Overlooked: Gay Marriage in California — Jun 9th 2008

By Dakota Smith

Story submission: Wedding Plans Underway In Calif. As Foes Rally Offensive
User: David-NWA

California saw two big events this week: First, opponents of California Supreme Court's May ruling (which granted gays the right to get married) gathered enough signatures to put an anti-gay marriage initiative on the ballot. Secondly, the Supreme Court stayed its decision to allow gay marriages to go forward beginning June 16th. California has been through this vote before: In 2000 voters adopted Proposition 22--with 61.4% in favor of the measure--that banned gay marriage. But in this case the legal twist is that the ban on gay marriage could come five months after couples are legally married in the state. To find out how gay groups are feeling about this latest round of events, Propeller followed up with Rachel Dowd, executive editor of The Advocate.

What is the mood, or general mood among your readers in terms of this being on the ballot?

The mood is cautious optimism. Even the fact that the Supreme Court decided to stay their decision and allow gay marriages to go forward on June 17th was a great symbol that we are moving forward.

But at the same time, the amount of money needed to beat this ballot initiative will be between $10 million and $20 million. That's an enormous amount of money for pro gay groups to raise. It will be the most ever they have raised and so it's an enormous task ahead. But it feels like winds have changed.

What will the money be spent on?

Media outreach, mostly. The main group [who helped put the initiative on the ballot] is the National Coalition for Marriage in California. They spent $8 million to get it on the ballot and they have plans to spend $15 million more.

Where do current polls show in terms of how the vote could swing?

A recent Los Angeles Times poll taken at the end of May showed that 51 percent of voters approved of same sex marriages. It's a dead heat. But that in and of itself is progress since Prop. 22 saw 61 percent of voters disapproving... so we are making progress.

One thing that is new now is that when Massachusetts passed their initiative, they got a $102 million boost to their economy in the first 18 months because of gay weddings [wedding and the related business, i.e., catering, florists, etc]. Now, you have to be a resident to Massachusetts to marry, you can't just drive there and get marry, but California won't have the resident clause. And it's estimated that it'll give a $375 million boost to our economy.

What happens to those marriages that happen before November if voters approve the amendment to ban gay marriage?

This has never happened before so there are issues.. but you can't take away something that was legal.

What kinds of implications will the November vote have for the rest of the country?

The California Supreme is the most-cited court in the country, it is used more often in arguments than in any other state. It's the most important Supreme Court in the country. There are other states, like Connecticut, that are close [to approving gay marriage] and looking to California right now.

With both candidates saying they are opposed to gay marriage, will this have any impact on the presidential race?

With the number of young voters who now plan to got to the polls [because of Obama] and vote this November, it's in our favor....Even though, he respects the right to choose, he has inspired younger voters.


Propeller also caught up with user David NWPA to find out what interesting him about the story. Here's what he wrote back: "I was most interested by the fact that some people in California (and elsewhere) are vehemently opposed to marriage equality and will stop at nothing to embolden their supporters. The reasoning behind why gay marriage is so offensive to some rests solely with religious beliefs and mythical ideas about marriage. That it is a heterosexual institution and has traditionally been so is sufficient reason to keep gays and lesbians from marrying. However, if one uses that logic, neither women, nor blacks could vote. They could not wed one another, and we would have slaves picking cotton in the south. Traditions can and rightly should change. Those who oppose gay marriage, like the ones mentioned in the article, fail to understand that position. Those ideas I found to be most compelling."

Tags:

0 Comments