September 6th 2008
Marriage Fight
P
roposition 8 on the California ballot in November seeks to protect the voice of 61 percent of the California people who voted in 2000 for Proposition 22, saying that marriage would remain the realm solely of a man and a woman and that all the possible gay, lesbian, transexual and God knows what else variations would not be deemed “marriages” by the state.
The pro-gay marriage groups know that if Prop 8 passes, gay marriage in California isn’t just ‘mostly dead,’ it’s dead dead, and they are fighting a much smarter fight this time. Let California Ring, a “no on 8″ committee, started the campaign with this ad:
It’s a brilliant piece of work because it avoids all the problems the gays had last time around by not showing a single gay person. Rather, it calls on straights to empathize with the heartbreak and frustration gay couples feel being denied marriage. There are some legal issues with the ad because it doesn’t identify itself as a political ad, but they’re a subtext to the theme.
A very high bar has been set for pro-8 groups by the wedding ad. They will have to explain just as compellingly why the nice gay couple shouldn’t be allowed to walk down the aisle, and hate and fear won’t work well as motivators, given the compassionate themes laid down by Let California Ring. Here’s how Protect Marriage – Yes On 8 tries to get people to vote for the proposition:
The Supreme Court’s decision to legalize same-sex marriage did not just overturn the will of California voters; it also redefined marriage for the rest of society, without ever asking the people themselves to accept this decision. This decision has far-reaching consequences. For example, because public schools are already required to teach the role of marriage in society as part of the curriculum, schools will now be required to teach students that gay marriage is the same as traditional marriage, starting with kindergarteners. By saying that a marriage is between “any two persons” rather than between a man and a woman, the Court decision has opened the door to any kind of “marriage.” This undermines the value of marriage altogether at a time when we should be restoring marriage, not undermining it.
My voting-age daughters, who are conservative on most issues, have trouble seeing what’s wrong with undermining marriage because their social influences have included much of the “post gay being controversial” worldview that permeates popular culture. The only argument that gains any traction with them is the historical one: No societies ever have done this, so we need to ask why, we need to consider it very carefully. But I wouldn’t be surprised if they both vote no.
It’s going to be particularly difficult for the Yes on 8 set now that No on 8 has this:
The American Civil Liberties Union reported donating $1.2 million to defeat Proposition 8, the ban on gay marriage, on the November ballot.
The $1.2 million donation is the single largest check written to the campaign, though Equality California, a gay-rights group, and the Human Rights Campaign, a similar group, have bundled more total donations. (SacBee)
I can’t tell by the way it’s written whether both Equality California and the Human Rights Campaign have bundled more than $1.2 million, or more than $2.4 million combined, or whether together they’ve bundled more than $1.2 million. Either way, No on 8 has quite a war chest, especially when you consider that the funding for Let California Ring is separate.
On the other side, Yes on 8 is being waged primarily by a religious coalition of Mormons, Catholics and Evangelicals who are working to get Hindus, Jews, Muslims and others on board. They plan later this month to hand out over one million “Yes on 8″ yard signs as their major campaign push. They have a lot of heart:
“This is a rising up over a 5,000-year-old institution that is being hammered right now,” said Jim Garlow, pastor of Skyline Church, an evangelical congregation in La Mesa. Garlow said that, while he supported Proposition 22, he was not nearly as involved as this time around, when he has helped organize 3,400-person conference calls across denominations to coordinate campaign support for the proposed constitutional amendment.
“What binds us together is one common obsession: . . . marriage,” Garlow said.
He added that many people of faith, regardless of their religion, believe that “if Proposition 8 fails, there is an inevitable loss of religious freedom.” (LA Times)
But faith and yardsigns aren’t much more than a few fish and loaves in a basket, when compared to the multitudes of dollars and years of chipping away at the issue that are on the other side.
Hmmm. Well, that approach has worked before …
