‘Prop 8 creates a situation in California where anyone could put a measure on the ballot to eliminate fundamental rights of many, many groups,’ said Kate Kendell, a member of the ‘No on 8’ executive committee. (Photo by Jeff Chiu/AP)
The
passage
of
Proposition
8
banning
same-sex
marriage
in
California
has
sparked
a
national
firestorm
leading
to
protests
in
several
cities
where
thousands
of
people
have
expressed
their
anger
over
the
elimination
of
marriage
rights
in
the
Golden
State.
After
the
measure
passed
last
week,
protesters
came
together
Nov.
5
in
West
Hollywood,
the
gay
neighborhood
of
Los
Angeles,
blocking
traffic.
Other
protests
followed
there
over
the
weekend
and
in
San
Diego
and
San
Francisco.
More
than
2,000
protesters
also
gathered
in
Salt
Lake
City
on
Nov.
7
to
protest
the
Mormon
church’s
efforts
in
passing
the
initiative,
which
included
an
estimated
$20
million
in
donations
in
support
of
the
amendment.
Protests
also
were
planned
in
New
York
City
on
Wednesday
and
in
Washington
on
Saturday.
Robin
Tyler,
who
with
her
partner,
Diane
Olson,
was
the
first
gay
person
married
in
Los
Angeles,
participated
in
several
protests.
She
said
she
appreciated
being
able
“to
hug
people
that
we’ve
fought
this
battle
for
and
finally
being
able
to
connect
with
our
own
people.”
“It
was
terrific
to
see
our
community
acting
like
a
civil
rights
movement,”
she
said.
But
with
the
enthusiasm
came
anger
directed
toward
the
large
percentage
of
black
voters
who
supported
the
initiative,
the
Mormon
church
for
supporting
it
and
gay
leaders
who
failed
to
stop
the
initiative
from
becoming
part
of
the
California
Constitution.
As
a
result
of
the
passage
of
Proposition
8,
which
was
approved
by
52
percent
of
state
voters,
city
halls
stopped
issuing
marriage
licenses
to
gay
couples
Nov.
5
and
the
marriages
of
18,000
gay
couples
have
been
put
in
legal
jeopardy.
The
Associated
Press
also
reported
that
religious
groups
were
“energized
by
a
comeback
win”
and
plan
to
employ
the
same
tactics
used
in
California
to
stop
same-sex
marriage
from
happening
in
New
Jersey
and
New
York,
where
the
state
legislatures
are
being
lobbied
to
pass
bills
granting
marriage
rights
to
gay
couples.
Petitions
filed
with
Calif.
Supreme
Court
In
the
aftermath
of
Election
Day,
a
number
of
organizations
filed
lawsuits
against
Prop
8
in
an
attempt
to
get
the
courts
to
reject
the
measure.
Attorneys
for
Los
Angeles,
San
Francisco
and
Santa
Clara
County
joined
in
filing
a
petition
for
a
writ
of
mandate
with
the
California
Supreme
Court
to
invalidate
Prop
8.
Tyler
and
Olson
filed
their
own
lawsuit
Nov.
5.
The
American
Civil
Liberties
Union,
Lambda
Legal
and
the
National
Center
for
Lesbian
Rights
filed
another
petition
with
the
high
court
Nov.
5.
For
the
petition
from
the
activist
organizations,
opponents
of
Prop
8
argue
that
the
measure
is
such
a
significant
change
to
the
state
constitution
that
it
should
be
considered
a
“revision”
and
not
an
“amendment,”
thus
requiring
approval
from
two-thirds
of
the
state
legislature.
Kate
Kendell,
executive
director
of
the
National
Center
for
Lesbian
Rights
and
a
member
of
the
“No
on
8”
executive
committee,
said
the
plaintiffs
are
“only
asking
that
amendments
that
seek
to
deprive
a
suspect
class
of
a
fundamental
right
be
put
in
that
(revision)
category
—
a
category
that
is
off-limits
to
popular
vote.”
The
lawsuit
is
similar
to
a
petition
that
gay
activist
groups
filed
with
the
California
Supreme
Court
in
June
in
an
attempt
to
keep
Prop
8
off
the
ballot.
The
court
denied
the
petition
without
offering
an
opinion
on
its
merits.
Kendell
said
there
was
“no
doubt
that
the
chances
of
success
on
our
claims
is
much,
much
stronger
than
pre-election.”
“Prop
8
creates
a
situation
in
California
where
anyone
could
put
a
measure
on
the
ballot
to
eliminate
fundamental
rights
of
many,
many
groups,”
she
said.
“There’s
a
lot
of
people
who
could
engage
in
a
lot
of
mischief
that
perverts
the
initiative
process
and
really
turns
the
constitution
into
a
document
no
more
significant
than
a
comic
book.”
Kendell
she
said
expected
the
California
Supreme
Court
would
consolidate
the
three
petitions
into
one
lawsuit.
She
noted
the
earliest
time
that
justices
could
take
up
the
lawsuit
is
next
week,
but
her
“best
guess”
for
when
the
court
would
take
up
the
matter
is
within
three
weeks.
She
said
it
was
“not
advisable
at
this
point”
to
file
a
federal
lawsuit
over
Proposition
8
because
the
California
Supreme
Court
already
established
constitutional
protections
for
gay
people
and
the
U.S.
Supreme
Court
“is
not
in
that
place.”
When
asked
about
the
possibility
of
calling
a
constitutional
convention
to
eliminate
Prop
8,
Kendell
said
she
didn’t
know
“technically
if
that
would
be
right
process
or
an
advisable
process.”
When
asked
if
there
were
any
plans
to
get
another
initiative
on
the
ballot
in
2010
that
could
eliminate
Prop
8,
Kendell
said
that,
“all
options
are
being
discussed.”
Some
California
political
leaders
have
shown
continued
willingness
to
fight
against
Prop
8
even
after
its
passage.
California
Gov.
Arnold
Schwarz-enegger,
a
Republican,
told
CNN
on
Monday
that
supporters
of
same-sex
marriage
“should
never
give
up”
and
the
state
Supreme
Court
will
“maybe
undo”
the
measure.
“I
learn
the
messages
from
lifting
weights,”
he
said.
“Sometimes
I
try
to
lift
the
weight
10
times
and
I
failed,
but
the
11th
time
I
lifted
it.
So
I
learned
that
you
should
never
ever
give
up.
And
I
think
it’s
the
same
with
this
issue.”
U.S.
House
Speaker
Nancy
Pelosi,
who
represents
San
Francisco,
issued
a
statement
Nov.
6
saying
she
was
“deeply
disappointed
by
the
passage
of
Proposition
8”
because
it
“takes
away
individual
rights
and
freedoms,
and
is
rooted
in
the
politics
of
division.”
“The
passage
of
this
measure
diminishes
the
California
Constitution,”
she
said.
“I
strongly
support
the
legal
challenges
underway
to
halt
this
dangerous
revision
of
our
state
Constitution.”
Activists
criticize
‘No
on
8’
campaign
Despite
the
failure
of
the
“No
on
8”
campaign,
Kendell
said
she
felt
“proud
and
some
measure
of
peace
believing
that
very,
very
talented
and
good
people
did
really
everything
we
could
...
The
following comments were posted by our readers and were
not edited by the Washington Blade. We ask that you
treat others with respect; any post deemed offensive will
be removed.
rpcv84 on 11/17/086:44 PM:
LatinVoice: I support you wholeheartedly. Don't let ReasonableDoubt's bitter, mean, evil-sounding note adversely affect your reasoning or spirit. You're absolutely correct with what you wrote. ReasonableDoubt should be grateful for all he/she's got in the US; s/he should live for a while in a country, such as Morocco where I did for 3 years, where gays had NO PLACE at the table, are harrassed, and their sexual activities are illegal. ReasonableDoubt should try living elsewhere, and then he/she'd be glad for what s/he has here in the US.
Hold your ground, LatinVoice.
ReasonableDoubt on 11/17/084:49 PM:
LatinVoice: You write "Yes, we deserve respect and opportunities to grow in good," but then spend the rest of your words trashing every bit of the gay community through your own warped perspective. You are the typical self-hating fag, lamenting the "sins" of every other gay person, while claiming yourself to be morally superior. Here's a hint: We don't care what you think, and we will win our rights with or without you.
LatinVoice on 11/15/081:53 PM:
Moreover, the gay communities are found is large cities where they tend to segregate themselves from the rest of the world. Within those areas, we see gays segregating other gay sub-groups based on race, ethnicity, age and economical status. It is a dysfunctional social group that has taken their sexual preference to a political and humanistic level that distorted values in society. The backbone of society is the family (mother/father) and we have to protect it because we come from a family. We would not be in this world otherwise. Yes, we deserve respect and opportunites to grow in good.
LatinVoice on 11/15/081:34 PM:
As a homosexual in Miami, I voted Yes for the ban. What is the percentage of gay people in committed relationships? I see no need for marriage between gays as they are less likely to compromise in a relationship. Their values are skewed by superficially and vanity until they reach senility and it is then when they go desperate looking to pair with someone to avoid painful loneliness. The arrogance is too big. Gay couples split over ridiculous issues. They’re more prone on cheating and there is a great chance a lot of “foreign” boys are going wed for immigration paper only. It's not OK.
