Box Turtle Bulletin
News and commentary about the anti-gay lobby“Now you must raise your children up in a world where that union of man and box turtle is on the same legal footing as man and wife…”
News and commentary about the anti-gay lobbyPosts Tagged As: Marriage
August 17th, 2009
Queerty is reporting the claim that Equality California solicited contributions for a 2010 campaign to reverse Prop 8, only to turn around and oppose such an action.
It’s looking pretty obvious that EQCA benefited, whether on purpose or otherwise, by telling marriage equality supporters they would fight for 2010. They collected cash from Californians — our allies — under a falsehood. And with all the existing in-fighting between California’s gay rights groups, the last thing we need are accusations of fraud aimed at our own groups.
I don’t know whether there’s much fire behind the smoke. This may be more miscommunication than deception.
But I do know that when I was cold-called a week or so ago from EQCA looking for volunteers, I asked specifically which year they were supporting. I was told definitely 2010.
August 17th, 2009
An editorial in the Los Angeles Times endorses the decision by EQCA to wait until 2012 to try and reverse Proposition 8. They also criticize the Courage Campaign for moving forward.
To me, I think that they debate over the date may be partly due to objectives. I think that the LA Times fairly argues from the perspective of EQCA and others who counsel to delay.
The most important objective should be a decisive victory, sending a clear message that this state no longer will tolerate separate but not-quite-equal status for families based on sexual orientation. Given the opinion polls, the lack of a coherent campaign strategy and the current makeup of the U.S. Supreme Court, this most likely means an unfortunate wait. A loss at the ballot box or in the nation’s high court could set back same-sex marriage for years.
If you share the above beliefs about objectives, then waiting until 2012 makes sense. And I think that the language in the editorial highlights the differences in approach, objectives, and goals between those wanting to go in 2010 and those wishing to wait until 2012.
The LA Times – and gay groups urging a wait – are viewing this as an election effort. Their goal is how best to run a campaign, how to achieve votes, how to pass this particular referendum. This is seen as a stand-alone initiative designed to achieve a specific purpose. And winning is everything.
But there is another perspective which I think is motivating those who are urging a 2010 date.
They do not see a reversal of Proposition 8 in terms of an election. They do not view it as a referendum or really in terms of a campaign at all. They view this effort not in terms of politics and elections but in terms of civil rights and a battle in the war for equality.
While twelvers are wondering about funding and strategy, tenners are focused on momentum, energy, honesty, and courage. Tenners want to win in 10, but find it even more important to not concede defeat. While they think victory is possible next year, they are committed to fighting this battle until it is won, even if that means going to the polls every two years.
And there will be an effort in 2010. I spoke this weekend to a leader with Equality Network (a grassroots organization unaffiliated with any established gay groups), and an application will be submitted to the Secretary of State for a proposition on the ballot in 2010. They will then begin the process of collecting 694,354 valid signatures. Should they (or another tenner group) prove successful at this rather daunting task, then they will have earned the right to establish the date.
August 13th, 2009
50,496 signatures reviewed (36.7%)
5,375 permanantly rejected
10.65% fail rate
August 13th, 2009
Equality California may have settled on 2012 as the right time to try to repeal Prop 8, but that doesn’t mean everyone’s on board:
John Henning, who heads Love Honor Cherish, an LA-based volunteer organization which helped raised $500,000 last year for efforts to defeat Prop.8 — the ballot measure approved by voters in November which outlawed same sex marriage — says that some 50 activist organizations are already part of a growing coalition signed up for the 2010 effort.
Henning, speaking to the Chronicle today, said there is profound anger and disappointment with the decision of EQCA to hold off a Prop. 8 challenge for the 2012 general election.
On the other hand, San Francisco Gavin Newsom, noting the divisions in the LGBT community over the timing of a Prop 8 challenge, says he’s not convinced such an effort can be successful next year:
With the landmark state initiative outlawing same sex marriage approved by state voters in November 2008 and reinforced by a decision of the state Supreme Court, “it’s a different campaign,” he said. “We can’t rely on the courts..we can’t rely on the legislature, or the executive branch.”
“And so, now, the rights of a protected class of citizens are in the hands of the people,” he said. “And that means it’s a political endeavor. Which it should never, ever be. But it is: those are the cards that have been dealt since Prop. 8 passed.”
“So as much as I’d like to see it happen next year, I’m not convinced that it will,” he said.
As we debate whether Californians should push for 2010 or 2012, let’s keep one thing in mind: Remember Maine in 2009!
August 13th, 2009
You can leave stains on the carpet:
Housman told police they were drinking a lot the night of Aug. 2 and started arguing after “John began telling everyone, ‘I’m a gay guy.'”
Traci Housman says when they got home the fight got physical and she “broke away from John and ran towards the kitchen to get a knife to defend herself.”
She called 911 after stabbing him in the chest.
When paramedics arrived, Housman was performing CPR on her husband but he was already dead.
August 12th, 2009
After the confusion on validating signatures, many watching (myself included) were discouraged that the fail rate had dropped significantly below that needed to avoid a ballot referendum. But as more signatures are reviewed, that rate is slooooowly starting to increase. And it is reasonable to expect it to continue to rise.
From the Washington Secretary of State blog:
The error rate is expected to rise as the count continues, largely because the number of duplicate signatures will rise as the number of checked signatures rises. In order to qualify for the November ballot, sponsors of R-71 would have to stay below an error rate of 12.4 percent by the time the last signature is checked. State Elections Director Nick Handy said it remains “too close to call” whether R-71 will make the ballot, and cautioned against making assumptions based on the current error rate.
Currently 48,299 (35%) of signatures have been checked. Of those, 5,121 have been permanently invalidated for a cumulative fail rate of 10.60%. This is up from 10.39% fail rate at 25% completed.
But we have no way of knowing whether the signatures reviewed to date are representative of the selection as a whole.
they were bound in volumes of 15 petitions, with no particular order, either geographically or date in which they were gathered initially. Each bound volume was assigned a number and are being assigned to checkers in no particular order– luck of the draw.
August 12th, 2009
Rex Wockner live-blogged it, and Equality California confirmed it. They hope to spend the time between now and 2012 “changing the hearts and minds of Californians” — specifically engaging LGBT communities of color and faith. Good plan. Both of those critical components were missing in 2008, and we all know where that got us.
Meanwhile, there’s a must-win campaign in Maine that really could use your help right now.
August 11th, 2009
The organization seeking to stop the implementation of Washington State’s legislative enhancement of domestic partnership is seeking to do so outside the glare of public scrutiny. They successfully delayed the release of the names of signatories to the petition until a hearing in September, but that isn’t enough.
Now they are seeking to keep its donors private. (Seattle PI)
Protect Marriage Washington last week asked the PDC to hold an emergency hearing because it said there had been violent threats against churches, property and supporters of the campaign. The group said such threats had been forwarded to the FBI.
I’ve not seen these, and they may be real. But in the past, such “threats” have generally turned out to not actually be violent threats at all once reviewed but rather a “threat” of a boycott or simply hate mail of the “I hope you die and rot in hell” variety.
And the request for anonymity does not sound promising at the moment.
Doug Ellis, assistant PDC director, said the agency would not hold an emergency hearing but rather listen to R-71 backers at its next regular meeting, which is Aug. 27. Ellis said transparency is expected in election financing.
“It’s a hurdle that they are going to have to jump to be able to say that the public doesn’t have a right to know who is financing their campaigns,” Ellis said Tuesday
August 11th, 2009
The Washington Secretary of State has a new reporting method by which they will wait until supervisors have reviewed and corrected the rejections made by checkers of signatures before they post the results. Based on the finalized review so far, 33,214 have been checked and 3,450 rejected for a fail rate of 10.39%.
Unless the remaining three quarters of signatures are very different from the first quarter, this referendum will qualify for the ballot. And it may set a new record for cleanest petition ever submitted in the state.
At present there is no way to determine if the signatures are being reviewed in any particular order. If they are in collection order, then there is a possibility that they will be less clean as time goes on.
August 10th, 2009
We were tracking and reporting on the Washington Secretary of State’s efforts to verify signatures presented for Referendum 71, a response to the legislature’s extension of benefits to domestic partners. And we were reporting that the petitions did not appear to have an adequate validation rate to make it to the ballot.
But we were under the mistaken assumption that the Washington Secretary of State was reporting the final determination of each signature. It turns out that they were reporting tentative rejections and not those who had been validated at the supervisor level. And the supervisors have reinstated enough signatures to significantly reduce the rejection rate.
As of the Friday day shift, the state has reviewed 35,296 signatures and rejected 4,063, a rejection rate of 11.51%. If correct, this would be a rejection rate low enough to allow the referendum to reach the ballot. If what I have read is correct, it would also set a record for the cleanest petition ever.
However, I’m not puting too much faith in this calculation. Currently the state is reporting a total number of signatures checked that is lower than the sum of those checked on a daily basis. This suggests to me that the reporting process is ruled by confusion.
August 7th, 2009
As we go into our weekend, it will be on a positive note. The verification of signatures collected to stop the legislature’s enhancement of domestic partnerships is not going well for Washington’s anti-gays. As of 10 pm last night, the signatures were yielding a 13.25% fail rate.
I am going to be reporting the numbers slightly differently than most. This is due to the way in which I will be considering those which are currently considered invalid due to a missing signature in the state’s database. Currently 89 signatures have been rejected for that purpose. However, the state will consult with counties regarding these signatures and, according to the Secretary of State’s website, most of these will be considered valid when the signature is recovered from the county. We already know that they are not duplicate on un-registered; the only way they could remain invalid is if the signature does not match the one on the voter registration card once the state recovers that comparison signature.
After yesterday’s swing-shift, the fail rate for the day was 14.11%. The state now has inspected 21.7% of the signatures submitted with a cumulative fail rate of 13.41%. To be a successful petition, the remaining signatures would have to have a fail rate lower than 12.21%.
UPDATE:
There appears to be confusion over the invalidated signatures. It appears that some of them (perhaps 409) were later determined to be valid by supervisors.
Unfortunately this is not at all clear. And unless un-registered voters were later found to be registered, then this seems to be mathematically impossible.
If this new declaration is correct, then the fail rate is currently at about 11.64% and this is not at all good news for those who are in domestic partnerships in Washington.
August 6th, 2009
The Washington Secretary of State is now using two shifts to validate signatures for Referendum 71, the petition drive to halt the expansion of domestic partnership rights and place them on the ballot.
The Washington Secretary of State has compiled the results for the first shift for today (ending at 3:00 pm). Of the 3,831 signatures reviewed, 573 were rejected, a rate of 14.96%. This brings the total rejection rate up to 13.54%. Unless there is a drastic change in results, this petition is on its way to failure.
August 6th, 2009
The Washinton Secretary of State has now counted 17% of the signatures submitted to block the legislature’s enhancement of domestic partnership rights.
Yesterday, an additional 6,140 signatures were reviewed with 14.2% rejected.
As it stands, of the 23,457 signatures reviewed, 20,335 were verified and 3,122 invalidated, a 13.31% fail rate. The remaining signatures will only result in a valid petition should they have a fail rate of 12.26% or lower.
August 4th, 2009
Todays validation of signatures submitted to halt a bill that enhanced domestic partnerships proved to be bad news for anti-gays. Today there was a fail rate of 14.4%, bringing the average fail rate over three days to 13.0%. Although it is difficult to establish a trend over just three days, this does seem to validate the assumptions that as time goes on more errors will be revealed – especially duplicate signatures.
The petition will be valid if it keeps its cumulative error rate below 12.4%.
August 4th, 2009
Anti-gay activists seeking to block the domestic partnership enhancement bill from being enacted needed to collect 120,577 valid signatures. They submitted 137,689, which provides a cushion of 17,122 for invalid signature or errors.
Thus, as long as fewer than 12.4% of signatures are erroneous, they will have enough signatures to qualify for the ballot. The average error rate is 18%
So far, the signatures are being validated with few errors. (Seattle PI)
As of Monday state election workers had checked 11,502 signatures, and 10,087 have been OK’d with 1,415 rejected, mostly because the person does not show up on the voter rolls.
This reflects an error rate of 12.3% and if this continues the validation check could be so close as to be suspenseful to the end. It might even qualify.
However, only 8% of signatures have been checked and we cannot expect that the signature validity is homogenous. We will know more as the count goes on.
UPDATE: The Washington Secretary of State has provided some additional information which may shed light on why the signatures appear at this time to be so clean. It could all have to do with duplicate signatures.
The total duplicates found on Friday were 7. Yesterday they were 16. Logically, this number should grow significantly as the count proceeds. And here’s why:
On Friday there were 5,646 signatures reviewed. So each new signature inspected was compared to a total database of about 5,000 other signatures instead of the total of 137,000. The odds are that if the party signed twice, the signature being inspected would be the first count of that signature and thus not show up as duplicate.
Yesterday, the database doubled in size. Now the odds are about twice as high – but still pretty low – that they’ve already seen the signature. And, indeed, the duplicate error rate doubled.
As the count goes on, the duplicate rate should continue to increase. Even if the missing, invalid, or non-register signatures stay consistent, the increase in duplicates may well kick this petition out of validity.
Featured Reports
In this original BTB Investigation, we unveil the tragic story of Kirk Murphy, a four-year-old boy who was treated for “cross-gender disturbance” in 1970 by a young grad student by the name of George Rekers. This story is a stark reminder that there are severe and damaging consequences when therapists try to ensure that boys will be boys.
When we first reported on three American anti-gay activists traveling to Kampala for a three-day conference, we had no idea that it would be the first report of a long string of events leading to a proposal to institute the death penalty for LGBT people. But that is exactly what happened. In this report, we review our collection of more than 500 posts to tell the story of one nation’s embrace of hatred toward gay people. This report will be updated continuously as events continue to unfold. Check here for the latest updates.
In 2005, the Southern Poverty Law Center wrote that “[Paul] Cameron’s ‘science’ echoes Nazi Germany.” What the SPLC didn”t know was Cameron doesn’t just “echo” Nazi Germany. He quoted extensively from one of the Final Solution’s architects. This puts his fascination with quarantines, mandatory tattoos, and extermination being a “plausible idea” in a whole new and deeply disturbing light.
On February 10, I attended an all-day “Love Won Out” ex-gay conference in Phoenix, put on by Focus on the Family and Exodus International. In this series of reports, I talk about what I learned there: the people who go to these conferences, the things that they hear, and what this all means for them, their families and for the rest of us.
Prologue: Why I Went To “Love Won Out”
Part 1: What’s Love Got To Do With It?
Part 2: Parents Struggle With “No Exceptions”
Part 3: A Whole New Dialect
Part 4: It Depends On How The Meaning of the Word "Change" Changes
Part 5: A Candid Explanation For "Change"
At last, the truth can now be told.
Using the same research methods employed by most anti-gay political pressure groups, we examine the statistics and the case studies that dispel many of the myths about heterosexuality. Download your copy today!
And don‘t miss our companion report, How To Write An Anti-Gay Tract In Fifteen Easy Steps.
Anti-gay activists often charge that gay men and women pose a threat to children. In this report, we explore the supposed connection between homosexuality and child sexual abuse, the conclusions reached by the most knowledgeable professionals in the field, and how anti-gay activists continue to ignore their findings. This has tremendous consequences, not just for gay men and women, but more importantly for the safety of all our children.
Anti-gay activists often cite the “Dutch Study” to claim that gay unions last only about 1½ years and that the these men have an average of eight additional partners per year outside of their steady relationship. In this report, we will take you step by step into the study to see whether the claims are true.
Tony Perkins’ Family Research Council submitted an Amicus Brief to the Maryland Court of Appeals as that court prepared to consider the issue of gay marriage. We examine just one small section of that brief to reveal the junk science and fraudulent claims of the Family “Research” Council.
The FBI’s annual Hate Crime Statistics aren’t as complete as they ought to be, and their report for 2004 was no exception. In fact, their most recent report has quite a few glaring holes. Holes big enough for Daniel Fetty to fall through.
“Google” is a trademark of Google Inc.
© Box Turtle Bulletin. All Rights Reserved.
Posts 
Posts via daily email: