<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Prop 8 Exit Polling</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2008/11/05/5894/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2008/11/05/5894</link>
	<description>News, analysis and fact-checking of anti-gay rhetoric</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 25 May 2013 02:47:28 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.4.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: CLS</title>
		<link>http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2008/11/05/5894/comment-page-1#comment-22012</link>
		<dc:creator>CLS</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 06 Nov 2008 19:51:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=5894#comment-22012</guid>
		<description>Having been active in the gay rights campaign for 30 years I can&#039;t buy the argument that gays failed to reach out to the Black community. The reality is that the Black community is more fundamentalist than are whites and have been more antigay at all times. This is not an attitude that &quot;crept&quot; in there. It has resided there for as long as anyone knows.

While African-Americans have been subjected to horrible legal disadvantages and bigotry that doesn&#039;t mean they are immune from bigotry themselves. And antigay bigotry has been, and is, rampant there. While it is to our advantage to reach out to everyone the responsibility for bigotry lies with the bigot not with their victim. Whites who attacked the rights of Blacks were responsible for their bigotry, we didn&#039;t blame Blacks. And Blacks who vote agaisnt the rights of gays are responsible for their prejudices not gays. Don&#039;t blame the victime here.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Having been active in the gay rights campaign for 30 years I can&#8217;t buy the argument that gays failed to reach out to the Black community. The reality is that the Black community is more fundamentalist than are whites and have been more antigay at all times. This is not an attitude that &#8220;crept&#8221; in there. It has resided there for as long as anyone knows.</p>
<p>While African-Americans have been subjected to horrible legal disadvantages and bigotry that doesn&#8217;t mean they are immune from bigotry themselves. And antigay bigotry has been, and is, rampant there. While it is to our advantage to reach out to everyone the responsibility for bigotry lies with the bigot not with their victim. Whites who attacked the rights of Blacks were responsible for their bigotry, we didn&#8217;t blame Blacks. And Blacks who vote agaisnt the rights of gays are responsible for their prejudices not gays. Don&#8217;t blame the victime here.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Duncan</title>
		<link>http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2008/11/05/5894/comment-page-1#comment-21994</link>
		<dc:creator>Duncan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 06 Nov 2008 17:17:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=5894#comment-21994</guid>
		<description>I can&#039;t say whether Ben&#039;s depiction of the campaign is true, but his suggestions do make sense. Simple fact: when your opponents have &quot;co-opted&quot; certain words, make use of them, because it might mean they work.

I believe in the traditional ideal of two spouses marrying for love and committing for life to raise children, and I wish to end gender-based restrictions that are preventing thousands of couples in this country from marrying. Marriage should be about love and commitment, not a mere matter of genitals.

I support free trade because I favour consumers over the corporate interest of the giant trade unions.

I support fox-hunting because I want to alleviate the suffering of innocent rodents...okay, that&#039;s a little spurious.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I can&#8217;t say whether Ben&#8217;s depiction of the campaign is true, but his suggestions do make sense. Simple fact: when your opponents have &#8220;co-opted&#8221; certain words, make use of them, because it might mean they work.</p>
<p>I believe in the traditional ideal of two spouses marrying for love and committing for life to raise children, and I wish to end gender-based restrictions that are preventing thousands of couples in this country from marrying. Marriage should be about love and commitment, not a mere matter of genitals.</p>
<p>I support free trade because I favour consumers over the corporate interest of the giant trade unions.</p>
<p>I support fox-hunting because I want to alleviate the suffering of innocent rodents&#8230;okay, that&#8217;s a little spurious.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ken R</title>
		<link>http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2008/11/05/5894/comment-page-1#comment-21832</link>
		<dc:creator>Ken R</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 05 Nov 2008 20:12:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=5894#comment-21832</guid>
		<description>&quot;And the fact that this thing passed in California sends a loud message to the religious right that these things can pass anywhere. It tells them that the winds are blowing in their favor, and they now have a mandate to roll back gay rights nationwide.&quot;


I agree. We must not be complacent with the rights we have already won. We must always be on alert.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;And the fact that this thing passed in California sends a loud message to the religious right that these things can pass anywhere. It tells them that the winds are blowing in their favor, and they now have a mandate to roll back gay rights nationwide.&#8221;</p>
<p>I agree. We must not be complacent with the rights we have already won. We must always be on alert.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ken R</title>
		<link>http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2008/11/05/5894/comment-page-1#comment-21828</link>
		<dc:creator>Ken R</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 05 Nov 2008 20:01:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=5894#comment-21828</guid>
		<description>&quot;I think pulling the word marriage out of such legislation, and including language that does not require religious organizations to accept/support civil unions takes a significant bite out of the opposition’s argument.&quot;


For some that maybe true. But for those conservative faiths like the fundamentalist/evangelical Christians,  Catholics, Mormons, and the like do not want the law to recognize any type of gay relationship. They will fight us if we try to pass civil union amendments. They will claim civil unions are like marriages and state that those that have business that are not &quot;religious organizations&quot; will be forced to provide benefits to partnered workers against their own religious beliefs. And let us not forget about the children that will be harmed by these &quot;evil&quot; civil unions. This is in fact reality. I have been all over the net the past few weeks and many of these so-called religious people would like nothing more than for us to shut up and go back into the closet. Of course this is right after we are called perverted, sinful,and abominations to God.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;I think pulling the word marriage out of such legislation, and including language that does not require religious organizations to accept/support civil unions takes a significant bite out of the opposition’s argument.&#8221;</p>
<p>For some that maybe true. But for those conservative faiths like the fundamentalist/evangelical Christians,  Catholics, Mormons, and the like do not want the law to recognize any type of gay relationship. They will fight us if we try to pass civil union amendments. They will claim civil unions are like marriages and state that those that have business that are not &#8220;religious organizations&#8221; will be forced to provide benefits to partnered workers against their own religious beliefs. And let us not forget about the children that will be harmed by these &#8220;evil&#8221; civil unions. This is in fact reality. I have been all over the net the past few weeks and many of these so-called religious people would like nothing more than for us to shut up and go back into the closet. Of course this is right after we are called perverted, sinful,and abominations to God.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: AJD</title>
		<link>http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2008/11/05/5894/comment-page-1#comment-21819</link>
		<dc:creator>AJD</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 05 Nov 2008 18:51:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=5894#comment-21819</guid>
		<description>We need to be realistic here: This is a constitutional amendment. That means no same-sex marriage in California, ever, until it is overturned either by the Supreme Court (unlikely, as long as Scalia &amp; Co. are around) or by another amendment (even more unlikely, for at least 10-20 years).

And the fact that this thing passed in California sends a loud message to the religious right that these things can pass anywhere. It tells them that the winds are blowing in their favor, and they now have a mandate to roll back gay rights nationwide.

We can&#039;t fall into pessimism because it will lead to dispair, but we likewise can&#039;t fall into optimism because it will lead to overconfidence.

And those of you quoting MLK need to remember: The civil rights movement in the 60s also faced a lot of uphill battles, but constitutional amendments designed to deprive black people of rights that won in state after state were not among them.

And Wanda, I absolutely agree with you. It&#039;s unwise, foolish and racist -- or at least statistically illiterate -- to pin the blame for Prop 8&#039;s passage on black people. However, do you think that if given the opportunity, even white gay people would support a constitutional amendment depriving a racial minority of rights by a 70 percent margin?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>We need to be realistic here: This is a constitutional amendment. That means no same-sex marriage in California, ever, until it is overturned either by the Supreme Court (unlikely, as long as Scalia &amp; Co. are around) or by another amendment (even more unlikely, for at least 10-20 years).</p>
<p>And the fact that this thing passed in California sends a loud message to the religious right that these things can pass anywhere. It tells them that the winds are blowing in their favor, and they now have a mandate to roll back gay rights nationwide.</p>
<p>We can&#8217;t fall into pessimism because it will lead to dispair, but we likewise can&#8217;t fall into optimism because it will lead to overconfidence.</p>
<p>And those of you quoting MLK need to remember: The civil rights movement in the 60s also faced a lot of uphill battles, but constitutional amendments designed to deprive black people of rights that won in state after state were not among them.</p>
<p>And Wanda, I absolutely agree with you. It&#8217;s unwise, foolish and racist &#8212; or at least statistically illiterate &#8212; to pin the blame for Prop 8&#8242;s passage on black people. However, do you think that if given the opportunity, even white gay people would support a constitutional amendment depriving a racial minority of rights by a 70 percent margin?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Louie</title>
		<link>http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2008/11/05/5894/comment-page-1#comment-21816</link>
		<dc:creator>Louie</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 05 Nov 2008 18:41:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=5894#comment-21816</guid>
		<description>Or better yet, what if Obama sees to it that the govt. only grants &quot;civil unions&quot; to all couples, gay/straight, and that &quot;marriage&quot; is left up to religious and humanist organizations.

In other words, the govt. gets out of the &quot;marriage&quot; business and gives euqal benefits to all couples, regardless of gender coupling.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Or better yet, what if Obama sees to it that the govt. only grants &#8220;civil unions&#8221; to all couples, gay/straight, and that &#8220;marriage&#8221; is left up to religious and humanist organizations.</p>
<p>In other words, the govt. gets out of the &#8220;marriage&#8221; business and gives euqal benefits to all couples, regardless of gender coupling.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Louie</title>
		<link>http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2008/11/05/5894/comment-page-1#comment-21815</link>
		<dc:creator>Louie</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 05 Nov 2008 18:36:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=5894#comment-21815</guid>
		<description>To check on the latest CA returns, here&#039;s a &lt;a href=&quot;http://vote.sos.ca.gov/props/index.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;&lt;b&gt;link&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/b&gt;: 
http://vote.sos.ca.gov/props/index.html

Also, keep in mind that late absentee and provisional ballots meant as many as 3 million ballots were left to be counted after all precinct votes were tallied. 

So, I AM NOT GIVING UP HOPE!!! Until that very last vote is counted! It ain&#039;t over! 

Another thing that disturbs me is that the number of votes cast for all Presidential candidates (Obama+McCain+Others) does not equal the number of votes on Prop. 8 (yes+no), the Presidential votes are higher.

So, does that mean that a lot of people did not vote all the way down the ballot?

Did they just cast their vote for President and leave? 

California: 
Voted for President (Obama+McCain+Others) - 10,088,999 
Voted for Prop 8 (yes + no) - 10,013,567 

Difference of 75,432 votes! 

Now, if those were &quot;Yes&quot; votes, then good riddance. 

But, what if they were &quot;NO&quot; votes!!!???</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>To check on the latest CA returns, here&#8217;s a <a href="http://vote.sos.ca.gov/props/index.html" rel="nofollow"><b>link</b></a>:<br />
<a href="http://vote.sos.ca.gov/props/index.html" rel="nofollow">http://vote.sos.ca.gov/props/index.html</a></p>
<p>Also, keep in mind that late absentee and provisional ballots meant as many as 3 million ballots were left to be counted after all precinct votes were tallied. </p>
<p>So, I AM NOT GIVING UP HOPE!!! Until that very last vote is counted! It ain&#8217;t over! </p>
<p>Another thing that disturbs me is that the number of votes cast for all Presidential candidates (Obama+McCain+Others) does not equal the number of votes on Prop. 8 (yes+no), the Presidential votes are higher.</p>
<p>So, does that mean that a lot of people did not vote all the way down the ballot?</p>
<p>Did they just cast their vote for President and leave? </p>
<p>California:<br />
Voted for President (Obama+McCain+Others) &#8211; 10,088,999<br />
Voted for Prop 8 (yes + no) &#8211; 10,013,567 </p>
<p>Difference of 75,432 votes! </p>
<p>Now, if those were &#8220;Yes&#8221; votes, then good riddance. </p>
<p>But, what if they were &#8220;NO&#8221; votes!!!???</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Vince</title>
		<link>http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2008/11/05/5894/comment-page-1#comment-21814</link>
		<dc:creator>Vince</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 05 Nov 2008 18:30:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=5894#comment-21814</guid>
		<description>Ken, no doubt it&#039;ll be a battle, but the next two years (at least) we have the best chances of getting this legislation passed! Here&#039;s what I pulled from President Elect Obama&#039;s website: &quot;Barack Obama supports full civil unions that give same-sex couples equal legal rights and privileges as married couples, including the right to assist their loved ones in times of emergency as well as equal health insurance, employment benefits, and property and adoption rights. Obama also believes we need to fully repeal the Defense of Marriage Act and enact legislation that would ensure that the 1,100+ federal legal rights and benefits currently provided on the basis of marital status are extended to same-sex
couples in civil unions and other legally-recognized unions.&quot;  I think pulling the word marriage out of such legislation, and including language that does not require religious organizations to accept/support civil unions takes a significant bite out of the opposition&#039;s argument. I realize many out there are disappointed that Obama does not support gay marriage, but I think he may have a good understanding of what is doable in the near future.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ken, no doubt it&#8217;ll be a battle, but the next two years (at least) we have the best chances of getting this legislation passed! Here&#8217;s what I pulled from President Elect Obama&#8217;s website: &#8220;Barack Obama supports full civil unions that give same-sex couples equal legal rights and privileges as married couples, including the right to assist their loved ones in times of emergency as well as equal health insurance, employment benefits, and property and adoption rights. Obama also believes we need to fully repeal the Defense of Marriage Act and enact legislation that would ensure that the 1,100+ federal legal rights and benefits currently provided on the basis of marital status are extended to same-sex<br />
couples in civil unions and other legally-recognized unions.&#8221;  I think pulling the word marriage out of such legislation, and including language that does not require religious organizations to accept/support civil unions takes a significant bite out of the opposition&#8217;s argument. I realize many out there are disappointed that Obama does not support gay marriage, but I think he may have a good understanding of what is doable in the near future.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Wanda</title>
		<link>http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2008/11/05/5894/comment-page-1#comment-21812</link>
		<dc:creator>Wanda</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 05 Nov 2008 18:11:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=5894#comment-21812</guid>
		<description>As a black lesbian, I am subjected to many of the criticisms leveled against these 3 groups; &quot;my race&quot; did not vote against Prop 8 and doesn&#039;t care about anyone&#039;s civil rights but our own; &quot;my sexual orientation&quot; has civil unions and domestic partnerships, isn&#039;t that enough; &quot;my gender&quot; is always out there trying to stir up something when we should be home in the kitchen. Instead of trying to find someone to blame for anything that&#039;s considered a &quot;failure&quot;, why can&#039;t we look at these things as just another hurdle to be jumped; another pothole to avoid; another mountain to climb, a river to cross, a valley to climb out of. We are ALL going to need each other to get where we want/need, no, DESERVE to be, and that&#039;s on an equal footing with everyone else. United we stand and divided we fall; an old cliche to be sure, but a true one nonetheless. We can only get to the Promised Land if we stand together, side by side, and that means ALL OF US who experience inequality. I am a black woman who loves another woman, but more than that I am a PERSON who is no different from anyone else. We are all what God made us to be; His children, made in His image, and NO ONE, not California, not Arizona, not Arkansas or Florida; not the State Courts or the Federal, not the Mormons or the Jehovah Witness&#039;, not even the President himself is gonna tell me otherwise.

&quot;We hold these truths to be self-evident: that ALL men [including the gay ones] are created equal.&quot;  (Thanks Michael R)

It&#039;s &#039;self-evident to me&#039;, and I&#039;m going to keep on fighting until it&#039;s &#039;self-evident&#039; to everyone else!!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>As a black lesbian, I am subjected to many of the criticisms leveled against these 3 groups; &#8220;my race&#8221; did not vote against Prop 8 and doesn&#8217;t care about anyone&#8217;s civil rights but our own; &#8220;my sexual orientation&#8221; has civil unions and domestic partnerships, isn&#8217;t that enough; &#8220;my gender&#8221; is always out there trying to stir up something when we should be home in the kitchen. Instead of trying to find someone to blame for anything that&#8217;s considered a &#8220;failure&#8221;, why can&#8217;t we look at these things as just another hurdle to be jumped; another pothole to avoid; another mountain to climb, a river to cross, a valley to climb out of. We are ALL going to need each other to get where we want/need, no, DESERVE to be, and that&#8217;s on an equal footing with everyone else. United we stand and divided we fall; an old cliche to be sure, but a true one nonetheless. We can only get to the Promised Land if we stand together, side by side, and that means ALL OF US who experience inequality. I am a black woman who loves another woman, but more than that I am a PERSON who is no different from anyone else. We are all what God made us to be; His children, made in His image, and NO ONE, not California, not Arizona, not Arkansas or Florida; not the State Courts or the Federal, not the Mormons or the Jehovah Witness&#8217;, not even the President himself is gonna tell me otherwise.</p>
<p>&#8220;We hold these truths to be self-evident: that ALL men [including the gay ones] are created equal.&#8221;  (Thanks Michael R)</p>
<p>It&#8217;s &#8216;self-evident to me&#8217;, and I&#8217;m going to keep on fighting until it&#8217;s &#8216;self-evident&#8217; to everyone else!!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mark F.</title>
		<link>http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2008/11/05/5894/comment-page-1#comment-21811</link>
		<dc:creator>Mark F.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 05 Nov 2008 18:11:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=5894#comment-21811</guid>
		<description>Ben has some good comments. If all you watched was &quot;No on 8&quot; TV ads, you&#039;d have no idea this initiative was about gay people. Apparantly you were just supposed to be gainst &quot;discrimination&quot; without knowing just who it was who was being discriminated against.

Let&#039;s try being totally honest next time. The &quot;Yes On 8&quot; people brazenly lied, but the No side was guilty of lying by ommission.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ben has some good comments. If all you watched was &#8220;No on 8&#8243; TV ads, you&#8217;d have no idea this initiative was about gay people. Apparantly you were just supposed to be gainst &#8220;discrimination&#8221; without knowing just who it was who was being discriminated against.</p>
<p>Let&#8217;s try being totally honest next time. The &#8220;Yes On 8&#8243; people brazenly lied, but the No side was guilty of lying by ommission.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
