rise up and create a new country, nor was it natural for Martin Luther to post his complaints on a door, nor was it natural to preemptively invade a sovereign country, but we got over those things pretty quickly. If someone has moral objections to same sex marriage, then it is their right to be disgusted or whatever, but that doesn't mean they can deny the rights of others... Then again, up is the new down these days.

[LeftyMom]

17. I've heard from several sources that a lot of their sigs are dupes.

Now the funny thing about California law is this: Let's say my name is Suzy Smith, and I sign the petition at church, then a few days later I space out or I'm just a bit overenthusiastic and sign it again at Safeway. Not only does the second, duplicate signature not count, the first is also considered fraudulent and does not count.

Other things that invalidate a signature:
-Not being registered to vote (duh)
-Signing with an address or name variation other than the one used on one's voter registration (ie- my name on my voter reg is Suzy Smith, I sign Suzy A. Smith or Suzy Smith-Jones on the petition, or I've moved and list my new address before changing my voter info, the signature is invalid)
-Signatures from voters registered in different counties on the same page (If Suzy Smith's pastor sends her home with a petition sheet, and all of her neighbors in Elk Grove and her Aunt from Granite Bay sign it, the whole page doesn't count, because there are signatures from both Sacramento and Placer counties on a single page. I'm guessing a ton of signatures collected in churches especially will be lost this way, as volunteers don't know that rule, and larger churches often have flocks spread over more than one county.)

They upped the bounty on signatures to $1.50 each on Sunday, which is quite high, and seems rather inconsistent with the assertion that they have enough to qualify for the ballot. My guess is that they know that they'll lose a lot in the verification process, and it's fairly likely they don't have enough valid signatures.

[MarkInLA]

18. Such garbage

I'm a gay guy - totally gay for the last 20 years - and I know NO same-sex couples who are officially "married". If I don't know any married same-sex couples, what are the chances that The Mundanes from Fresno are going to know any?

The idea that same-sex marriage will have a huge affect on our society is utter nonsense.