Gay Marriage to Alfred: Your Thoughts

As Mark Leno pointed out on Saturday, here in SF, Prop 8 won 52%-48%. Prop 22, in 2000, won 61.4% to 38.6% with the same wording.

Michael, surely you mean California voted that way, not San Francisco?

one of the reasons civil rights protests (and the Gandhi-an tactics they were based on) worked so well was because they provoked an inappropriately violent response on the part of the opposition, and for the first time the mass media was there to document it. It wasn't that a bunch of people showed up in public angry about something - it was the fact that they're showing up resulted in them getting beaten, hosed down, attacked with dogs, etc. and those images went out into the national press, which garnered sympathy for the civil rights movement on a previously unheard of level. That shit is not going to happen this time around. Law enforcement is smarter now. And if anyone is successfully playing the victim card, its the right-wing fundies who are complaining about being "threatened" and "harassed" etc.

I hope its clear that I am entirely supportive of the cause here. I am just concerned about effective tactics. The tactics that are the most emotionally satisfying are not necessarily the ones that will result in the desired outcome.

x-postiness

protests can and still do have an effect imo. especially when the other (wrong) side doesn't have a reasonable argument beyond bigotry and some lame shit about how marriage must be preserved. the protests here can and perhaps are working because it's such a one-sided issue.

So, protests need to get to Kent State levels and circumstances to be effective? Please try again. And I'm glad you're trying, but come on.

there's no mention of Kent State in his post, Mackro, nor is the analogy apt.

There was some venting on Saturday here, but many of the speeches were more about equality than revenge and were intended to appeal even to religious people by keeping the argument about fairness and equality under the law. As a positive sign of an inclusive movement, I think they're useful for PR and as an opportunity for the aggrieved to bond and feel less hopeless, they're good for the base.

fair enough - xp

Old people *can* change once they find out their loved ones -- friends, family -- are gay or have close friends who are gay. Not all of them do, but I don't completely buy the "old people have to die out before we get anywhere" meme.

Defection at the fringes ain't a trend. People currently under 40 were overwhelmingly against 8; people currently over 60 were overwhlemingly against.

The difference was 300,000 votes. Next year a whole bunch of under 40s will be old enough to vote for the first time, and a whole bunch of over 60s will be dead. You do the math.

xpost and yeah those are Cali numbers SF was 25% for 75% against

wow, 1 in 4 people in SF or SF county voted for Prop 8? (sorry, I guess I can't be happy with any data today.. apologies)

xpost and yeah those are Cali numbers SF was 25% for 75% against

sigh, i love SF (even taking what mackro just said into account)

http://womenshistory.about.com/od/suffrage1900/a/august_26_wed.htm

oh look, they protested too and no one turned a hose on them, yet their cause was victorious

I think, Shakey, you are conflating "one reason why the Civil Rights Movement protests worked" with "the only reason protests work".

Honestly, I think the more effective thing to do (in terms of making a rhetorical point, not in terms of making an actual legislative change) would be to organize a lobby to completely divorce the legal status associated with marriage from the marriage union itself and make civil unions mandatory for things like property ownership/transferal upon death, medical access rights, etc etc and make all people who want those things to have a civil union, as we are talking about civil rights here and not religious rights.

xp: Scary idiots live everywhere, guys! This is not news!

l.a. county was REALLY FUCKING CLOSE -- it ended up being something like 51%/49%, but toward the end there was something like a half percentage point difference.

http://imgs.sfgate.com/c/pictures/2008/11/13/ba-sfvote1114_gr_SFCG1226624392.jpg

A little outreach will be required, it looks.

xp: Scary idiots live everywhere, guys! This is not news!

I know I know.. just the idea that 25% of SF is filled with Raymonds (of Raymond & Peter fame). SHUDDER.

(granted, I'm avoiding the can of worms labeled "race")

see, the thing is when we all get pissed about conservatives saying we live in a center right country, the reason we get pissed is because they are right and they really shouldn't be

i think what is now "center right" was once "middle left" maybe?

HD OTM up there aways. Thoughts I had while walking back home on Saturday: ministers and preachers may perform marriages because the state allows them too, and what definition of marriage works for all, at its most basic level? All I could come up with was "mutually beneficial, non-exploitative legal partnership". Let churches layer an extra dose of sacred bond and sacrament, etc on top of that basis if they want to.

"no" voters in l.a. county were on the westside, santa monica, malibu, hollywood, los feliz, the valley, downtown, pasadena, basically all the educated and somewhat affluent areas. the areas with the "yes" voters are the poor ones with A LOT (seriously a lot) of churches.

Jaq and HD, OTM

The can of worms called race has to be faced, though, Mackro. No on 8 didn't even try to talk to some black churches 'cause they figured they wouldn't be interested - self-defeating prophesy. You can't change the minds of people you don't talk to, especially when you're not treating them as ordinary people but as racial stereotypes.

Oh I agree the can of worms must be opened as a public issue. I just didn't want to open it on ILX today, especially since we opened it two weeks ago.

Back to legalizing gay marriages/unions, it depends on the state, ultimately.

Not sure if it's worth a gamble in 2009, but a pro-gay-marriage/repeal-Defense-Of-Marriage-Act initiative has chances of passing in Washington state -- barely. Washington and Oregon are each different from California in that there are less churches in each overall, the BIG lefty cities in each state makes up a bigger chunk of the population, and among the churches, there's a large percentage of Anglican churches that have states they would honor gay marriages -- which doesn't seem to be the case in California.

"that have stated" not "states".

The Anglican/Episcopalian churches in SF were among the first and most vocally supportive of the gay community.

How much of a percentage of California do Anglican churches make (among other churches)?

Good grief, I go away for an hour...

If anything I see the protests almost as a sign of gauging things. And I have to say that if you had told me up through recent years that a loud and noticeable pro-gay marriage protest on all four corners of a busy intersection near the biggest mall in all of OC was not only going to happen but that nearly 99% of the reaction to it was loudly positive in turn, then I wouldn't've believed you. And damn if it wasn't nice to be proven wrong.

What was interesting to me on Saturday was that there was less of the anti-Mormon, anti-anything feeling about it all and more of a positive vibe about making this a broad civil rights thing; not specifically pro-gay but anti-enshrining discrimination in the State Constitution. If the appeal is braod and not made with too much finger pointing , I think the goal can be achieved with greater ease and speed than if it looks too 'shrill' and 'special interest'y.

see, the thing is when we all get pissed about conservatives saying we live in a center right country, the reason we get pissed is because they are right and they really shouldn't be

― Black Seinfeld (HI DERE), Monday, November 17, 2008 3:01 PM (9 minutes ago) Bookmark Suggest

its not really any more true than us being 'center left' - it depends on issue to issue

i've read that the jewish faith doesn't have an official stance on gay marriage because the orthodox jews are against it and the reform (more liberal) jews are in support of it or don't have a problem with it. most non-religious jews are bleeding-heart lefties.

Mackro, not much I assume. It's pretty old school Anglo in its origins and modern immigration has favored the relative growth of the number of Catholics and Evangelicals.

Having been raised Anglican, I can assure you that we're generally a more freethinking and inclusive bunch out here, and we're also a distinct minority in terms of religion.

ok, lol at Wikipedia, I know, but I grabbed chunks from the Religion section of California, Washington, and Oregon each...

California:

The largest Christian denominations by number of adherents in 2000 were the Roman Catholic Church with 10,079,310; The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints with 529,575; and the Southern Baptist Convention with 471,119. Jewish congregations had 994,000 adherents.[25]

The state has the most Roman Catholics of any state and a large Protestant population, a large American Jewish community, and an American Muslim population.

With a Jewish population estimated at more than 550,000, Los Angeles has the second-largest Jewish community in North America.

California also has the largest Muslim community population in the United States, an estimated 3.4 percent of the population, mostly residing in Southern California. According to figures, approximately 100,000 Muslims reside in San Diego.[26]

...

Washington:

The religious affiliations of Washington's population are:[13]

Christian – 63%
Protestant – 29%
Lutheran – 6%
Baptist – 6%
Methodist – 4%
Presbyterian – 3%
Other Protestant or general Protestant – 10%
Catholic – 20%
Other Christian – 11%
Latter-day Saint – 3%
Other Religions – 5%
Refused – 6%
No religion – 25%
The largest denominations by number of adherents in 2000 were the Roman Catholic Church with 716,133; the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints with 178,000; and the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America with 127,854.[14]

As with many other Western states, the percentage of Washington's population identifying themselves as "non-religious" is higher than the national average. The percentage of non-religious people in Washington is the highest of any state.[15]

...

Oregon:

The largest denominations by number of adherents in 2000 were the Roman Catholic Church with 348,239; the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints with 104,312; and the Assemblies of God with 49,357.[60]

Of the U.S. states, Oregon has the fourth largest percentage of people identifying themselves as "non-religious", at 21 percent, after Colorado, Washington, and Vermont.[61] However, 75–79% of Oregonians identify themselves as being Christian [1], and some hold deeply conservative convictions. During much of the 1990s a group of conservative Christians formed the Oregon Citizens Alliance, and unsuccessfully tried to pass legislation to prevent "gay sensitivity training" in public schools and legal benefits for homosexual couples.[62]

Oregon also contains the largest community of Russian Old Believers to be found in the United States.[63] Additionally, Oregon, particularly the Portland metropolitan area, has become known as a center of non-mainstream spirituality.[citation needed] The Northwest Tibetan Cultural Association, reported to be the largest such institution of its kind,[citation needed] is headquartered in Portland, and the popular New Age film What the Bleep Do We Know? was filmed and had its premiere in Portland. There are an estimated 6 to 10 thousand Muslims of various ethnic backgrounds in Oregon.[64]

practicing Episcopalians are dying out faster than homophobes

I remember going to Midnight Mass at Grace Cathedral here in SF as teenager (not out of faith but because I liked the spectacle) and being shocked in the early mid-eighties to hear a sermon spoken with sorrow and pity about the nascent AIDS epidemic. When I was a kid in the Sierras, all the Xtians were decidedly anti-gay.

What does that 63% Christian in Wahsington mean? 63% are Xtian and they break down like this?

I go away for 15-minutes... anyway Dan largely OTM. I totally agree about the distinguishing civil rights from religious rites angle

You can't change the minds of people you don't talk to, especially when you're not treating them as ordinary people but as racial stereotypes.

So fucking OTM btw; one thing that pisses me off about every group of people, regardless of whether it is an ethnic group, a political group, a sexual orientation group, or whetever, is the instinctual desire to identify everyone outside of the group as lesser. Every single group out there does it and it really disgusts me. People would be much better off if they realized this.

(btw I am a group of one)

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints with 529,575

Jewish congregations had 994,000 adherents.

see, this pisses me off. we could have taken those fuckers by their funny underwear.

Those WA numbers are whack and in conflict amongst themselves.

I just think that pointing fingers at poor (and religious) black neighborhoods or Latino neighborhoods is counter-productive. A lot of San Franciscans who voted for 8 did so because the yes on 8 campaign told them that no would mean that homosexuality would have to be taught in schools and other such nonsense and if no on 8 had had the outreach to realize how their opponents message (for lack of calling it outright bullshit) was penetrating those neighborhoods, they might of countered it.

'have countered', Jesus wept.

but... homosexuality is already "taught" in schools! this was the funniest part of that yes on 8 campaign to me.

Well, that's certainly where I learned to be gay.

SB 777 yo

Those WA numbers are whack and in conflict amongst themselves.

The tab characters disappeared in the text paste. :(. Sorry. Most of that list goes under the breakdown of "Christian". I think if you stop the subsection before "other religions" it makes more sense.

The statement that LDS was 2nd largest after Catholic doesn't jive with the 20%/3% numbers.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Washington#Religion

There's a sub-subsection, too. Maybe that makes more sense?

What was interesting to me on Saturday was that there was less of the anti-Mormon, anti-anything feeling about it all and more of a positive vibe about making this a broad civil rights thing; not specifically pro-gay but anti-enshrining discrimination in the State Constitution.

That's way fucking cool and admirable! I wish I could be the same. As an ex-mormon right now, I am even more embarrassed than usual and really want to slap the fucking bitch Mormons all over America who rallied aagainst a thing that was none of their fucking goddamn business (since most do not even live in California).

Fuck those fucking shitpie assfuck dipshits.

Oh, I've felt that way, Abbott, I just don't want this to turn into THAT kind of fight.

If WA (or the country as a whole) ever ends up with some sort of civil-union thing that nobody dares call "marriage" even though it is, the wife and I want to get divorced and immediately get civil-unionized. If marriage is only for churches they can have it; just let us file taxes together, visit each other in the hospital, adopt kids, etc.