Self defeating reaction to Prop 8 from GBL community. (legal, activist, election)

[OC Investor2]

This whole Prop 8 debate is largely over semantics - calling the legal relationship between a gay couple a "marriage" or "partnership"/"union". Same sex couples in California can aquire all the legal protections afforded hetro married couples through a California civil union or domestic partnership. For purposes of CA state law there is no significant difference.

So Prop 8 passes and suddenly gay rights groups are in the streets of LA sounding off like they are one step from being shipped to the gulag. Meanwhile California is one of only 5 or 6 states that provide for legal recognition of same sex couples.

Activists are fighting tooth & nail to force traditionalists to accept gay unions as "marriages" in CA when gays can't even have a legal union 40+ states and get almost ZERO legal recognition from the Feds.

Why are they expending all these resources fighting for the final inch of ground in CA when they are miles away from their goal in most of the rest of the country? Do they think blacklisting & harassing their political opponents will change peoples minds in CA or these other places? Do they think tying up traffic in West LA - West LA!! - and other places that voted against Prop 8 Help's their cause?

What's the real goal here?

[BirdistheWord]

Hopefully it involves the destruction of orange county.

[AnUnidentifiedMale]

Originally Posted by OC Investor2

This whole Prop 8 debate is largely over semantics - calling the legal relationship between a gay couple a "marriage" or "partnership"/"union".

Maybe for you it is, but for many, it's about the removal of equal rights from a certain class of people.

So Prop 8 passes and suddenly gay rights groups are in the streets of LA sounding off like they are one step from being shipped to the gulag.

While some of the reactions have been over the top, others are justifiably upset, especially the 18,000 couples whose legal marriage licenses may have been invalidated overnight by the passage of Prop 8.

Activists are fighting tooth & nail to force traditionalists to accept gay unions as "marriages" in CA when gays can't even have a legal union 40+ states and get almost ZERO legal recognition from the Feds.

Actually, since same-sex marriage was legal already, activists aren't asking for anything that they didn't have before. The California Supreme Court said that marriage is a basic civil right that should be available to every individual in the state. Same-sex marriage was legal in California for nearly six months. It was the passage of Prop 8 that caused this mess. The activists wouldn't be there, and life would have gone on peacefully if it weren't for Prop 8.

You seem to be saying, "Shut up and accept the fact that you're no longer equal, and oh - you're lucky that you've got any legal recognition at all."

By the way, cute use of the quotation marks around the word "marriage". It's right out of the right-wing literature that I've read. The quotation marks suggest that same-sex marriages aren't real marriages.

Why are they expending all these resources fighting for the final inch of ground in CA

They already had the "final inch of ground". It was Prop 8 supporters who decided to take it away from them.

What's the real goal here?

Simple. They want to have the same rights that they had the day before the election. If your marriage license was invalidated overnight, you'd probably be upset too.

It's easy to smugly criticize gay rights groups when you lost nothing from the passage of Prop 8.

If I'm wrong, though, and you did have a marriage license that was invalidated by Prop 8, or if you planned to marry someone of the same-sex in the future, please tell me and I will apologize for my tone.

[OC Investor2]

Maybe for you it is, but for many, it's about the removal of equality from a certain class of people.

There is no loss in equality. Under current law, everyone, regardlesss of sexual orientation, can enter into a marriage with an individual of the opposite sex. Everyone has the same, equal, abilty to do so under the law.

If you do not wish to exercise the legal option of marrying someone of the opposite sex, you may enter a domestic partnership. Domestic partnership provides all the same legal standing, rights and priveleges as a marriage in the eyes of the law. Everyone, regardless of sexual orientation, of legal age has access to this opportunity as well.

That is equal.

While some of the reactions have been over the top, others are justifiably upset, especially the 18,000 couples whose legal marriage licenses may have been invalidated overnight by the passage of Prop 8.

Prop 8 was approved for the ballot in november of 2007, the CASC ruled marriages legal in the summer of 2008. None of those 18k couples got married not knowing thge "marriages" could be invalidated while a civil union was under no such threat. All those couples can go & get a civil union today & there would be no practical change in their lives from when they were "married"

Actually, since same-sex marriage was legal already, activists aren't asking for anything that they didn't have before. The California Supreme Court said that marriage is a basic civil right that should be available to every individual in the state. It was the Prop 8 supporters who caused this mess. The activists wouldn't be there, and life would have gone on peacefully if it weren't for Prop 8.

Again, Prop 8 proceeded the CASC decision. The Prop would'nt be there if the activist had'nt been working to redefine the word "marriage" for years.

You seem to be saying, "Shut up and accept the fact that you're no longer equal, and oh - you're lucky that you've got any legal recognition at all."

No, I'm saying the focus should be on expanding the geography that offers some legal protection to GBL couples & achieving some federal recognitoin of GBL unions v. squabbling over what the union is called.

By the way, cute use of the quotation marks around the word "marriage". It's right out of the right-wing literature that I've read. The quotation marks suggest that same-sex marriages aren't real marriages.

This is where we really disagree. I believe it is not a marriage. A union, partnership, whatever, but a marriage is between a man & a woman.

They already had the "final inch of ground". It was Prop 8 supporters who decided to take it away from them.

Simple. They want to have the same rights that they had the day before the election. If your marriage license was invalidated overnight, you'd probably be upset too.

It's easy to smugly criticize gay rights groups when you lost nothing from the passage of Prop 8.

I voted for Prop 8. I believe marriage is between a man & a woman. If CA did not have a robust civil union program for GBL's, I don't know how I would have voted. Because as much as I believe marriage is between a man & woman, I also believe that it is only fair that GBL couples have a legal framework established by the state to build a life together and that that framework should offer all the same legal advantages and protections as a marriage. The state of CA provides that as much as is possible today.

Changing the name of the unions to marriages will not change anything. It will not confer federal benefits on the couple, it will not get the union recognized in other states that do not recognize same sex partnerships and it most definately won't confer the socail standing & approval so many advocates of gay marriage think they will get by calling them marriages.

So instead of squabbling over names maybe all the CA gay activists should be focussed on changing minds in NV, AZ & OR or at the federal level so GBL's in those states can acheive some of the same rights they now enjoy.

[AnUnidentifiedMale]

By saying that same-sex couples should just be happy with civil unions is like telling a certain group of people that they should be happy sitting at the back of the bus. After all, the bus still takes them to where they need to go, right? Why do they have to push for the right to sit up front?

You'd like us ignore the fact that same-sex marriages were legal for six months, arguing that because Prop 8 was being "prepared", it should have taken precedent over the Supreme Court's decision. It doesn't matter if it was prepared last year or last month. It meant nothing until it was voted upon.

Furthermore, the Prop 8 organization certainly could have pulled it from the November ballot after the California Supreme Court made its decision in May, allowing same-sex couples to marry. Instead, they ignored the court's decision, and pushed onward.

When Prop 8 supporters say, "Why can't the No on 8 side respect the vote and give up? Prop 8 won.", I can't help but think, "The Prop 8 supporters didn't give up after the CASC made its decision. Why should the opponents give up simply because of a popular vote?"

So, although many of the Prop 8 supporters would like this case to be settled and final (now that they've gotten the result they wanted), it's not.

This could go on for a long, long time.

[wehotex]

Originally Posted by AnUnidentifiedMale

Maybe for you it is, but for many, it's about the removal of equal rights from a certain class of people.

While some of the reactions have been over the top, others are justifiably upset, especially the 18,000 couples whose legal marriage licenses may have been invalidated overnight by the passage of Prop 8.

Actually, since same-sex marriage was legal already, activists aren't asking for anything that they didn't have before. The California Supreme Court said that marriage is a basic civil right that should be available to every individual in the state. Same-sex marriage was legal in California for nearly six months. It was the passage of Prop 8 that caused this mess. The activists wouldn't be there, and life would have gone on peacefully if it weren't for Prop 8.

You seem to be saying, "Shut up and accept the fact that you're no longer equal, and oh - you're lucky that you've got any legal recognition at all."

By the way, cute use of the quotation marks around the word "marriage". It's right out of the right-wing literature that I've read. The quotation marks suggest that same-sex marriages aren't real marriages.

They already had the "final inch of ground". It was Prop 8 supporters who decided to take it away from them.

Simple. They want to have the same rights that they had the day before the election. If your marriage license was invalidated overnight, you'd probably be upset too.

It's easy to smugly criticize gay rights groups when you lost nothing from the passage of Prop 8.

If I'm wrong, though, and you did have a marriage license that was invalidated by Prop 8, or if you planned to marry someone of the same-sex in the future, please tell me and I will apologize for my tone.

I wish that I could rep you again. I owe you one.

[18Montclair]

Originally Posted by AnUnidentifiedMale

By saying that same-sex couples should just be happy with civil unions is like telling a certain group of people that they should be happy sitting at the back of the bus. After all, the bus still takes them to where they need to go, right? Why do they have to push for the right to sit up front?

You'd like us ignore the fact that same-sex marriages were legal for six months, arguing that because Prop 8 was being "prepared", it should have taken precedent over the Supreme Court's decision. It doesn't matter if it was prepared last year or last month. It meant nothing until it was voted upon.

Furthermore, the Prop 8 organization certainly could have pulled it from the November ballot after the California Supreme Court made its decision in May, allowing same-sex couples to marry. Instead, they ignored the court's decision, and pushed onward.

When Prop 8 supporters say, "Why can't the No on 8 side respect the vote and give up? Prop 8 won.", I can't help but think, "The Prop 8 supporters didn't give up after the CASC made its decision. Why should the opponents give up simply because of a popular vote?"

So, although many of the Prop 8 supporters would like this case to be settled and final (now that they've gotten the result they wanted), it's not.

This could go on for a long, long time.

All true.

But the problem is that this is an issue where Church and State collide.

I think Marriage and Government need to get a divorce.

[AnUnidentifiedMale]

Originally Posted by 18Montclair

All true.

But the problem is that this is an issue where Church and State collide.

I think Marriage and Government need to get a divorce.

Yes! I would love that too.

I think it would be very cool if the State of California would say, "Okay, no more marriage licenses from the state. Everybody gets civil unions and everybody is equal. If you want to say you're married, go to a church and get married."

That would be grand.

[NVplumber]

Originally Posted by 18Montclair

All true.

But the problem is that this is an issue where Church and State collide.

I think Marriage and Government need to get a divorce.

Truely!! The government needs to be divorced from our lives in more areas than just marriage. Some things , in reality, ain't nobody's business but our own. Well put Montclair. Simple and direct. Covering a lot of ground in few words.

[PurpleLove08]

Originally Posted by OC Investor2

Same sex couples in California can aquire all the legal protections afforded hetro married couples through a California civil union or domestic partnership. For purposes of CA state law there is no significant difference.

How does domestic partnership differ from marriage?
While the AB 205 takes a giant step toward creating equality for same-sex couples, it doesnt give same-sex couples all the rights and responsibilities of marriage. To begin with, it doesnt allow couples to walk down the aisle, say I do, and announce to the world that they are a married couple. There is a great deal of cultural, historical and social significance attached to that statement and the status that goes with it. It may be the single most important aspect of marriage.

The law does not give same-sex couples any of the more than 1000 rights and benefits that the federal government gives to married couples, including:

• the right to sponsor a partner for immigration purposes;
• the right to family-related Social Security benefits;
• the right to federal income and estate tax breaks; and
• the right to purchase continued health coverage for a partner after the loss of a job.

Right now, the federal government wont let any state extend these federal benefits to same-sex couples, no matter what the relationship is called.

Even under California law, same-sex couples are not completely equal. Domestic Partners cannot file joint state income taxes and state employees are not entitled to the same benefits under the states long-term care benefits package. (This could be an advantage. See below.)

In addition, if you enter into a California domestic partnership, many of the protections will not exist if and when you are outside California. For instance, if you or your partner are injured in another state, you are allowed hospital visitation or the right to make emergency medical decisions on behalf of your partner.

Source:Get Busy. Get Equal: Frequently Asked Questions about California Domestic Partnerships (http://www.aclu.org/getequal/rela/california.html - broken link)