Proposition 8 Exit Poll: Whites oppose blacks support, latinos divided

[cali]

Californians went to the polls today on the divisive and deeply emotional issue of same-sex marriage, with early exit poll data showing the state's voters closely divided along lines of religion and political affiliation.

With the polls still open, it is too early to project the outcome, which would amend the California Constitution to ban gay marriage. But preliminary data showed that Democrats and independents were tending to vote against Proposition 8, while Republicans were in favor of the measure.

The proposition was trailing among white voters, but was ahead among black voters. Latino voters were closely divided.

People who said they attended religious services weekly were overwhelmingly voting for the measure, while those who said that they occasionally or never went to religious services were voting no.

<snip>

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2008/11/proposition-8-e.html

[still_one]

1. Those that should have the most tolerance, had the least tolerance, how ironic /nt

[cali]

3. yes, it's very sad that the African American community on this day

should choose to support bigotry.

[still_one]

6. I have an associate at work who is African American who voted yes on 8, and I tried

to argue that it is similar to the laws that prohibited mixed marriages, but she would not buy it

The Church she goes to encouraged the congregation to vote for it

Having an amendment that deprives a group of rights is very troubling

I also believe this won't stand up to Constitutional scrutiny

[noiretextatique]

8. i am black, and i voted no on prop 8

can we please stop painting everyone with that broad brush? thanks.

[FreeState]

13. Thank you for voting on the side of civility

I agree its the church's that are using the black community here to further their own bigotry. What we need to do is find a way to help the black churches view on the issue of civil marriage. If you have any idea's please let us know - because I for one am no longer going to play along with system - I intend to change it - even if its the last thing I do. Civil rights should NEVER be voted on.

[noiretextatique]

17. no need to thank me: i am a lesbian

it was a vote for me.
i have never been very religious, but some of my family members are. one thing that might help: all the closet cases in the black churches need to come out. seriously...that might help somewhat.

[cboy4]

22. Yea, and why is it they don't come out noiretblu.

You are an extraordinarily brave woman being an out lesbian knowing what you're up against in your community.

[noiretextatique]

27. i live in oakland...my community is gay, cboy4

:hi: i was hanging out with 100+ black gays and lesbians last night. i rarely mix with straight folks, but oakland is a lot more tolerant than some places. having said that, i wouldn't walk in certain neighborhoods here holding another woman's hand.

[FreeState]

23. Thanks:) But what can I personally do as a white gay male to help black churches?

Seriously I will do what ever it takes (short of converting - Im Buddhist). There are a couple of black churches in the area but I don't even know how to begin...

[noiretextatique]

28. i am really not sure

i live one of the most progressive places in the USA, and my church embraces gay people. i don't think you can reach the extremely religious black people any more than you can reach the extremely religious white ones.

[Behind the Aegis]

38. You're a lesbian?!

I had no idea!

A black, gay, woman....you should be the next President. If you were diferently-abled, you'd be G-d. :)

[noiretextatique]

66. yep...i am

:rofl: i tell you what...i am certainly more qualified than sarah palin :dunce:

[noiretextatique]

10. it's religion

i'll bet those black people who supported prop 8 are ultra-religious. i watched the results at a gay bar owned by two lesbians. 90% of the patrons were black, and i can assure you none of us voted for prop 8.

[Leopolds Ghost]

42. Do folks here have a problem with religion?

Marriage is a religious ceremony. The gov't has no business promoting or regulating marriage. This whole debate is ridiculous.

[tkmorris]

43. I have a problem with religion.

It is intolerant. It promotes hatred. It is divisive. Furthermore, it's fucking silly.

I hope that clears things up for you.

[Leopolds Ghost]

46. Well, good thing you have no say in the matter.

The government and anyone you vote for has no say in the matter.

And vice versa. (My religious beliefs inform my distaste for the corp-government policies which so many "rich liberals" support.)

I hope you don't believe in marriage because it's a religious institution with no real secular meaning.

Civil unions, that is perfectly fine. It's called "common law marriage" and has existed for thousands of years.

The reason voters are insisting on redefining "marriage" is because they don't understand common law unions, what the term means ("civil unions? no, MARRIAGE!") or the cultural-religious origin of "marriage ceremony." The government has no business regulating culture or religion.

[kdmorris]

62. Marriage is not a religious institution.

No one can go to a church and get married without the approval of the government (as in, a marriage license). The government says who can and cannot get married, not the church.

Common law marriage is NOT the same as civil unions. Common law marriage is rarely legal these days, but the term used to be applied to people who had lived together as spouses without the benefit of a marriage license.

The cultural origins of the marriage ceremony have nothing to do with religion. The church got involved in it because it was the most powerful entity at the time, but marriage was originally a way of transferring ownership of one's daughter to her husband in a legal way. That's not what it is today, but the origins are NOT religious.

[spoony]

51. I think you've proved that one doesn't need religion to be

divisive and intolerant. Well done.

[bullwinkle428]

69. "Marriage is a religious ceremony" - AGAIN with that tired old rhetoric?

I guess all of those married atheist couples aren't truly married, then...

[JuniperLea]

80. Exactly right...

It's religion. The yes on prop 8 organization is made up of religious people, and they got the message out... the LIES out... making people think that their church would be forced to marry gay people, that the "gay agenda" would be taught in school, and all sorts of horrid lies. My next door neighbor is a black, church lady... bless her heart she is a gem. A very, very nice lady. But she is stubborn too. And I bet she got an earful from her pastor on this. I don't think it's a prejudice against gays so much as a thought that they are protecting their flock. A lot of mothers are fiercely protective of their flock, and would do just about anything if they thought it was best for their children.

They need reeducated... and the right for clergy to marry people should be revoked. They can still have their religious marriage ceremony, but the legal part of the marriage should be the states business, not the church's.

My two cents... I'm a straight white woman who is a recovering Fundie... and I live in one of the most gay-friendly areas in CA outside San Francisco... Long Beach... you would love it. You can walk down the street holding hands with whomever you choose and no one would even beat an eyelash around here. If they do, they are more apt NOT to let you see it:) That's fine. We can't be the thought police. I can't make people stop thinking bigoted thoughts, but they should keep bigotry in the closet;)

[Leopolds Ghost]

44. If Dems had focused on civil unions instead of trying to redefine a religious ceremony,

If Dems had focused on civil unions instead of trying to redefine a religious ceremony, we'd be celebrating the re-election of John Kerry.

This is a total distraction which has destroyed the (successful) movement for civil unions and destroyed the Thomas Frank populist effort to restore economic populism to the top of the agenda instead of manufactured controversies where none should exist. Thanks, Gavin Fucking DLC Newsom. If Green candidate Gonzalez had won, Kerry would have won, civil unions would be legal, liberalism would mean economic populism and not this ridiculous anti-black, anti-lower class rhetoric, and we wouldn't be talking about this.

And no, I don't support government involvement in religious "regular" marriage ceremonies either.

It's called common law. Or civil unions. We shouldn't be trying to regulate peoples' religious beliefs.

Why should marriages which originated as a church ceremony be licensed in any jurisdiction?
Saying fundies are fighting gay or straight secularists over the definition of marriage is
like saying they are fighting over the definition of transubstantiation.

I don't hear anyone complaining about the potential end of Affirmative Action,
or the Dem-directed destruction of public housing in cities like New Orleans.

Some unity of purpose. They are dividing the progressive coalition.

[wtmusic]

68. It's not Democrats who are trying to legislate marriage.

Democrats (most) are trying to stop the legislation of marriage.

[dorkulon]

79. No one is saying that churches should be forced to perform gay weddings.

Just the state. Like it or not, marriage is a state issue. Atheists get married.

[Corkey Mineola]

2. my worst fear, confirmed

The great bus of progress,
brimming with bright black and brown and white faces,
drags queer bodies behind it
what a shame

[JI7]

4. asians opposed it by large amounts also

not sure if they exit polled them but on previous polls done.

[cboy4]

14. They had every right to oppose it, considering how they

were stripped of their human rights during WWII.

[RedCappedBandit]

33. How is that relevant to the issue at hand?

[cboy4]

55. How is it relevant? If any race of people would understand

what it's like to have their rights stripped from them, it's Asian Americans who were rounded up and thrown into internment camps throughout California during World War II.

Their opposition to Prop 8 is therefore hardly surprising, nor should it be considering the way they were treated.

[RedCappedBandit]

63. OOPS

I dunno why, but I didn't realize they OPPOSED the bill. I fail at reading!

[Donald Ian Rankin]

60. Your logic does not resemble our earth logic.

If someone breaks into my house and steals my TV, that does not give me the right to go out and steal someone else's.

[HughLefty1]

5. This put a damper on my election day..

I'm not surprised though...

As happy as I am at the outcome of our presidential election, PROP 8 was equally, if not more important for me. I work with a diverse group in my office here in L.A. and had a feeling it would end this way..

I'm sorry but it's a dark day when anyone's rights are taken away..

I'll leave now before bringing anyone else down on what should be a glorious day here at DU :(

[Duncan Grant]

7. Kicking for the shame of it. (nt)

:kick:

[Freddie Stubbs]

9. And African American turnout was undoubtedly high

[noiretextatique]

11. the title is misleading without any hard numbers eom

[cali]

21. the title is not mine It's the L.A. Time's.

[noiretextatique]

67. i read the article

but i didn't see any numbers to back up the claim.

[EFerrari]

12. So a minority of California voters of color are responsible

for the efforts of rich white men in Utah? Is that right or am I missing something?

[cboy4]

15. You might be giving the rich white men a little too much

credit.

But who knows.

The racial break down is what it is.

[EFerrari]

16. But the racial breakdown didn't vote. People did (or, didn't).

There are 'way fewer black church going women than there are white guys.

The Latino vote isn't much different than those white guys -- and a lot of those people have less access to information.

Blaming people of color for this is not a winner. It's not accurate and it won't help. It probably also feels like more of the same scapegoating.

[noiretextatique]

18. right...i want to see some numbers

so we can expose this "black people hate gay people" foolishness for what it is. there is no way in hell that prop 8 passed JUST because of black people, as too many here keep saying.

[cboy4]

19. Believe me noireblu, I have more black male friends

than you can probably imagine.

And I am fully aware of the blatant homophobia that exists.

We have very open and frank conversation about it.

Let's not blame black people disproportionally, and let's not say black people "hate gay people."

Because I don't believe that. And I don't believe black people are responsible for the outcome.

But please, let's also not pretend there isn't a problem.

There sure is.

There's an even bigger problem in the Hispanic community because of their conservative social values associated with the Catholic Church.

And there's a big problem with white people associated with the Mormon Church and the fundy Baptists.

So everyone is to blame, but I'm sure as hell not going to stick up for white ass holes.

I hope you're not sticking up for the black ones.

[noiretextatique]

25. i am a black lesbian

so, no...i am not sticking up for homophobes :7

in california, the supreme court has already stuck down the ban on gay marriage. given that precedent, prop 8 will be declared unconstitutional. as long as i have the law on my side, i don't give a damn about homophobes, black or otherwise.

i am not going to try to change the minds of homophobes...black or white. it's THEIR problem, not mine.

the way to win this battle is in the courts, just like african-americans had to rely on the courts to end segregation.

we californians are fortunate to have a supreme court that has already ruled in our favor on this issue.

[Behind the Aegis]

41. " i am not going to try to change the minds of homophobes"

"...black or white. it's THEIR problem, not mine.

I will disagree with you. It IS your problem, as it is mine. We can't win them all, but you know (and this is a guess on my part) as well as me, there are some who need to hear from us and see us, understand, we are like them. We are no different. We are are as fucking boring as they are! :) But, our love is as strong as their's is.

I have always liked you. I think it is because when I first saw your DU name I associated it with a French song, "En rouge, et noir," by Vaniss Paridis (sp?) (Johnny Depp's wife). And, here we are, in 2008, and I finally saw your name is "noiretblu"...."black and blue" (noire = black (fem.)) (et = and) (blu = blue). Am I wrong? Why that name? You show me yours, I'll show you mine. :)

[noiretextatique]

64. it is not my problem

and i will not waste my time trying to change them. people need to do their own spiritual work on this issue...i cannot do that for them. what i can do is to live my life openly, and perhaps in doing so, the homophobes who know me will evolve. that's been the case with some of my family members and coworkers.

i came out in 1979 when i was 21 years old, but it took me another 10+ years to truly accept myself as a lesbian. that acceptance came when i realized that as long as i fully accepted myself, there would be no room inside me for someone else's disapproval. homophobes have no power in my life.

black and blue...i picked that because that's how i felt when bush was selected in 2000 :hi:

[Nikki Stone1]

26. Here are the numbers: Blacks comprised almost a fifth of the vote in CA

70% of that 5th voted for Prop 8. That means 14% of the vote for Prop 8 (against gay marriage) came from the African American community. The measure was very close--if 1/4 of this group had voted against 8, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

Look at the figures here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=221&topic_id=86836&mesg_id=87110

[noiretextatique]

65. the same is true of the white people who voted yes, its is not?

if less whites had voted YES, we wouldn't be having this discussion either...correct? this discussion is futile for that reason.

as to why so many black people voted for this...it's religion. unbelievably, i ran into a black lesbian i know who told me she voted yes on 8 because she didn't "believe" in marriage for gay people.

[cboy4]

20. Are we looking at the same numbers? I'm reading the

CNN exit polls---------->http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/results/polls/#val=CAI01p1

And I'm not accusing people.

I'm just saying people should take responsibility for how they vote, instead of blaming it completely on the Mormons.

The Mormons and Catholics weren't holding pistols to everyone's head inside the booth.


on edit: to add link

[EFerrari]

30. cboy4, could you please post the snip for me?

Can't load it. And, I agree should be responsible, of course.

[cboy4]

36. Okay, let's try

(Vote by race percentage)


2,240 Respondents

White (63%)

Y 49%

N 51%



African-American (10%)

Y 70%

N 30%



Latino (18%)

Y 53%

N 47%



Asian (6%)

Y 49%

N 51%



Other (3%)

51%

49%


From A.P.

Exit polls revealed dramatic demographic gaps in the gay-marriage vote. While about six in 10 voters under 30 opposed the ban, about the same proportion of those 65 and older supported it. There were sharp racial discrepancies as well. Even as black voters overwhelmingly backed Barack Obama — a gay-rights supporter — in the presidential race, about seven in 10 of them voted against gay marriage, compared with about half of white voters.

Denise Fernandez, a 57-year-old black woman from Sacramento, said she voted for Obama and Proposition 8. "I believe a Christian is held accountable," she said.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081106/ap_on_el_ge/gay_marriage_8

[EFerrari]

39. Thanks. Even taking those per centages -- which, imho, are high

(18%, 10% for Latinos, black voters is a little high normally but let's say, they did turn out this time), that's still not really enough to swing it. That's only about 17% of the "yes" vote taken together.

To make it more concrete,

In Los Angeles County, Obama got a whopping 1,845,726 votes, McToast got 766,164.

2,613,444 votes were cast on Prop 8 (I don't believe this number but, that's what's official right now).

1,317,125 freeps voted for H8; 1,296,319 voted with us.

The black and Latino freep vote accounts for only 432,431, less than half of the white and asian freep vote of 883,605. So, this wasn't mainly about blacks and Latinos although those two small groups did vote Yes more than whites and asians.

:shrug:

And, imho, there's something wrong with the numbers in L.A. County such that either the freep votes are too high or our votes are under counted. I don't believe that half a million people who voted for Obama voted freep on H8. Some of them, but half a million? Something is off in the L.A. County count. They had problems during our primary and I hope someone checks this out.

[cboy4]

57. Well the L.A. numbers really raised my eyebrows.

That is stunning that Obama would win overwhelmingly there, but 8 wins also!?

How is that possible?

And WTF was up with the turnout rate in the City?

Something like 50 percent? :wtf:

I'd like to know how many asshole gays stayed at home for the most important civil rights decision of their lives.

Ughh. Frustrating.

[Nikki Stone1]

24. sfexpat: Black voters were almost 1/5 of total voters and 70% voted for prop 8

So .7 times .2 = .14, which means that black voters were responsible for 14% of the No vote. The measure was close: if even half of the 14% voted against 8, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

Blacks did turn the tide.
The majority of Whites, by contrast voted Against 8

[EFerrari]

29. Where are you getting 1 in 5? That seems really high.

Eta: I'm having a horrible time loading the link in the OP, so if it's there, sorry. I can only read it in short snatches.

[JVS]

31. Her link says 10%

[EFerrari]

32. Thank you. n/t

[EFerrari]

34. 7%, Nikki, not 14%. Go back and look at the thread you link to.

Black voters were 1 in 10, not 1 in 5. Only half that number did vote against it.

[tkmorris]

45. No

But they should definitely be ashamed of themselves for agreeing with those white rich men from Utah. Don't you think?

[EFerrari]

53. They're not even 20% of the "yes" vote. Should they be more especially ashamed

than the other voters who voted yes?

[Donald Ian Rankin]

61. No, but nor is the reverse true.

That other people were advocating it is not an excuse for voting for this.

Voters are responsible for their own votes.

That certainly doesn't exculpate those who campaigned for it, though.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

72. In A Lot Of Ways They Partially Were.

Anyone voting for it was responsible, but the AA vote on it's own actually contributed 4% to the yes % alone, as opposed to if they had been split 50-50 (they were 70-30, 10% of overall votes). They were by far the largest group supporting the measure, whereas almost every other group was close to 50/50.

But even the fact that half of other people supported it is quite depressing. There should only be a minute minority who would support such discrimination.

Everyone voting yes is to blame.

[EFerrari]

76. Combined, the black and Latino vote weren't even half of the Yes white vote.

I agree with you about responsibility. But, let's not go off on people we can reach out to and bring into our voting block just because the media offers them up for consumption -- I guess that's what I'm trying to say here.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

77. I Think We Should Go After Them, But Responsibly And Strategically.

The fact so many AA's in ratio voted for prop 8 is immensely disturbing. The passage of it is immensely disturbing. In order to foster change, first the groups with the most violators need to be identified and then convinced to change their position. That's simple logic and strategy.

In this specific instance, AA's are absolutely a huge group that require further influencing on the issue, based on a 70-30 split. That split was by far the biggest split over any other group. It is the ratio that matters as it relates to influencing groups, not just the sheer numbers.

Whereas AA's contributed 4% based on a 50/50 split to the yes number, whites actually contributed 4% to the NO side. Obviously due to the greater makeup of that group itself, more yes votes still came from that side, but they at least had more voting no than yes. That means overall, the group did their part (since 50-50 is all that matters in whether something passes or not) in trying to get the proposition to fail. The AA group on the other hand, had a huge difference in ratio from those voting yes or no. There is huge room for improvement there. You must understand that regardless of how many yes votes any specific group had, the real and logical battle is attempting to get any given voting group to be at least 50.01% against the prop and 49.99% for it, since that's all that's needed for it to fail. As a group, the whites did their part in that. As a group, the AA's didn't. Not only didn't they, but they weren't even close. That shows a huge room for improvement within the group and that should absolutely be identified. It shows additional education on the issue and further persuasion is needed within that group, in hopes of getting the 70% down to 49.9%.

When all the numbers are counted, it may very well be that the difference between the yes and no percents is less than or equal to the % given to the yes column from the % above 50 from the AA voters. That absolutely is important to know.

They shouldn't be blamed nor resented outright, but they should be identified as a core group requiring further persuasion. It is responsible to do so.

[EFerrari]

78. I agree with that, OMC. Let's mark the calendar.

:hug:

I have this fundamental belief that most people are decent and if you approach them in a way they can hear, they will do the right thing. It's not clear to me that the AA community was approached in this way well enough. Ditto for Latinos. And we know both groups were targeted extensively by the rightwing nutter money people.

But let's be extra clear: It was mostly churchgoing AA women who voted for this thing. While they only added a few percentage points, they are very influential. Let's know what the challenge is so we can be good and effective.

[jmm]

35. Only 2,240 in the entire state were surveyed.

2,240 out of millions by a company that botched the exit polls in 2000, 2002, 2004, and 2006.


If you look closely here the break down of the numbers is incomplete and not just in California. In Massachusetts they only surveyed 767 people and only gave percentages for whites. As Homer Simpson once said, “People can come up with statistics to prove anything, Kent. 14% of people know that.” I've got to wonder why most major media outlets are relying on one company to give them their numbers.

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


http://www.forbes.com/opinions/2008/11/01/exit-polls-el ...

....

But exit polls aren't always reliable, and the controversy surrounding the 2000 election is the most infamous example. The exit pollsters and news organizations awarded Florida to Al Gore before the polls closed and then retracted it. Later, the networks (but not the exit pollsters) awarded Florida to George W. Bush--and then retracted that call, too.

.....

The machinery was overhauled for the 2002 elections, but that year, massive technical failures botched exit poll reporting. In 2004, and again in 2006, the exit poll overstated Democrats' performance. In the 1,460 exit poll precincts where Edison/Mitofsky collected both exit poll tallies and actual final vote returns in 2004, the exit poll results overstated the actual difference between John Kerry and Bush by 6.5 points in Kerry's favor.

.....

Can these past problems be overcome on Tuesday night? To compensate for the potential oversampling of Democrats, Edison/Mitofsky have improved interviewer training and are using fewer young interviewers.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/05/us/politics/05method ....

The national results are based on 17,244 voters in 300 precincts across the United States. These include 2,378 absentee voters and early voters interviewed by telephone.

The state results are based on on 869 to 3,350 voters in 15 to 50 randomly selected precincts across each of 18 states analyzed by The Times. In certain states, some interviews were also conducted by telephone with absentee voters and early voters. In Colorado and Washington, all interviews were by telephone.

.....

http://www.opednews.com/articles/ExitPoll-Mess--2008--T ...

Wash. DC) Did you know that 2004 was not a "red versus blue" election? Did any analysis that you heard or read mention that the very red rural voting segment went from 23% of the vote total in 2000 to 16% in 2004? How about the 2.4 million fewer votes Bush received in the smaller 2004 rural segment than in 2000? All of this showed up in the exit polls on Election Day and the day after when the "official" exit poll was released.

The national exit polls are sponsored by the National Election Pool (media consortium) consisting of ABC, CBS, CNN, FOX, and NBC, and the Associated Press. The polling is conducted for the media consortium by Edison - Mitofsky. The same day poll for federal elections seeks to capture who voted, where, and why.*

The exit poll gave us another surprise, one that was necessary for the poll to match up with the announced vote totals showing Bush winning by a 3 million vote margin, 50.7% to 48.3%.

.....

[Jed Dilligan]

37. If the government could figure out a way not to send a quarter or more

of young black men to prison, we would see an end to this homophobic trend. Prison is no place to be gay, seem gay, have gay friends, or say anything positive about gay people--you are likely to be attacked or raped for any of the above. People who expect to go to prison build up their homophobic front big, and they build it young--never mind their private or personal feelings on the issue. Every day, hate crimes are committed against perceived gays in prison to prevent the attacker from being perceived as gay. A weird concept in prison culture, propagated by guards and psychiatrists inside, makes prison rapists out to be non-gay and their victims gay. Prison gang members may find themselves in the odd position of having to sodomize another man in order to continue to be perceived as heterosexual. The result is that incarceration for those perceived to be gay is not merely a legal punishment and isolation from society. It is literally hell on earth.

Add to that another side effect of mass incarceration of black men--a female population with an unnaturally diminished pool of male partners--and you have a demographic that is ripe to be targeted by homophobic preachers.

No one wants to hear it, but it's your tax money paying for the perpetuation of these horrors.

[Eryemil]

40. What is the government supposed to do with criminals then?

[Leopolds Ghost]

48. Wow. Translation: "A quarter of all you black people are criminals anyway. Pink triangle phbbt!"

Some of the posters on these threads remind me of a few militant gay gentrifiers in downtown DC who've been fighting to get rid of black churches in their area on the grounds that it is a gentrifying area and those people no longer belong. One of them even painted a racist mural on a building he owns in Shaw. Yeah, not much different than the Irish.

[Eryemil]

49. Please enlighten me.

I obviously do not know enough about the subject it seems. Wouldn't there be global outrage if the United States were jailing innocent men?
It seems a bit fallacious to assume that those jailed AREN'T criminals simply because there are lots of them.

I do not understand.

[Leopolds Ghost]

50. OK, so a quarter of all black men are criminals.

Why do you care if they or their wives or girlfriends are homophobic or not? After all, they are criminals or associate with criminals. By your argument, that renders any criticism you may have about their political or social prejudices moot.

[Eryemil]

52. You still did not answer my question

How could a decentralized government get away with wrongfully imprisoning innocent men? You're basically saying that the US is a fascist, pseudo-apartheid state.
Most importantly, why isn't anyone talking about it?

Like I said, I have absolutely no knowledge on the subject but I think the questions I am asking are pertinent. Either those jailed committed a crime and were sentenced or they were unjustly inprisoned.

[Leopolds Ghost]

56. I started off in this noting marriage is a cultural-religious thing the gov't has no business in.

My beliefs incline me to agree with the (secular) Jesse Ventura on this, so that is where I'm coming from.

Getting to your point, my secular OR religious beliefs inform me of how I think an ideal society would treat its citizens, and so all I can say is:

"How could a decentralized government get away with wrongfully imprisoning innocent men? You're basically saying that the US is a fascist, pseudo-apartheid state."

You said it, not me. ;-)

"Most importantly, why isn't anyone talking about it?"

Because they are too busy dividing the oppressed average citizen (straight, gay or black) with cultural wedge issues that shouldn't matter.

"Like I said, I have absolutely no knowledge on the subject but I think the questions I am asking are pertinent. Either those jailed committed a crime and were sentenced or they were unjustly inprisoned."

If I misinterpreted your earlier post as an "I'm sick of hearing about how oppressed black homophobes are" I apologize.

Coming from the DC area, there is a lot of mutual hostility between (affluent white) gays and (poor, culturally and economically conservative) blacks. If you restricted the discussion to non-affluent yuppie, or non-white members of the gay community, the tension is strangely much less. Things that make you say "hmmm."

The entire situation of how people have been led away from social and economic justice (not to mention how simple efforts to support civil unions and common law partnerships have been sidelined) depresses me.

[EFerrari]

58. Search "Chicago police torture black suspects".

The investigation is ongoing and dates way back. That's a good story to help you introduce yourself to the apartheid in our justice system.

[Jed Dilligan]

74. Surely you are being disingenuous.

How could you be in this country and not be aware of how the "War on Drugs" combined with welfare dismantling and the decline of the school system have affected urban black communities?

[Eryemil]

81. I don't see your point

Under current law, drug related charges are a valid reason to imprison people. Are you telling me that the government is framing black men? I've no doubt that happens but on such a massive scale?

As to welfare, are the poor less responsible for their actions? I am an immigrant myself so I have a better understanding of this particular issue.

[Jed Dilligan]

84. You really don't have an analytical mind

How can you not see that putting a quarter of black men in jail WOULD NOT BE NECESSARY if we did not follow policies that are at best highly misguided and, at worst, racist?

[Eryemil]

86. I would appreciate if you did not insult me, firstly

You still have not done anything to counter my argument. I need evidence that these men have been actually framed and put in jail without breaking the law, otherwise I really do not care.
Sorry if I don't think our police and judicial branch is racist for upholding the law.

[Jed Dilligan]

88. There are well-established patterns of racially unequal enforcement.

Your blindness to them is obviously the result of an over-fondness for police and court officials.

But the social and policy structures underlying these patterns go far beyond the individual actions of racist officers and corrupt judges.

[EFerrari]

54. Kick them off the force. n/t

[Leopolds Ghost]

59. You forgot the Treasury Dept! :-)

[Jed Dilligan]

73. What is a criminal?

[Eryemil]

83. Someone who breaks the law?

[Jed Dilligan]

85. That means most people are criminals. Why aren't most people in jail?

Also, are you really so naive as to support the War on Drugs the way it's currently being "fought"?

[Eryemil]

87. Yes, but not all crimes are equal in the eyes of the law

This should be obvious enough. While I don't support spending so much money on the effort to completely prohibit drug usage I would still be strongly in favor of careful government regulation.

[Jed Dilligan]

89. The same crimes committed by different people are unequal

in the eyes of the so-called "law" in this country. Have you ever hung around in a public place near your home for more than a few minutes? If so, why were you not arrested for "loitering for drug activity"? Demographics are the most likely explanation.

[Leopolds Ghost]

47. Damn straight. But folks will not listen to reason.

just look at how thankful the social left is for DLCer Gavin Newsom, who helped derail civil unions, the Green left, AND defeat John Kerry.

[Duncan Grant]

70. Kick -- cause this ain't over.

:kick:

[IndianaJones]

71. makes sense to me. nt.

[cascadiance]

75. I wonder if the black vote on this is a bit of blowback for gays supporting Clinton earlier?

I seemed to notice through the primaries that many in the gay community were more adamant in supporting Hillary than Barack... Might there have been some bruised feeling in some of those yes votes?

I'm neither black or gay, and this is pure speculation on my part, but I was wondering if this played a factor in it.

[Eryemil]

82. That would make the situation worse not better

It paints the black community as petty and childish. I really can't see this being much of a reason.

[bluedawg12]

90. Gay support for Obama in the primaries & overwhelming in GE

http://leftinsf.com/blog/index.php/archives/2472

Gay support for Obama in the primaries
.......

http://www.windycitytimes.com/gay/lesbian/news/ARTICLE.php?AID=19735


Data available thus far on voting in heavily gay precincts suggest the gay vote for Obama was at an unprecedented high