1. GOING BACK TO THE BALLOT IN 2010:

I believe we should go back to the ballot in 2010 for a whole host of reasons. Here are just a few:

First, it is the right thing to do. As MLK said, “A right delayed is a right denied.” I am a straight ally, so the issue doesn’t affect me on as deep of a level as my LGBT friends and family, but I felt like my rights were also taken away on November 4th — my right to live in a California where everyone is treated equally under the law, allowed the same opportunties, and given the same level of respect. We have the moral high ground, and we should not be afraid to speak up (and continue speaking up) until these rights are restored. It kills me every time I meet someone who wanted to get married in December or January (and had booked a venue, sent out invitations, etc.) and had to cancel. My heart goes out to those people, and my heart goes out to all the LGBT kids who, in May of 2008, dreamed of getting married one day only to have those dreams shattered on November 4th.

Second, the time is right. I remember fighting with people who were going to other states to campaign for Obama instead of staying home to fight Prop. 8. Many of those people won’t be there for us again in 2012 when Obama is up for re-election, and some of them feel guilty enough to work really hard to restore marriage equality in 2010 (and to work hard between now and then). I don’t like the idea of competing with Obama for fundraising, and I don’t like the top of the Democratic ticket not being on our side. Obama may be a really good advocate for some things, but he is not the fierce advocate for which we had all hoped. I hope he redeems himself, but I feel much better about all of the likely Democratic candidates for Governor. As far as I can tell, every single one of them is on our side with respect to this issue. Plus, activism is at an all time high. There is no way that all of these people are going to continue at this clip between now and November 2012. They may continue between now and November 2010 — but if we give up 2010, a huge number of them will take a vacation from now until July 16, 2011 or later (and some may never return — after all, they may view a decision of waiting as a message that this issue really isn’t that important to us).

Third, fundraising is going to be difficult for everyone. The people on the other side live in the same economy that we do. Plus, thanks to some really effective boycotts (Fred Karger of Californians Against Hate is amazing), many of the really big donors may think twice about giving large donations to the other side again. Doug Manchester (owner of the Manchester Grand Hyatt in San Diego) gave $125,000 to help qualify Prop. 8 for the ballot, and he has apparently lost over $7 million in business as a result of that boycott. And let’s not forget that media, materials, etc. are all less expensive now than they were in 2008.

Fourth, the recent polling shows we can win in 2010. Our group helped co-fund a poll that shows that 50% of likely 2010 voters are already with us (without any campaign or work) and only 42% against — once we clarify in the ballot language that allowing same sex couples to marry will not affect churches or other religious institutions. So, the people who say that we need to change 300,000+ hearts and minds in order to win are ignoring the shift in public opinion since November 4th and the impact of progress in other states. We just have to keep those that we have already won since Prop. 8 passed and win just a small percentage of the undecided voters. The poll is really bringing out who views the glass as half empty and who views the glass as half full. I obviously view it as half full and those of us who have that view have a powerful advocate on our side — hope. Plus, polling is not the be all and end all. If Barack Obama only listened to the polls in July 2007, John McCain would be President.

Fifth, avoiding an initiative battle in 2010 is impossible. People who think that we can avoid dealing with the 2010 election by announcing that we are waiting until 2012 to restore marriage equality are forgetting about the other side’s agenda. If they are not having to fight us on the marriage issue again, they will be putting forth their own ballot initiative to get rid of domestic partnerships, or to try to retroactively take away the 18,000 same sex marriages that were performed, or to try to prevent same sex couples from being able to adopt. The earlier poster got it right. We need to stop being on the defensive. We draw the line here.

2. DARREL CUMMINGS AND THE L.A. GAY & LESBIAN CENTER:

The L.A. Gay & Lesbian Center does some truly amazing things. The scope, breadth and quality of their services enrich (and save) lives. I think it is fair to be critical of the decisions made by the Center (and others) during the NO on 8 campaign, but we need to move past that and even I (a straight guy who never even knew about the Center until I got involved in the fight for marriage equality a little over a year ago) was quite offended by the characterization of the Center as “primarily a health organization – with a few other worthwhile programs.” I have met so many people now who rely on programs the Center offers that I am amazed that I never knew about the Center before a year ago (I guess I didn’t have enough LGBT friends before then).

I have also met Darrel Cummings on a few occasions now — and I don’t just mean a “hello” at an event. Rather, we have sat down and discussed the issue of marriage equality in small group settings on a few occasions. I am not going to pretend that he and I are best friends because we just don’t know each other that well. That said, you don’t have to be around Darrel for very long to realize that he is as decent of a person as you will ever meet and he has clearly dedicated himself to making sure that the needs of the LGBT community are met.

Has the Center made the issue of marriage equality enough of a priority? I think that is a fair question, but I also think it is fair for the Center to express its concerns about the economy and the effect of another ballot initiative on the Center’s ability to continue providing vital services. Of course, as I stated earlier, I believe that a 2010 ballot initiative is inevitable (the only question being whether we are on the offensive to regain marriage equality or on the defensive, fighting an initiative designed to take more rights away from the LGBT community, such as domestic partnerships or the right to adopt), so I hope that the Center realizes that soon and advocates that we draw the line here. Not only do I believe that it is the right thing to do, but I also think that it is in the Center’s best interest to do so.

Aaron Bloom
Chair, Ballot Initiative Committee
Love Honor Cherish

“In the end, we will remember not the words of our enemies, but the silence of our friends.” — Martin Luther King, Jr.

The right will always have the money. To put this in the cross-hairs during the mid-terms would be a huge mistake.

Get it on the ballot in 2011. That would make sense.

Get off your high horse and look at the bigger picture. 2010 bandwagon jumpers claim that momentum with will help us win. Are you kidding? Momentum within WHICH groups? Certainly not the non-English speaking population…because the POC groups weren’t given enough resources by the larger campaign to reach out to their communities. Get out of the fantasyland and realize that everlasting change needs to be worked on. It’s not just about changing the minds of a few swing voters by a certain deadline.

BECAUSE there’s less time to gather money.

The less time to gather big huge war chests, the more this thing banks on what’s in the hearts and minds of people. The polling in the runup to the Prop 8 vote was showing us ahead, right up until the anti-gay side ran the ads saying we were going to indoctrinate the children and all the other crap. It takes big lethargic organizations a lot of time to establish operations, a network, etc.. I think a quick run-and-gun type grassroots operation could successfully overcome the juggernaut of the Mormon Church and their ability to coverty establish solid networks and operations.

TRiG.

Marriage is not the most pressing social inequality in the world, or even in the Western world, or even among gay people in the Western world. Other things matter more. I’ve said that before, and I’ll say it again.

Other things, however, are more complicated. The world is a messy place, and social problems cannot be solved easily. On questions of government policy to fix these problems, there are usually strong (or, at least, non-whacky) arguments on each side. Marriage equality, by contrast, is simple. There is a straightforward, conceptually easy fix to this glaring inequality. And there are absolutely no good arguments against it*. To some extent, then, we are right to focus on marriage. Rarely are issues of right and wrong quite so clear.

But only to some extent. Those messy social problems often cause greater harm to the community than marriage inequality does, and they too deserve focus. Of course, Timothy Kincaid is a right-wing thinker. Right-wing thinking does not have solutions for messy social problems, so right-wing thinkers often pretend to themselves that these problems don’t really exist.

What was that I said about not taking sides? Oh well ….

TRiG.

* I don’t count “My imaginary friend doesn’t like it” as a good argument.

You’ve been more than courteous in the face of nasty attacks by Timothy, who apparently refuses to actually engage in a conversation about his over-the-top accusations. Keep up the good work.

I am sorry that we could not have a more respectful exchange. I have tried and now I am done.