Slog

News & Arts

Line Out

Music & Nightlife

Wednesday, November 4, 2009

Gay Marriage: Who's Ready for Round 32?

Posted by Dan Savage on Wed, Nov 4, 2009 at 1:48 PM

The marriage equality fight moves to New Jersey... where yesterday voters turned their pro-marriage equality Democratic governor John Corzine out of the office and elected anti-marriage equality Republican Chris Christie. The New Jersey legislature is about to pass a marriage equality bill, however, and Corzine has promised to sign it, defeat or no defeat. I don't know if New Jersey has a referendum process or a "people's veto" and I'm not going to check because right now I don't wanna know. Garden State Equality brought out a very effective, very moving ad today...

...but our side brought out lots of very effective, very moving ads in Maine. More info here.

UPDATE: Beth in NJ writes in comments...

We do NOT have a "people's veto" or referendum process or anything like that in New Jersey, and any proposed constitutional amendment has to be approved by 3/5ths of each house of the state legislature to even get on the ballot for the people to vote on it. If we can get a law passed and signed before Corzine leaves office, it will be very hard for the bigoted assholes to get it overturned.

Share via

  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Newsvine
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  • del.icio.us
  • Email
 

Comments (31) RSS

Oldest First Unregistered On Registered On Add a comment
1
Everyone deserves decent health coverage.
You shouldn't have to "marry" a lesbian to get it.

What GLBT who are not in a relationship?
Is health coverage only for people that hook up?
Posted by FAIL . . . . I see NJ as #32... on November 4, 2009 at 1:57 PM
Beth in NJ 2
We do NOT have a "people's veto" or referendum process or anything like that in New Jersey, and any proposed constitutional amendment has to be approved by 3/5ths of each house of the state legislature to even get on the ballot for the people to vote on it. If we can get a law passed and signed before Corzine leaves office, it will be very hard for the bigoted assholes to get it overturned.
Posted by Beth in NJ on November 4, 2009 at 2:14 PM
3
@2 is correct. also, Maine only voted to veto a statute from the leg. they did not enshrine a constitutional amendment into their law like Prop 8 did.

here is a link to the process in NJ which has to be initiated by the legislature http://www.iandrinstitute.org/New%20IRI%…
Posted by maineshame on November 4, 2009 at 2:22 PM
Will in Seattle 4
Sometimes, just sometimes, it's not about gay marriage.

Like in NJ. Which had very little to do with why people voted the way they did (the incumbent is/was a skunk).
Posted by Will in Seattle http://www.facebook.com/WillSeattle on November 4, 2009 at 2:27 PM
Loveschild 5
So long as the people are allowed to exercise their right in the ballot, then I say the sooner the better.

I strongly believe that cases of impositions like in VT, CT, NH (and what could come to WA once the sheep clothing of domestic partnerships is turn into a full blown litigation for gay marriage) have served as a warning to those states yet undecided. And just like in Maine as well as every other state were the people have demanded to be allowed to voice thru the vote their opinion on this social matter it too (marriage) will be upheld in NJ.

If @ 2,3 is correct then this issue needs to be address at once in order for the political process (whatever the outcome) to be a legitimate one.
Posted by Loveschild http://www.samaritanspurse.org/index.php/articles/responding_to_haiti_earthquake/ on November 4, 2009 at 2:32 PM
6
LovesChild is a stupid cunt.
Posted by Gray Coyote on November 4, 2009 at 2:45 PM
7
Loveschild, we all agree that people are allowed and should be encouraged to voice their opinion at the ballot box. But we all know that when the public opinion doesn't go the way of the fundies, they lose their shit and start going about all sorts of legal (and sometimes illegal) backflips to overturn it.

I love that ad. The end has the most significant fact stated plainly that it seems so many fundies overlook:

It won't affect your marriage.
But it will mean everything to them.

If the fundies really were concerned about preserving the sanctity of marriage, they'd be more offended by people holding WoW- or Star Wars-themed marriages than two gays being married.
Posted by Knat on November 4, 2009 at 2:56 PM
8
Fuck the state that bore me.

I am furious at Christopher Daggett, the liberal independent that took 6 percent of the vote that would have most likely gone to the Corzine. Why do independents stay in the race when it is clear that they are taking votes from the candidate that they most align with politically.

Now we're going to have to deal with that smug-faced, hate-spewing ass bag for 4 years.

LC, I'm so excited for the day when the old folks of this country have died off and you see the people of this generation have their say. You're fighting a losing battle. (I'm not minding metaphorical kicks to gut you collect along the way.)
Posted by Normal Adjacent on November 4, 2009 at 2:57 PM
9
Hey Hateful Bigot (#5)...is your life any different today as it looks like the awful gays are gonna be allowed to have some more legal rights?

And Hateful Bigot, how about the 47% in Maine who don't buy your garbage? Their worth is not equal to the 52% hateful bigots like yourself? I don't think they demanded one thing about being heard, but, they were.

And here, if 'we' win...Does God just hate WA State? Did God only have enough power for Maine yesterday, and just couldn't hack it here?

Oh, and Hateful Bigot, how is your life and those of you who worship whomever any different in the past 5 years that MA has had same-sex marriage? I mean, your day-to-day bigoted lives, not your spiritual, God- will-smite-me-cause-gays-are-married beliefs.
Did you go get gas and happened upon a same-sex couple with some legal rights?
Did they stop you from getting gas? Or buying groceries? Or worshipping in your bigoted church?

Oh, and Hateful Bigot. Shut the fuck up about letting people have another popularity contest about gay folks. We all know the Magic Book is more popular than us in some quarters and we all could give a crap.

Hateful Bigot. Go to Hell. And take these bigots with you.

http://www.bangordailynews.com/detail/12…
Posted by chic65 on November 4, 2009 at 3:04 PM
Sargon Bighorn 10
Church poisoned Americans that are str8 have no clue as to the struggles of Gay Americans (BlackWhiteYellowRedBrownBlueGreen) and their fight for civil rights and equality. It's always shocking to read the post of Hetero Americans vomiting out that inequality and bigotry are fine and dandy and part of God's will. Of course their minds have been tainted with poison from Churches that teach hate and darkness. As Jesus said," out of the heart's abundance the mouth speaks". The vomit that comes from the mouths of these individuals shows the rotting condition of their heart.
Posted by Sargon Bighorn on November 4, 2009 at 3:27 PM
leek 11
They are not as adorable as OUR older lesbians in a commercial, but those accents are pretty sweet.

Posted by leek on November 4, 2009 at 3:31 PM
12
chic65 - Thank you for getting to it before me. I've (unfortunately) read a lot of Loveschild's bigoted comments on the slog. I'm not sure why LC and others like her are so in the dark. Look LC, no one cares about your religion as it relates to politics. In fact, the Constitution was written in such a way that religion SHOULDN'T play any role in determining policy. The fact that you think it does just shows your ignorance. You are welcome to live your life however you want and I don't pursecute you for it, but you are seeking to do just that to others. Who made you the moral judge? Do you think that you as a religious person, and that goes for anyone of religious faith, have the market cornered on morality?

One day, LC, your own children and grandchildren (if they don't already) will be ashamed of you for your views. They will think of you as bigoted and out of touch. Some of them may even rejoice at your passing as they will know that the world just got a little less hateful without you. My grandfather was a bigoted hateful person too and I am glad that he knew how ashamed we all were of him before he passed.
Posted by are you really serious? on November 4, 2009 at 3:35 PM
13
are you - You're welcome. I've got absolutely no patience for these assholes any longer. Not that I ever really had any to begin with.

As I've learned on other comment threads this past couple of weeks, and after looking at that awful Reject 'causes' page that Dominic posted...we will never change their bigoted minds. Their brainwashed by their churches. Stone walls. No reasoning whatsoever.
And, it's interesting how much I've read about the word bigot...why we should or shouldn't use it. And that's from gay people too! But, I choose to keep using it cause what else do you call them?

They're bigots. And, boy, do they HATE being called bigots.

10 minutes to more results. Shit better be good.
Posted by chic65 on November 4, 2009 at 3:53 PM
Loveschild 14
@7 The pro-traditional marriage/family side is not the one bringing this issues to the courts or lobbying rogue legislators who seek to silence the people. We are the ones telling them, you know, let the people exercise their right in the ballot box and decide what values they want in their communities and enshrined in their government. That's our foundation. That's democracy in action.

Knat, believe it or not I'm all for the above ad, I don't agree with it, but I'm all for them and you making your case to the people of NJ. Likewise I can only hope that you feel the same for our side making our case to them and not obstructing a democratic referendum process by the people.

If you truly believe that people need to be allowed and should be encouraged to voice their opinion at the ballot box then you and i can disagree, have a polite debate and at the end of the day let the people decide without threatening to further litigate like the gay side usually does, behaving like sore losers (that's why constitutional amendments have been brought up).

The people of NJ (as all states) have shown that they want to take an active role in deciding how their government works and that includes how their institutions function and whether or not they need to be redefined. I know that I need to start focusing on this upcoming battle starting from tomorrow on to contribute in whatever small way I can.
Posted by Loveschild http://www.samaritanspurse.org/index.php/articles/responding_to_haiti_earthquake/ on November 4, 2009 at 4:12 PM
15
God said Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve.
Posted by Friend on November 4, 2009 at 4:19 PM
16
Hey everybody listen to Loveschild for the rational truth.
Posted by Friend on November 4, 2009 at 4:25 PM
17
Remember Maine: Full Federal Equality Now!
By SHERRY WOLF

IN STARK contrast to the surge of pro-LGBT activism, and legislative and legal progress in recent months, Maine voters overturned equal marriage rights on Election Day by a margin of 53 percent to 47 percent.

Voter turnout of nearly 50 percent, local efforts by 8,000 volunteers—many of them straight—and a national blitz of phone banking to try to sway Mainers to uphold equal marriage was not sufficient to retain same-sex marriage in that state. Maine’s Question 1—similar to California’s Proposition 8 that reversed same-sex marriage rights in that state exactly a year ago—once again placed civil rights on the ballot, this time in an off-year election.

In Washington state, a new law that greatly expands the rights of LGBT couples—though doesn’t grant marriage itself—was approved by voters, but by an unexpectedly narrow margin of 51 percent to 49 percent.

The failure of the same-sex marriage forces in Maine’s No on 1 campaign to retain marriage equality passed earlier this year by the legislature highlights four central problems: 1) Civil rights activists are weakest outside of urban areas where the financial and institutional resources of the right can dominate rural politics; 2) President Obama and the Democrats have failed to deliver on their promise of “fierce advocacy” of LGBT civil rights; 3) LGBT rights must be enacted into law by the federal government; and 4) Civil rights should not be reduced to election fodder to be manipulated by well-financed bigots.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

NATIONWIDE, LGBT activists scrambled in a monumental effort to try to stop right-wingers in Maine from succeeding in what was often termed a “mini-Prop 8” effort that relied on money from the Catholic Church and blitzed the media with lies about how gay marriage would be taught in the schools and imposed on religious institutions.

Local groups will assess the No on 1 organizing efforts in coming weeks, but suffice it to say that despite what appears to have been an energetic and collaborative campaign, equal marriage has lost in every state it has been put to a popular vote—31 in all. Despite the fact that the No on 1 campaign, Protect Maine Equality, raised $4 million and the anti-same-sex marriage forces raised only $2.5 million, the strategy of statewide ballot initiatives plays to activists’ weaknesses, especially in non-urban areas.

In addition to the purposely confusing language used by the right in these initiatives—voting “yes” denied equality, voting “no” would have retained it—larger population centers create opportunities for activists to reach people in groups, as in Portland, Maine, where the vote was an overwhelming 73 percent against Question 1. At University of Maine’s Orono campus, 81 percent of students voted against taking away equal marriage rights, also showing the generation gap that persists on this question.

Similarly, in Washington state, it was urban King County that voted overwhelmingly for the “everything but marriage” referendum, while the less populated eastern part of the state voted against it.

Just three weeks after the massively successful LGBT National Equality March that drew more than 200,000 people demanding full federal equality now, conservatives are punching back. Right-wing bigots like Pat Robertson have attacked recently enacted federal hate crimes legislation, saying, “The noose has tightened around the necks of Christians to keep them from speaking out on certain moral issues.”

In the face of this hostility and legal challenges, the Democrats have been passive at best and hostile at worst. The White House and Congress have failed to deliver so far on promises to reverse decades of legal discrimination in federal and state laws.

When Attorney General Eric Holder was asked about Maine’s Question 1, he said that he and President Obama “are of the view it is for states to make these decisions.” Holder later said to one blogger, “I don’t really know enough about the referendum over there to comment.” As National Equality March organizer Cleve Jones said on MSNBC of President Obama’s silence on Question 1, “This is a far cry from the fierce advocacy he promised us in his campaign.”

Even more outrageous, not only did the Democratic National Committee (DNC) refuse to help finance the No on 1 campaign, but it expressed crass indifference to LGBT rights when the DNC’s organization “Organizing for America” (formerly known as “Obama for America”) e-mailed Maine voters the day before the election about getting involved…in the gubernatorial contest in New Jersey (which lost)!

The failure of the Democrats to hold onto huge gains made in the 2008 election in New Jersey and Virginia gubernatorial races—and the flaccid response from Obama’s base in this off-year election—reveals that the inability of the Democrats in power to deliver on their promises is alienating progressives.

“President Obama and his team were zero help in this critical battle, and in the last week might actually have hurt us,” said David Mixner, long-time Democratic Party activist and initiator of the call for the National Equality March.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

MAINE’S REVERSAL on marriage equality proves once again the bankruptcy of the state-by-state, issue-by-issue strategy upheld by many establishment LGBT forces. This approach concedes that civil rights must remain on the precarious turf of the states, in a country where one Constitution is supposed to guarantee equal protection under the law.

Activists can no longer accept that LGBT civil rights can be attained outside the federal government. Even if Maine voters had rejected Question 1, most marriage rights like Social Security are only gained through the federal government and married LGBT people in Maine, as in the equal marriage states, would have remained second-class citizens under the law.

The right’s strategy of placing LGBT civil rights on state ballots for a vote places the battle for human equality on an unstable and hostile terrain. Why should anyone have to battle in each locality for equal treatment in a country where the Fourteenth Amendment—passed after the Civil War!—guarantees equal protection to all U.S. citizens? Why should LGBT people have to repeatedly reassert that we are equal human beings in every state and municipality 45 years after the Civil Rights Act prohibited discrimination?

Civil rights cannot wait for the approval of reactionaries. According to that logic, Blacks, too, should have waited for public opinion to catch up with their demands. But in 1968, one year after the Supreme Court struck down bans on interracial marriage as unconstitutional, Gallup polls showed that only 20 percent of Americans approved of marriages between Blacks and whites.

The failure of Maine’s No on 1 campaign highlights why the National Equality March demand for full equality in all matters of civil law in all 50 states must continue to be the rallying cry of grassroots activists across the country.

This is the Week of Initiative called by Equality Across America, the national network attempting to gather these groupings to map out a national strategy to continue this fight. In cities and towns across the country this week, activists will be marching and protesting this defeat in Maine—and celebrating victories in Washington state and Kalamazoo, Michigan, where pro-LGBT referenda passed.

Remember Maine. Get out and organize for full federal equality now!

SHERRY WOLF is the author of Sexuality and Socialism: History, Politics and Theory of LGBT Liberation (Haymarket Books, 2009) and was on the steering committee of the National Equality March.
More...
Posted by Zepol on November 4, 2009 at 4:31 PM
18
Main Entry: big·ot
Pronunciation: \ˈbi-gət\
Function: noun
Etymology: French, hypocrite, bigot
Date: 1660
: a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices.

Sounds alot like some of the people who have posted on this board and are in support of "gay marriage": Obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinion.
Posted by Friend on November 4, 2009 at 4:32 PM
19
I think only Adam and Eve should be allowed to marry.
Posted by Irving on November 4, 2009 at 4:32 PM
20
Yes, Hateful Bigot, people should have let Plessy v. Ferguson stand rather than being whiny sore losers.

Hey, here's an idea: let's put your civil rights up for a popular vote in Forsyth County.
Posted by Meat Weapon on November 4, 2009 at 4:39 PM
21
I'd like to think that Loveschild is simply playing devil's advocate... There's no such thing as a 'polite discussion' that ends with people losing their dignity & their basic civil rights. There just isn't. If you people really had the faith you claim you do it wouldn't matter who did what because your god would protect you. How ironic then that you run to the government to cover your sorry ass. My rights are not a matter of opinion. Religion is a choice. Sexuality isn't.
Posted by capricorn44 on November 4, 2009 at 4:39 PM
22
Hey Hateful Bigot and 'friend' (Hateful Bigot 2 from here on in):

You both getting to vote on ME.
Just plain unfair when YOU are not affected one IOTA by what I do in my life. But, by allowing you to vote on MY life, yes, MY life...you get to affect it. In the negative sense.

If these amendments, referendums, initiatives said 'If you support the law just passed which says that same-sex marriages are legal, you will be taxed 30% more, or we will firebomb your house"...then sure, I can see you voting against the interests of others because you are directly affected.

However, no one, let me repeat, NO ONE is affected by two people marrying except the TWO PEOPLE MARRYING.

Bigot (seems like you neglected to copy and paste the final sentence)
Main Entry: big·ot
Pronunciation: \ˈbi-gət\
Function: noun
Etymology: French, hypocrite, bigot
Date: 1660
: a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices; especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group (as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance.

I repeat. Hateful Bigot(s).
Posted by chic65 on November 4, 2009 at 5:47 PM
23
Oh, and Hateful Bigot, you say this:

"The people of NJ (as all states) have shown that they want to take an active role in deciding how their government works"

Yes, it's called voting for your representatives, for that is what they are elected for. To represent the electorate.
But you bigots love to second-guess them when they are according benefits and legal rights to a group that you don't approve of.

Hateful Bigot.
Posted by chic65 on November 4, 2009 at 5:53 PM
24
when the queers here get all "hey marriage is a Civil Right!" we just want to howl- it's so goshdarn funny...
Posted by U guys R hysterical! on November 4, 2009 at 6:57 PM
25
This is ridiculous. The point is you shouldn't get to vote on things that have no effect on your life. My marriage would not effect a fundie, would it? Your marriage does not affect me, so I stay out of the high divorce rates.
And as a huge star ears fan there could be no more sacred a marriage (this excludes the new ones).
Posted by Mongolianlez on November 4, 2009 at 11:40 PM
Southern Gentleman 26
Hey, what if a majority of people got together to vote to take away Loveschild's rights? Then it would be wrong, right? By the way Loveschild, I realize you're not interested in facts, but it's people who defend your moronic, prejudiced, and poorly thought-out positions who are the "rogue politicians". You know, as in Going Rogue. How'd that work out for you in New York?
Posted by Southern Gentleman http://just-write.contentquake.com on November 5, 2009 at 5:44 AM
Rob in Baltimore 27
Loveschild, we will continue to bring this to the courts, as denying us equal rights is unconstitutional. Make no mistake, you will lose in the long run.
Posted by Rob in Baltimore http://domaflipflop.com/ on November 5, 2009 at 6:01 AM
28
Ah. So this is why the Democrats were so eager for Mainers (Maineinites?) to start working on New Jersey.

/snark
Posted by Sili on November 5, 2009 at 8:50 AM
29
I am gay and I oppose gay marriage. Sorry but it is not a civil rights issue and the very concept of same sex marriage is absurd. I am proud of what I am, but marriage still means a man and a woman.
Posted by Steven M on November 5, 2009 at 11:54 AM
TheFang 30
@8 polls showed over and over and over and over that Daggett's supporters were mainly Christie backers or "anyone but Corzine" folks. Daggett may be a social liberal, but before he ran as an independent he was a Republican and served in the administrations of several Repub. Gov's.

Also, this bill is super close to passing here in Jersey. No one really seems to have any problem with it, there's been no big deal made about it. All we have to do is just make sure it gets passed by the end of the session. I wouldn't worry.
Now the medical marijuana bill moving thru the legislature that's another issue...
Posted by TheFang on November 5, 2009 at 8:56 PM
31
You canNOT always trust the majority when a minority's rights are up for vote. 50% approval is not enough validation to abuse a smaller segment of the population. What if there was a vote where 10% of the population would be used for slavery to benefit the other 90%? If majority vote passed on that, would it be right? Would you dare to call the new slaves "sore losers" if they protested? ...

The US government was designed with checks and balances written into it so that everyone is represented, even minorities. This is why we allow the court to check the popular vote and vice versa, it's not about one group having total power. When there is a dispute like the one over marriage in the end we turn to our founding documents like the Constitution, and if a practice violates that, a suit will bring it to the Supreme Court until the situation is corrected. That is what is happening now as Ted Olson brings Prop 8 to the Supreme Court in appeal, due to its violation of the Due Process Clause, the Equal Protection Clause, and more.
Posted by fernweher on November 16, 2009 at 8:19 PM

Add a comment

 

All contents © Index Newspapers, LLC
1535 11th Ave (Third Floor), Seattle, WA 98122
Contact Info | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use