California voters approve Proposition 8 ban on same-sex marriages

[Zenlitened]

Source: Los Angeles Times

A measure to once again ban gay marriage in California was passed by voters in Tuesday's election, throwing into doubt the unions of an estimated 18,000 same-sex couples who wed during the last 4 1/2 months.


Read more: http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-gaymarriage6-2008nov06,0,2331815.story

---

Thank you, Sen. Obama and Sen. Biden, for your courage and forthright leadership in supporting marriage rights for all Americans.

Um, or not.

Do I feel a little bit bitter? Yes, I do. It's hard to truly relish the joy of President-elect Obama's historic accomplishment, knowing that he and Biden failed to lead on this issue. Knowing that, in fact, they gave a degree of support to the "no marriage fer th' gays" side.

I think it's very likely that the vote on Prop H8 in California would have been defeated had Mssrs. Obama and Biden said these words out loud: "I support the right of all loving couples to marry, and enjoy all the benefits, rights and responsibilities of marriage."

They opted not to, for reasons and rationales that have been fully discussed here and elsewhere.

So here we are.

It hurts, seeing the world celebrate this turning point in America's history even as an entire community of millions of loving, generous, creative and strong Americans mourns. Rejection hurts, especially when the narrative of the day is inclusion and promises of a new era of unity, dignity and opportunity.

Kind of makes the victory bittersweet, no?

[LeftCoast]

1. Next stop, CA Supreme Court

I'm not optimistic though.

:(

[onehandle]

2. Yeah. No optimism here either.

How far up will this go?

Scotus?

[TechBear_Seattle]

8. The state courts can't do squat, unless they can somehow invalidate the whole initiative

That is extremely unlikely, as the initiative itself has already survived court review as to its validity.

Now that this is in the state Constitution, state courts have no choice but to enforce it; their fundamental duty is, after all, to enforce the state constitution. The only realistic way this can be overturned would be a federal ruling that the US constitution prohibits this kind of discrimination, much in the same way that Brown v. Board of Education and Loving v. Virginia overturned state constitution items which mandated racism. That is a bit more likely that a successful state challenge, but not by much.

[LeftCoast]

12. Potentially they could look at it as a revision to the constitution

I doubt it though...

[keepCAblue]

18. The CA Supreme Court already declined to review said argument, unanimously. n/t

[TechBear_Seattle]

20. No, they cannot

The constitution has been revised. The mandate of the state court is to enforce the state constitution. End of story.

[slackmaster]

26. If they did, that would trigger a recall

Just like the voters recalled Chief Justice Rose Bird over the death penalty.

[NMDemDist2]

3. fuck

that is so wrong

:cry:

[Solly Mack]

4. Fuckers

hate-filled pieces of garbage

[Democat]

5. Can't voters just put another prop on the next election to void this?

If you can add it easily, can't you remove it just as easily?

With each election, the country gets more liberal (and old conservatives die off), so shouldn't this be a temporary setback?

[amdezurik]

7. it is finding the millionaire religious asshats

and their drone followers to fund it...

[Terran]

16. That's what I'm wondering...

There's probably a time limit before a new ballot proposition can be pursued, but pursued it can be, right?

In any event, this has created a situation where the California Constitution is now in conflict with the Equal Protection clause of the US Const. (as in many other states). Eventually, there will be a case before the SCOTUS that will specifically rule on the matter, and ALL these state measure will instantly wither away.

[slackmaster]

31. I used to have the same naive view, that the country was becoming more and more liberal

The election of Ronald Reagan in 1980, the resurgence of religious fundamentalism, anti-evolution teachings,etc. has wiped that one out.

[Bette Noir]

38. Not a temporary setback to a couple I know who married last week.

One has cancer. Inheritance taxes are entirely different, depending on whether a couple is legally married or not. If their marriage is voided, and my friend dies, it could cost her surviving spouse several tens of thousands of dollars to keep the home they bought together twenty years ago.

[auntAgonist]

6. civil rights should never be a ballot proposition NEVER

A progressive country that is so regressive when it comes to civil rights :cry:

unbelievable.

aA

[Javaman]

9. unbelievable.

We can elect an African American to president but we can't allow two people who love each other to marry.

Sigh.

[keepCAblue]

36. bingo. Hypocrisy reigns supreme in the land of the "free"

[2Design]

10. discrimination must be stopped in the usa or it will never be WE the people n/t

[defendandprotect]

11. 52% suggests this won't survive very long...religios interests have to be more strongly upposed --!!

Do I feel a little bit bitter? Yes, I do. It's hard to truly relish the joy of President-elect Obama's historic accomplishment, knowing that he and Biden failed to lead on this issue. Knowing that, in fact, they gave a degree of support to the "no marriage fer th' gays" side.

I think it's very likely that the vote on Prop H8 in California would have been defeated had Mssrs. Obama and Biden said these words out loud: "I support the right of all loving couples to marry, and enjoy all the benefits, rights and responsibilities of marriage."

Yes - sad reality and worries me ... !!!

[defendandprotect]

13. dupe

[drgonzosghost]

14. How the hell did THAT happen?

I'm almost sure that it was because you had to vote "yes" to get the "no". Maybe people got confused.

[slackmaster]

24. I have no doubt that is part of it

OTOH there are probably also some people who voted No thinking that a Yes vote would permit gay marriage.

[MissMillie]

15. gays are the "new black"

I'm embarassed for CA, FL and AZ.... to think they would vote to change their constitutions to include discrimination.

[Auggie]

17. California will try again

We'll get it right. Eventually.

[Elderon]

19. I'm Very Saddened for CA

AND, I'm almost embarrased to say that I live in Florida after Amendment 2 passed here.

To honestly think that these people are FRIGHTENED that the "Big Bad Evil GLBT Community" is going to come in and ruin their pristine (lying, cheating) marriages is beyond the pale...

My wife and I have been married for 17 years and I can say without any doubt that, to us, it matters not that we are man and woman.

We are ONE and i believe that EVERYONE should have the same opportunities & rights as we do.

That being said, I have unfortunately participated in taking for granted those same opportunities & rights over the years and it has been those on DU that have truly opened my eyes.

My heart goes out to you California, but don't let it get you down! We will all keep on fighting for you!

[LatteLibertine]

21. Now that they are actually elected

I am hoping they are more aggressive in their support. I almost expect it. They could only say so much and get the "moderate" vote. I'm surprised to see CA, of all places, support this.

[melody]

22. Religious zealots manipulating the ignorant :(

There has to be away around this. This cannot be allowed to stand.

[asthmaticeog]

23. ...

x(

I was holding out hope that the opposition would squeak in a win - I have friends whose marriages could be invalidated now. This is inexcusable.

[Jack Rabbit]

25. This puts a damper on yesterday

It's not going to let it spoil my good mood about the election of President Obama, but it serves as a reminder that American democracy is a work in progress.

Equality is an American value. This kind of thing flies in the face of democracy every bit as much as Jim Crow legislation.

[Piewhacket]

27. Great day for America. Not so great a day for CA

If principles of fairness and equality ruled the day here in CA,
Prop 8 would fail massively.

But that day of equality is not today, apparently , for Prop 8 isn't failing
massively, and unless later counted ballots are greatly against
the measure it appears poised to pass. Once again, discrimination will
appear not merely in the laws of California, but enshrined in the CA
constitution in its most basic provision, equal protection of law.
Californians have not heaped glory upon themselves today.

The majority don't care about gay rights. They see only the jealous need
to reserve a name "marriage" to themselves.
That is disappointing but not shocking, people tend to view the world through
the lens of their own self-interest, their own version of bigotry.
Yet it would be well if we all better understood that that our own rights
depend on a willingness to recognize that others should have equal rights.

It has been a great day for Obama, for Democrats, for America.
Yet challenges remain to Americas ideal of equal protection of law for all.
But that true day of equality, for CA, does not appear to be today.

[keepCAblue]

37. Or AZ...or FL ... or AR n/t

[proud progressive]

28. I 100% AGREE WITH YOU!!

on the other hand, even california has enough self-righteous, religious, right-wing wack-jobs for him to worry about getting elected. plus,.... he's black....this is still a white-man's country.....it's taken us 400 years just to get this far....you understand.

[aintitfunny]

29. Heartbreaking

That there are so many ignorant and bigoted people who think they are entitled to more rights than others.

[yardwork]

30. I'm disappointed, but ready to continue the fight for human rights.

Civil rights come slowly in the United States of America. Very slowly. We are a backwards country compared to many others. That doesn't mean that we lie down and give up. It means that we continue the struggle, on and on.

Did African Americans give up when Martin Luther King, Jr. was assassinated? No, they did not. They continued to fight, and yesterday the entire country elected an African American man president. Many of the people who struggled for civil rights in the 1960s are no longer alive to see this victory. But it is a victory, and one day there will be full and equal rights for gay people. My faith tells me this.

Now is not the time for division and bitterness between Democrats. We must follow Barack Obama's example to persevere - as he did for many years early in his political career - and build a coalition toward victory.

[hunter]

32. Keep hammering away at the fear, ignorance, and bigotry.

It cannot stand.

Recognize, celebrate, and defend the committed relationships of gay couples as marriage, no matter what the law says. These realationships are marriage, and we must continue to fight for ownership of the language.

[AtheistCrusader]

33. I can't believe this passed in California...

The people who ran this ballot measure are going to come right up the west coast.

Holy crap.




All those poor people already married. Unbelievable.

[ellie]

34. I am very sorry

to see this passed.

[Bette Noir]

35. Damn shame.

I don't know why a simple majority is enough to change a Constitution.

What we need is for a *national* ban on discrimination against gays. All religious questions aside, it's plain not fair that gay couples be taxed at a different rate than straight couples.

[LiberalLovinLug]

39. Very sad

I heard that Bill Clinton advised John Kerry in 2004 to come out publicly for the "sanctity" of hetro marriage, I forget exactly. He refused and look what happened. While I admire Kerry for not giving in to the Clinton win-at-all-cost strategy, it may have garnered him just enough votes from 'the other side' and we could have already been out of Iraq.

Its a fine balance. Clinton also proposed "Don't ask, don't tell" as a compromise to gays in the military. Neither side was happy with this, but he was able to slide past the issue and on to other policies. Is it fair or even just? No. But progressives have to accept that moving ahead is a matter of two steps forward and one step back in the dirty world of politics, especially when the other side is armed with a corporate TV media and a raging Reich wing on the radio.

So Obama did not publicly support gay marriage, but he has put to rest the idiotic notion of doing to the federal constitution, the same as what California just did to theirs, that is strip out rights to citizens. And put it up to the States to decide. I am shocked that California voted for this though.

But the only plan that will work to eventually create an equal marriage situation is to first get progressives elected, and then the country will slowly move to the left and then they will be open to move further towards progressive ideals once that happens. Unfortunately for gay couples, this issue is used a 'wedge' issue by conservatives, and because of the fear and ignorance out there it works!

For now.

If Barack Obama had come out forcefully for gay marriage, he may have lost. Then the US would never get universal health care, continued dying and killing in Iraq, Row vs. Wade overturned, and be further ostracized by the rest of the world. I am saddened for all those couples that wanted to marry, and also saddened that Obama had to take that stance in order to get elected. That issue had to be sacrificed - for now - for the greater good.

Here's a plan. Let's wait until Obama can appoint a new Supreme Court judge or two and THEN take the issue up with the federal court. Until then, we hang in there.

[happygoluckytoyou]

40. DISAGREE---> ---> ---> The reason that this passed was....

The people who pushed YES ON 8 would have lost in any "usual" California vote--- but they were very clever... the worded the ads to indicate all of the FEAR negative FEAR things FEAR that would happen if 8 FAILED. "Churches would lose their tax status" for example... in REALITY, 8 was to "take away a right", in fact, the churches were SAFE as gay people could have already done "these things" and didn't. IT WAS A FEAR OF SOMETHING WHICH WAS NEVER REALLY GOING TO HAPPEN.
OBAMA ? BIDEN ? Sadly, BUT TRUE, it was MORE IMPORTANT for them to win than to get tied up in a "liberal cause." We need to cut them some slack.
OBAMA will undoubtedly appoint LIBERAL JUDGES. It was MUCH TOO IMPORTANT for them to tip "centrist"--- had the election been CLOSE it could have been stolen. ONCE IN A WHILE we Democrats need to understand that PRINCIPLE is IMPORTANT... but you have to WIN THE WAR to divide the SPOILS.
CONGRESS and the PRESIDENT are now MUCH MORE POWERFUL to help us with our causes.

[liberal1973]

41. No kidding- what happen?

This would be expected in maybe South Carolina.

[Megahurtz]

42. OMFG!

I can't stand this place. I want to move.

[NorthernSpy]

43. Obama DID say that the court's decision on gay marriage should stand...

The voters didn't listen, that's all.