Box Turtle Bulletin

NYTimes Opposes Prop 8, Prop 102, and Prop 2

Although there is no consideration of an amendment in New York to ban gay marriage, New Yorkers are impacted by the results of the vote on Proposition 8. Currently, same-sex couples in the Empire State will have their marriages recognized at home if they are conducted in a location where they are legal. If Prop 8 passes, New Yorkers will be limited to Massachusetts and foreign nations.

So the New York Times has taken an editorial position in opposition to Proposition 8 and to the propositions in Arizona and Florida.

Whether this important civil rights victory endures is now up to California voters. Opponents of giving gay couples the protections, dignity and respect that come with marriage are working furiously to try to overturn the court ruling through Proposition 8. It is our fervent hope that Californians will reject this mean-spirited attempt to embed second-class treatment of one group of citizens in the State Constitution.
…
Similar discriminatory measures are on the ballot in Arizona and Florida. They also should be rejected.

Mormon Youth Group Mans Utah Phone Bank for Proposition 8

Students at Brigham Young University are being encouraged to campaign for California’s anti-gay marriage amendment, Proposition 8. (BYU News)

The International Voice for Youth club sponsored an assembly Thursday night to educate students about the possible effects of not passing Proposition 8 in November. After a speech by Lynn Wardle, a BYU law professor, the students got on their cell phones and started calling fellow students from California.

The Mormon youth group will continue to seek to influence the election in California.

The International Voice for Youth will host phone banks each week leading up to the election on Nov. 4. They will also be giving out information on voter registration, absentee voting and Proposition 8 at a booth in the Wilkinson Student Center each Monday and Thursday just outside the BYU Bookstore.

If the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints continues their public activism, they run the risk of Proposition 8 becoming known as the Mormon Marriage Amendment. I think that is likely not to be advantageous to their marketing strategy.

The Right Side

Writing in the Ventura Star, Republican columnist Scott Harris raises what I think is a most convincing argument as to why a voter should oppose Proposition 8 (and other anti-gay marriage amendments). Among his list of eight reasons, he provides

It is easy to say that I would have supported interracial marriage if I were old enough to have lived through the then-controversy. In years to come, when the same-sex issue has faded to all but historical irrelevance, I want to be able to tell my grandchildren that I was there, publicly supporting those who needed the support. It will be the best way to know that if I had been in Birmingham in the ’60s, I would have stood on the right side of the hoses.

AZ Faith Leaders Speak Out Against Prop 102

More than thirty members of clergy met last Tuesday to speak out against Arizona’s Prop 102. In a press conference before local media, the clergy gathered to voice their concerns over religious meddling in the state constitution.

We’ve posted several articles at Box Turtle Bulletin highlighting the efforts of at least one religious denomination seeking to impose its theological views into the constitutions of Arizona and California, sometimes raising alarm among some of that denomination’s members. These Tucson clergy members have a different view: keep politics out of marriage, and keep theology out of the constitution so that all people can live freely according to their beliefs.  From the Arizona Daily Star:

Tucson religious leaders who oppose Arizona’s marriage amendment spoke against it Tuesday, with many questioning why the measure is before voters again after it was defeated two years ago.

Rabbi Helen Cohn spoke of Jewish Scriptures in urging people to vote against Proposition 102, which would amend the Arizona Constitution to define marriage as solely between one man and one woman.

… Cohn said endorsing the amendment based on religious beliefs blurs the line between religious life and secular life. “Legislation based on one group’s religious beliefs is completely contrary to all this country stands for,” she said.

The Rev. Anna Bell, pastor of the Mosaic United Methodist Church, said Arizonans were “clear two years ago” in defeating a similar amendment. She said voters now are “ready for solutions to actual problems.”

“Religious beliefs and values are important to many Arizonans, but no religion should be able to use government enforcement to mandate its beliefs for all of us,” she said.

And from the Tucson Citizen:

Prop. 102 opponent the Rev. Frank Bergen, who has served as a priest in both the Roman Catholic Jesuit order and the Episcopal Church, said some people think everybody “should be bound by our religious concept of marriage.”

“Uh, uh; not so,” he said. He said his objection to Prop. 102 is actually rooted in religion. “Proposition 102 offends my sense of justice, and my sense of justice comes right out of my religious faith,” Bergen said.

Tracy Press Says “No” to Prop 8

A local newspaper in Tracy, CA (population about 80,000) has printed an editorial opposing Proposition 8.

Despite what this initiative’s supporters say, marriage and domestic partnerships are not the same — and this constitutional right doesn’t dictate health education programs for public schools.

We’ve said it before in this space, and we’ll say it again. The freedom to marry is fundamental in our society, just like the freedoms of religion and speech. Our laws should treat everyone equally.

No on 8.

Tracy is a conservative community and the Tracy Press is considered to be conservative in outlook, although they did oppose Proposition 22, an early anti-gay marriage effort.

The Tracy Press is a small family owned newpaper with twice weekly publication and circulation of less than 10,000. What they have to say probably isn’t going to tip the scale for the vote. But their voice is a welcomed addition to the growing call to vote down this discriminatory proposition.

Rabbis Oppose Proposition 8

Anti-marriage activists like to present their constitutional amendment efforts as appealing to those “from secular and faith backgrounds, from Christian to Jewish, Mormon to Muslim“. The amendments are based, they’ll tell you, on “Judeo-Christian values”.

But their Judeo-Christian efforts seem to be missing the “Judeo” component.

The LA Times is reporting that the Board of Rabbis of Southern California has overwhelmingly decided to oppose Proposition 8.

The board — a collection of leaders from the Reconstructionist, Reform, Conservative and Orthodox movements — this week declared its opposition to the measure, which would amend the California Constitution to define marriage as only between a man and a woman. Leaders of the board said they wanted protect the civil rights of gay and lesbian couples.

And this was not some rote decision by some ivory towered committee

The board has more than 290 members. Roughly 120 took part in Wednesday’s vote, the largest number of rabbis to weigh in on such an issue in recent memory. Vogel said Friday that 93% of those who cast votes supported the resolution.

Many of the Rabbis do not support religious same-sex marriages within their faith. But they recognize that the terms of civil marriage should not be dictated by a religious majority.

So where then is the Jewish support for Proposition 8?

Well, perhaps they are referring to Jewish New Testament Publications, Inc. After all, I doubt the “New Testament Jews” are part of the Board of Rabbis.

Thanks, Levi’s

Look down at your legs. If they have denim on them, you can thank Levi Strauss. You can also thank his family today for their commitment to equality.

Robert Haas, the great-great-grand-nephew of the founder has given $100,000 to defeat Proposition 8 and announced that he is putting the reputation and the strength of his company (and $25,000 of its cash) to the effort as well. (Forbes)

The San Francisco-based jeans maker said Thursday it will co-chair with Pacific Gas & Electric a group trying to drum up opposition to Proposition 8 in the business community.

How proud am I that I spent my college years in 501’s!

Forbes is also reporting that the influential Valley Industry and Commerce Association has voted to oppose Proposition 8.

The most eloquent argument we got from an employer is they spend so much on human resources dealing with different benefits under domestic partnership rules versus married employees

Business has come to know that bigotry and discrimination are luxuries that we can ill afford at a time of economic crisis.

Um, Sorry Prop 8 Folks, But the Vote Was To OPPOSE

The supporters of Proposition 8 seem to be finding it difficult to extend their endorsements beyond their base. Yes they have all of the Republican State Senators and and 19 of 32 Repubican Assemblymen, but no Democrats or Independants. And they can’t get either of the two statewide elected Republicans, the Governor and the Insurance Commissioner.

Yes, they have the Church of Scientology of San Diego, Jewish New Testament Publications, Inc., and Creation Research of North America but they have yet to win the endorsement of any major newspapers or mainstream voters group.

And while the mayors of Los Angeles, San Diego, Sacramento, San Francisco, and Oakland are all opposed to the proposition, the Yes on 8 campaign proudly announces support from the Mayors of Danville, Rancho Santa Margarita, Chino, Chino Hills, Corona, Cypress, Duncan, Folsom and Anaheim. You’ve probably even heard of Anaheim.

So perhaps it shouldn’t be surprising to see the Yes on 8 folks desperatly cling to any endorsement that they can find. But claiming support where there is none? Now that’s just tacky.

On their website, Yes on 8 proudly lists the Los Angeles Unified School District, better known as L.A.U.S.D, as supporters. One problem. The LAUSD Board unanimously voted on September 9 to oppose Proposition 8.

“Proposition 8 undermines the culture we are all working to create here in LAUSD: one of respect, inclusiveness, and strength through diversity. I am very proud that the Board voted to affirm the right of all committed couples to marry, and rejected the bigotry behind Proposition 8,” Board President Monica Garcia.

Well, maybe it was an accident. I suppose to some folks “endorse” and “oppose” can be confusing concepts.

UPDATE: The LAUSD endorsement has now been removed from ProtectMarriage’s site.

Pro-Prop 8 LDS Leaders: “The Work Depends On Us”

Amid continuing reports of heavy Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints’ involvement in anti-marriage campaigns in California, and Arizona, a Wiki website has released a document which provides further evidence that the nuts and bolts of the Prop 8 campaign in California is almost exclusively an LDS-driven effort.

The brief document, which was on document posted on Wikileaks earlier this week, appears to be brief notes for a meeting of LDS officials working to defeat California’s Prop 8. According to the document:

The brethren emphasized that there wasn’t much participation from non-LDS people. The work depends on us.

The document goes on to describe their strategy for placing yard signs — a strategy which experienced a serious hickup when LDS campaign leaders decided to outsource their signs to China. Those signs were due last Monday, but now won’t be expected for another couple of weeks.

According to the leaked document, the next phase in the campaign is the “Persuasion Phase”, which appears to include phone-banking:

We need about 20 people per zip code to call the “mushy middle” people. That will take about 5 hours per person. There will be two surges, one the end of Sept. or early Oct. and the other at the end of Oct. to the first of Nov.

The plan also describes poll monitoring to ensure their members show up to vote, and a voter registration drive using ward lists maintained by individual LDS churches.

The poster at Wikileaks describes the document as a handout to a small group of local LDS church leaders. It was emailed to at least two other people that the poster was aware of. The poster also notes that “producing the document publicly online could result in ecclesiastical punishment for the publisher.”

When marriage amendment battles started appearing in California and Arizona, it was assumed that evangelical churches would be carrying the load. While many of those churches continue to support these so-called “marriage amendments,” the real surprise has been the extent to which one single denomination has placed so much of its resources and financial muscle — as well as the direct involvement of that denomination’s leadership and organizational structure —  to impose its theological positions on the state.

As I said before, this should concern everyone who cherishes religious liberty in this country.

“Yes on Prop 8” Signs On A Slow Boat From China

The economy is sinking and people are losing their jobs across the country. What better time than now for proponents for California’s Prop 8 to outsource their one million “Yes on Prop 8” yard signs to China?

Those “Yes On Prop 8” signs were intended to miraculously appear on lawns all across California at 7:00 am on September 22 to give the appearance of a sudden “blossoming of support” (their words, oft repeated) for the initiative, according to plans devised by LDS backers of California’s “Yes on Prop 8” campaign. But a serious glitch in that plan means that those signs weren’t ready for last Monday’s launch.

Julia Rosen Calitics blog contacted Gena Downey, producer of the cult Mormon film “God’s Army,” who works on the “Yes on Prop 8” campaign. Downey responded with an email confirming that those million signs are “still in route from China” and aren’t expected for another couple of weeks. Rosen concludes:

So, the Yes campaign, rather than purchasing some good old fashioned union made in America lawn signs, they went to some cut rate producer in China who blew the delivery date by at least three weeks. What, they couldn’t afford traditional American signs?

That seems to have worked out well. Why does the Yes on 8 campaign hate America?

Outsourcing jobs to China seems like a very strange way to “protect families” in America.

[Hat tip: Nick Literski]

No on 8 Ad Hits the Airwaves

The campaign against Proposition 8, the California anti-gay marriage amendment, has been collecting funds and promising an advertising effort. Now they have begun to deliver.

Historically, advertising around gay issues has been complexing, leaving average gay concerned about whether the No on 8 campaign would skirt the issue or reach the right audience. I wondered if same-sex marriage would be mentioned, if gay people would be the focus, and if the program selection would be based on audience or whether the ads would only run on Bravo and Logo or at 3:00 am.

So I was a little surprised last night while watching the season opening episode of Dancing With the Stars when an ad came on with a lovely older couple asking us to treat all of their children the same. But it did answer some questions.

It appears that the No on 8 advertising will be structured to reach the broadest markets. Karen Ocamb reports

Here’s where it is scheduled to air: Dancing with the Stars Premier, Heroes Premier, Grey’s Anatomy Premier, The Presidential Debate, Survivor, Ugly Betty Premier, The Office Premier, Colbert Report and The Daily Show, The Today Show and Good Morning America, Ellen, Oprah, The Tonight Show and David Letterman, Saturday Night Live…and more, per the press release.

Nor will the campaign shy away from using either the words “gay” or “marriage”.

If Prop 8 passes, our gay daughter and thousands of our fellow Californians will lose the right to marry. Please don’t eliminate that right – for anyone’s family.

However, at least in this first ad, the focus will be on presenting those with whom the straight viewer can empathize.

So far I’m impressed. Let’s hope that the advertising is effective.

Of course, the supporters of Proposition 8 have trotted out their talking points, some of which are so obviously nutty that you wonder if it they lose votes everytime they say them.

Churches will be required to perform homosexual marriage ceremonies or face prosecution under anti-discrimination laws.

Only the koolaid drinkers believe that.

Public Schools will teach that homosexuality and same-sex marriage are normal and acceptable-and if you disagree, you are a bigot.

And this argument has the ill advised effect of reminding undecided voters that the ones who are opposed to marriage equality are going to be perceived as bigots (and that many of them are bigots). That’s not what I’d consider an effective tool at recruiting support.

Steven Spielberg Gives $100,000 to Fight Prop 8

Another Hollywood heterosexual has joined Brad Pitt in helping our community fight against the attack on our equal treatment under the law. The LA Times is reporting that Steven Spielberg and Kate Capshaw have announced that they will contribute $100 K to the No on 8 campaign.

Proposition 8: Words Matter

In previous postings, I’ve explained how studies have shown that some survey respondents are more reluctant to forbid or ban something than to simply “not allow” it.

Applied to California’s Proposition 8, the ballot initiative that aims to amend the state constitution to bar same-sex couples from marrying, this research suggests that at least some voters might be influenced by how the ballot measure is worded. They may be less likely to support a proposition framed as banning marriage equality, and more likely to support one that is framed as simply defining marriage as the union of a man and a woman.

Now the latest Field Poll shows that the wording does have an impact, mainly on the 30% of likely California voters who aren’t already knowledgeable about Proposition 8.

When the ballot measure was framed as eliminating marriage rights for same-sex couples (as it will be in the official ballot summary), a whopping 58% of this group opposed it. By contrast, only a plurality (42%) opposed the measure when it was described as a “limit on marriage” — the wording favored by Proposition 8 backers.

In my latest post at Beyond Homophobia, I discuss the Field Poll findings in greater detail and consider their implications for the final seven weeks of the Proposition 8 campaign. Although the latest survey results are more good news for marriage equality supporters, they shouldn’t be cause for complacency. The amendment can still pass if its supporters turn out their voters in disproportionate numbers.

The Avocate: Arizona’s Marriage Battle “Feeling Ignored”

I missed this article from the Sept 23 issue of The Advocate:

Now that hope is being put to the test in California, Florida, and once again, Arizona, which all face ballot initiatives against same-sex marriage this election cycle. But while donations are pouring in to defeat the initiatives in the first two states, money is only trickling into Arizona’s gay rights groups. … If donations and attention are the currency of this campaign, marriage equality advocates could be up a creek.

“We’re hearing from individuals who have the money to fight these things that they’re giving to California and Florida because they feel like they can win there — and are skeptical about our chances here,” says Robert Tindall, a Phoenix human resources consultant and board member for the state’s American Civil Liberties Union. Adds Rebecca Wininger, a member of the Phoenix chapter of Parents, Families, and Friends of Lesbians and Gays, “To say that one fight is more important than another dismisses the other fights.”

Donations and attention are most certainly the currency of this campaign. Arizona turned back a so-called “marriage amendment” in 2006, becoming the first state in the nation to do so at a time when everyone thought it was impossible.

But just because we did this in 2006 doesn’t mean that it will automatically happen again in 2008. This is a different election with a different electorate, and our opposition is already airing television commercials.

We can defeat Prop 102 again, but we cannot do this without your help. Help us preserve your 2006 victory and tell them that when you say no, you really mean no. This is important because this has implications for other states in the years to come — including California, should Prop 8 go down in defeat there. Please give as generously as you can.

San Diego Union-Tribune Editorial: No on Proposition 8

The San Diego Union-Tribune mirrors the shift in thinking that Californians have had since Proposition 22:

In the past, this page has advocated civil unions for gay couples rather than marriage. But our thinking has changed, along with that of many other Californians. Gay and lesbian couples deserve the same dignity and respect in marriage that heterosexual couples have long enjoyed. We urge a No vote on Proposition 8.

They join the Los Angeles Times and the San Jose Mercury News.

(hat tip to reader Stefano)