If 8 is eventually repealed, does that mean those who were married have their licenses reinstated? Or would they have to reregister? I'm curious. And what does this mean practically for those who's marriages would be annulled if this officially passes?

Thanks for this post outlining a coherent and logical strategy. I so much want to hate on all the black people who voted to take away my rights, but feel it is much wiser to focus my anger and energy on the people who bankrolled the yes on 8 campaign. And, while we're at it, let's hire some real political pros to run the next campaign for our side instead of the standard issue group-hug PC mainstream 'gay agenda' groups that have proven their incompetence over and over again.

Unfortunately, they are far wealthier than you give them credit for. With every devoted member paying 10% of their entire income to the church and with an extensive missionary program raking in tons of converts all the time, it seems like they have an endless supply of money.

The Mormon church should lose their tax-exempt status if they're going to meddle in politics. I know so many good Mormons that it makes me furious that their church would rip families apart like this. ARGH!

Bankrupt the mormons? Good luck with that...

We should also work at having the Mormon's tax-exempt taken away.

We probably can't bankrupt them, so I like the earlier idea of gay days in SLC.

Suit is alread filed in CA to prevent 8 from taking effect:

As the vote counting continued this morning, opponents of Prop. 8 filed a lawsuit directly with the state Supreme Court - whose May 15 ruling legalized same-sex marriage - asking the justices to overturn the measure.

The suit argued that Prop. 8 would change the California Constitution in such fundamental ways - taking important rights away from a minority group - that it amounted to a constitutional revision, which requires approval by the Legislature before being submitted to the voters. The case was filed by the American Civil Liberties Union, Lamda Legal and the National Center for Lesbian Rights.

The same groups asked the court before the election to remove Prop. 8 from the ballot on those grounds. The justices refused, but left the door open for a post-election challenge.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/11/05/BA3B13UM63.DTL

And what Carollani said. They have deep, deep pockets.

Yeah, give them another concrete way for them to demonize you. Attack the gays, they rail against the Jesus and his tabernacles! Great idea.

Can we send Mormon temples in California a nice tax bill this year? They seem to be as much a political lobby as a religion. Would it be too much to hope that we could tax their donations as well?

Be aware, however, if you want to battle them dollar-for-dollar, that Mormons give 10% of their income to the church, and they are one of the fastest growing religions in the world. That's why it would be important to kneecap them with the tax bill first.

As a California voter I'm seriously considering moving to Utah, so that I can dedicate myself to fucking up their state the same way they felt entitled to fuck up mine. I'll sneak out at night and salt people's gardens. I'll rearrange all the books in the library so nobody can find anything. I'll import cane toads and release them into the wild. Turnabout is fair play.

This fight is not over yet. Lambda Legal, the ACLU and the National Center for Lesbian Rights filed a writ today to the California Supreme Court charging that the measure was improperly on the ballot because it was a revision of the state constitution (which requires a super majority vote and legislative approval) instead of a mere amendment (which only requires a majority vote). While the Court declined to rule on this issue before the vote, it left the door open for a post-election challenge, and the Court has tossed other measures passed by the voters on the same grounds in the past. More here: Legal Groups File Challenge to Proposition 8 I thought I had been un-married this morning, but now maybe not.

Mormon's got WAY too much scratch to ever go belly up over something like this.

I don't know if the knowledge of the LDS involvement in this measure was well know before the recent LA Times article, but it might have been good for the No on 8 campaign to fight fear baiting with a little xenophobia of their own.

Something to the tune of: "Prop 8 is a Mormon initiative, paid for buy the Church of Latter Day Saints in Utah, to FORCE California to live by THEIR beliefs..." etc, etc, etc. That ad would scare the shit out of most Californians.

Agree with DR and eclexia - if they want to pull this shit, then make them pay their taxes!

It's a good plan, but it's expensive for both sides, and their pockets are probably deeper.

They should stay the fuck in Utah.

i'm pretty sure the next step should be to run an initiative in california to ban marriage altogether. right?

Ok, get rid of your white guilt for a second and focus your energy on changing the minds of blacks. Mormons are crazy and always will be, blacks are willing to change.

QUIT blaming black people and QUIT trying to suppress the black vote already. Sweet jesus. Stop this stupid meme now.

Demographic groups voting for Proposition 8 (from most votes to least votes:
1) White men
2) Hispanic men
3) Asian men
4) Black women
5) Black men

Demographic groups voting against Proposition 8 (from most votes to least votes:
1) White women
2) Hispanic women
3) Asian women

Start suppressing the white male vote first if you want to play voter games. Maybe get something else on the ballot that appeals to women voters but hasn't historically brought out the male vote in droves to take away women's rights (eg, no abortion issues, no birth control issues, no equal pay issues, no discrimination issues).

@1 - no marriage license that resulted in an actual marriage is in danger.

You can't undo the contract.

So, if you're legally married in Cali, you still have your rights.

FIGHT FOR THEM!

Sure, while you're at it, why don't you try to bankrupt the Catholic church? After that, the oil companies.

Their financial resources are staggering. You can't possibly hope to outspend them.

Ok, I think we could make some of a difference if everyone who had an affair with a mormon leader or member of the Tenor Section of the Mormon Tabernacle Choir outed them!!!!!!!!!!!! However, I think #16 and 17 are on the better track. Address the white males, african american, and latin communities.

How could we effectivly decend on Salt Lake City without injecting them with a huge ammount of money for their economy. That can't happen, unless we find a gay mobile equivilent of Burning Man outside of the city.

Best,

Drew from Arkansas

17 you stupid fuck, more white people voted, per capita and % wise the blacks fucked you over.

While you're at it, add a proposition preventing religious groups from spending money on political campaigns without surrendering their tax-exempt status.

@21, 6.4% of the california electorate was black. That means 4.48% of the "yes" votes were from black people if you believe the "70%" statistic, which is completely wrong -- a total of 224 black people were exit polled in california, and it wasn't close to a random sample.

Say those exit poll figures are right (which they're not). If we brought the black vote down to the white male vote level, it would go from 4.48% yes to 3.26% yes. That would bring the "yes" vote down from 52% passing to 51% passing.

Meanwhile, if you brought the white male vote down to the white female vote level, the "yes" vote would go down from 52% passing to 49% passing. There ya go. Problem solved. Start suppressing the white male vote now if you want to go play voter games.

It wasn't just the Mormons, it was the Catholic Church and all the right wing evangelical churches who waged an effective fear-based campaign.

Sad to say, African-Americans played a large role as well.

Last night was a reminder that social change (equal rights, e.g.) takes lots of work by lots of people over a long period of time. The gay rights movements is still young. There is much more work ahead. The future is not in doubt--there is already a new generation for whom this is a non-issue. Equal rights for gays and lesbians will be a reality eventually.

I just can't figure out what to do next (once my desire for pure revenge dies down).

I am stuck in a Mormon owned nursing home until I can either walk out of here or find someone else to take care of me. This is just one of about 50 nursing homes they own in Washington State. The Mormon church make their money off of other people's misery.

@21,

You stupid fuck. Black voters make up less than 7 percent of the electorate. Even if they split 53 to 47 on Prop 8, just like Latinos, it still wouldn't have been enough to vote it down.

Alternately, we could just burn every LDS church to the ground.

@21: You're being the stupid fuck. You go after the biggest slice of the pie to effect change. With nearly every black vote going to Obama, it was the swinging of enough of the white vote (not the majority) that got Obama elected.

If that hadn't happened, it wouldn't have mattered if the black vote were 100% Obama. He would've lost.

where does it end?

you get 8 repealed. then two years later there's another initiative to repeal the repeal. then what? the next election you repeal the repeal to the repeal?

How about we start a group to legalize plural marriage IN UTAH?

That would really frost the Mormons. We could call the group "Americans for Traditional Marriage" and make them fight themselves over the issue. Best case, it passes and suddenly gays getting hitched does not look so strange anymore.

@29,

Initiatives need to be abolished, or at least need to require a super majority to pass. Initiatives' few successes are far outweighed by their abuses.

Gay-Americans and particularly those in CA are ALSO making history. A double jeopardy situation is playing out now in CA with some Gay citizens being married, and other Gay citizens being barred from marriage. Thank you to those that have posted links to CA papers and websites, the reading is very informative.

BTW with Gregoire back in office the Gay citizens of Washington have a good chance of gaining more marriage rights, and a citizens initiative CAN NOT amend our state constitution. WA just might get civil marriage equality sooner than we think, let's fight for a place at the table.

Obama will appoint supreme court justices. Or, hopefully, the ridiculous democratic majorities in congress will pass anti-discrimination laws. That's the only solution. We'll have a mish-mash of ridiculous state laws until federal law is on our side.

http://www.mormonsstoleourrights.com/

In addition to getting a repeal on the ballot in 2010, we also need to get an initiative on the ballot to change the ability to change the constitution from 50% to 66%. But I guess before we do that we need to remove the discrimination from the constitution THEN make it harder to ever happen again.

In addition to getting a repeal on the ballot in 2010, we also need to get an initiative on the ballot to change the ability to change the constitution from 50% to 66%. But I guess before we do that we need to remove the discrimination from the constitution THEN make it harder to ever happen again.

@27 - I think that may be why they always seem to built out of brick...

How about a proposition to remove Mormon tax exempt status? Take that "Right" away.....

In addition to getting a repeal on the ballot in 2010, we also need to get an initiative on the ballot to change the ability to change the constitution from 50% to 66%. But I guess before we do that we need to remove the discrimination from the constitution THEN make it harder to ever happen again.

In addition to getting a repeal on the ballot in 2010, we also need to get an initiative on the ballot to change the ability to change the constitution from 50% to 66%. But I guess before we do that we need to remove the discrimination from the constitution THEN make it harder to ever happen again.

In addition to getting a repeal on the ballot in 2010, we also need to get an initiative on the ballot to change the ability to change the constitution from 50% to 66%. But I guess before we do that we need to remove the discrimination from the constitution THEN make it harder to ever happen again.

@17, 21, etc:

Here's the breakdown on which groups voted which way on Prop. 8 courtesy Americablog:

Whites (63%): 49% yes, 51% no

Blacks (10%): 70% yes, 30% no

Hispanics (18%): 53% yes, 47% no

Asians (6%): 49% yes, 51% no

Others (3%): 51% yes, 49% no

Everyone here is talking about how much the Mormon Church gave to Prop 8. Everyone is 100% wrong. That church didn't give a penny to Prop 8. They just asked its members to individually give. That's where prop 8 raised all of its money.......not from the Mormon Church, but from the Mormon people. (and others)

Everyone here is talking about how much the Mormon Church gave to Prop 8. Everyone is 100% wrong. That church didn't give a penny to Prop 8. They just asked its members to individually give. That's where prop 8 raised all of its money.......not from the Mormon Church, but from the Mormon people. (and others)

I hate to be a spelling nerd, but misspellings in headlines drive me berserk. It's Pyrrhic, please.

Oh, and I hate when people say the Mormon church is the "fastest-growing" church. Sure it is - since they count all the deceased relatives their genealogy research digs up that they then baptize as Mormon.

That all being said, this whole thing with Prop. 8 makes me so sad. How can people actually vote against the basic right of two people who love one another to marry?

Is there a way to make Salt Lake City the new gay vacation destination? If they're going to invade our lives, why not invade theirs?

@46: No, no, no. Don't spend a dime in SLC. Gear up in Park City, then go and be gay in Salt Lake and Provo. Give them the aggravation but not the cash.

Why wait until 2010 for that repeal effort deadline? Apparently this last September, Schwarzenegger had already scheduled a Special Election for 2009, possibly as early as June. A repeal effort could kick into gear AsAP, while all the forces mustered to defeat 8 are still in touch with each other.
http://www.sacbee.com/static/weblogs/capitolalertlatest/015528.html

#30: You're on the wrong track. The LDS would LOVE to see polygamy legal again. Contrary to popular belief, the LDS did not "disavow" polygamy. To become a state, they reluctantly agreed to delay polygamy until the afterlife, when each good Mormon male gets his own planet to populate with his wives and offspring.

From IRS Publication 1828 Page 5:
"In general, no organization, including a church, may qualify for IRC section 501(c)(3) status if a substantial part of its activities is attempting to influence legislation (commonly known as lobbying)."

http://www.mormonsstoleourrights.com

@42 and everyone else who is blaming black people.

The problem is males. Black women were the only segment of women to vote for this, so if only women were voting Prop 8 would have failed. In absolute, as opposed to proportional numbers, white men were the biggest problem (and of the combined race/gender demographic they're the worst proportionally too). There are more persuadable people there--ten percent of white men is something like 3% overall, and that flips the result (a 3% swing is net 6%). 10% of all men is 5% of the electorate, for a 10% swing. On the other hand, to get the same effect from the African American population you'd have to change almost everyone's mind. (It's also worth noting that of the male vote, the black vote is LESS anti-gay than the white, Latino, or Asian vote.) Changing the minds of 10% of religious voters, regardless of race or gender, would also do it.

To look at the data and conclude this is an African American problem is not rational.

All of this is taking notoriously unreliable exit polling at face value.

To jrrrl (#17). I'm sure you a very nice person. But if you want to rank demographic groups in order of their homophobia (I'm not sure why you do), you need to look at the *percentages* with which each group voted for the hate amendment, not the gross vote totals.

A little knowledge is a ...

Here is an article, called "Unamendments," on when constitutional amendments are unconstitutional: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=803864
[available for free downloading]

@49: Sure, they'd love polygamy to be legal again. But they wouldn't be caught dead admitting that in public. The Catholics and Evangelicals would turn on them like rabid ferrets... and I think there hasn't been nearly enough internecine strife lately between Christian denominations. Let them bleed one of their own for a while, and then we can sneak a repeal of 8 behind their backs while they're distracted. (It only takes a few thousand signatures plus 50%. Should be easy enough.)

I love it when liberals try to disenfranchise and scapegoat black people instead of doing the hard work with their own white brothers. It just shows me how much work there is to be done. Obama has not solved all of our problems!

most of you are missing the whole picture. It doesn't matter if only 1 black person voted for the ban, that's one black person too many. really, how can you vote for change and the next takeaway someone else's rights? Martin Luther king stood up for the rights for everyone,not just black people and sad to say, a whole lot of them forgotten about that and they think they're in the clear. Just as they help to take away another person's rights, their rights can be taken away just as fast. even more sadder is that they will hide behind their beliefs to justify their hate. We really need to not just revoke the Mormon's tax status, but all religious organizations. it just shows us more that we need to start teaching as well as fighting.

You need to change minds, not organizations.
1. The Mormon church didn't donate anything to the campaign, it was the members of the church.
2. Mormons are 2% of the electorate in CA, they're responsible? Really?
3. Don't suggest that things would be better if only the black people didn't vote. It is moronic and tragically ironic that you would want to exclude them in a process to broaden inclusion.
4. Quit making total asses of yourselves.