No on 8.
Sorry if I am being too personal on this. It’s just important to me.
P.S.: Just as an FYI, I know almost all of you support No on 8, I just think that this is a great ad – one that my parents would make if thy had the influence. I appreciate the support all of you give. You can donate here. I know you all don’t have a lot of money, but $5 or $10 would be great!
Jon H
I gave $200 the other day.
OT: We need a betting pool on the number of media reported Halloween incidents of people wearing racist blackface "Obama" costumes. You *know* it’s gonna happen.
Michael D.
Thank you!
Xanthippas
Ithaz Perleman is the greatest violinist of our age and we’re lucky that he chose our country to call home. If he has a gay daughter and says vote no on 8, then people should fucking well vote against that stupid proposition.
Scribble
I really hope enough people on the coast and in Sacramento vote NO to outweigh the right-wing nutters out here.
Smudgemo
My household is delivering three votes for No, and my coworkers all seem to be in agreement. Okay, it’s Oakland/Berkeley, but it counts.
Jesse Ventura may be a lot of things, but when he pointed out that this an issue of civil rights, he was correct. The religious pricks that keep bringing this up are really pissing me off.
Charity
This was lovely. How can you listen to Mr. Perlman and not be moved to do the right thing? NO on Prop 8. I’m just sorry I’m in NJ and can’t help vote.
Michael D.
@Charity: You can’t vote, but you can donate!
Michael D.
@Smudgemo: Your family = Awesome. Thank you!!
Jon H
Apple has given $100k and come out against 8.
Laertes
I know some people who plan to vote for prop 8. The thing that swayed them was the argument that even if 8 passes, same-sex couples will still have precisely the same rights as opposite-sex couples, except that it’ll be called "domestic partnership" instead of marriage.
For whatever reason, the argument that calling the same institution by a different name is just a shameful and degrading "separate but equal" doesn’t move them.
The SecState’s voter guide doesn’t help much on that front. The nearest it gets to addressing the point:
(caps in original)
That’s on point, if a bit vague. From the rebuttal: "Under California law gay and lesbian domestic partnerships are treated equally; they already have the same rights as married couples. Proposition 8 does not change that…Prop. 8 will NOT take away any other rights or benefits of gay couples."
Okay, a bare assertion that the argument against is wrong. And, sadly, the no-on-8 forces don’t get to answer the rebuttal, so let’s instead look at their rebuttal to the case for 8:
(again, caps in original.)
Well, great. Nine concrete differences. What are they? This stuff about "confusion" and "certainty" is pretty weak tea. I’m trying to convince people here, and the no-on-8 guys are giving me not a whole hell of a lot to work with. It reads like a lot of hand-waving that’s intended to obscure the fact that it really IS mostly just about nomenclature. That’s more than enough for me, but it’s not enough for the people I’m working on.
Anyone help me out here?
gbear
Sully was featuring some worthwhile Prop 8 ads too.
My friends in SF that were married last month were asking friends to donate to No on 8 as a wedding present. I couldn’t afford much but that’s what I did for them.
ninerdave
Sorry have to disagree about that ad. It sucks.
1. I’d bet a good majority of people don’t know who Itzhak Perlman is. I didn’t. I had to look him up. When I did I found out:
2. He lives in NY. It’s a good bet that Homophobes are also Xenophobes. Hearing from a New Yorker tell them to vote one way or another in CA isn’t going to wash. In fact as someone who is pretty liberal, lives in the Bay Area of CA, I absolutely resent outsiders using our proposition system to influence our state. It happens every election cycle; see T Boone Pickens and Prop 10 this year in CA. I voted no.
3. That ad does not measure up to this. THAT is a good ad. Extremely effective, and HAS been flipping votes.
See this ad also
While, I voted No on 8 (of course), the yes folk have been extremely effective in scaring the shit out of fence sitters, which is why you see it getting closer. I haven’t seen the No folks on TV or mailings or really anywhere outside of a few lawn signs. It seems they are hoping that the good liberals of CA will carry them through. Hell, I drove through the Laurel district in Oakland the other night and saw a few people with Yes on 8 signs on a corner.
Note to the world outside of CA, while we have San Francisco and LA, we also have a bunch of dumb rednecks in between.
cain
I gave 25 bucks a week ago. I don’t know any LGBT people.. well I do but not very well. But I can’t stand injustice. If some money helps I will gladly give.
cain
gbear
A lot of those dumb rednecks have kids, brothers, sisters and cousins that are gay (and maybe living in SF or LA). It’s an issue that can touch any family – you can’t build a gated community that will keep teh gay out.
Those shitty hate ads do make people think, but some of those rednecks may be thinking that people in their family are going to get fucked over.
You know more of them than you think you do.
Bill H
Perlman speaks as movingly as he plays. I have donated enough elsewhere toward "No on 8" that I don’t feel the need to donate here, but only because my funds are not unlimited.
That’s a good ad if you are a sick fuck.
ninerdave
@gbear:
The simple fact is since those ads have been airing the polling has gone in the direction of yes. They are stupid, and shitty, but they are working and I have yet to see any No ads as effective.
How about feature Phyllis Lyon talking about how she was able to be married to Del Martin for at least a few months before Del passed. Their relationship lasted 55 years.
Comrade Kevin
@cain:
Bullshit.
Comrade Kevin
@ninerdave:
That is something they should do, an excellent idea.
Unrepentent Dennis - SGMM
The Yes on 8 campaign has been one of the most duplicitous I’ve ever seen. In the world of California Ballot Propositions, that’s saying a hell of a lot. The yard signs are all in nice bright Easter Egg colors and they symbolically show a happy family. The televised ads imply all sorts of sinister outcomes if Prop. 8 fails without even striking a glancing blow at the facts. Nonetheless, it’s a coin toss as to whether the thing will pass.
I’ve concluded that, on some issues, Californians aren’t very far removed from the yahoos screaming "Terrorist" at the Palin rallies.
expatoz
I’ve donated $600….US expat and have never lived in California but this one is too important to ignore. I’ve already cast my absentee ballot for Obama and have a big sign hanging outside my house in Oz for him. Let’s get all of this done.
Comrade Kevin
@Unrepentent Dennis – SGMM:
The ads really are repulsive. Some of them stop just barely short of saying "the fags are taking over!!!!"
ninerdave
@Unrepentent Dennis – SGMM:
While California has it’s share of wingnuttia, think Orange County, Contra Costa County (the Mini-OC), and well hell the Freeps’ website is published out of Fresno. The plain and simple fact is the Yes folks are out campaigning the No folks. Period.
DrDave
Too bad Dick Cheney doesn’t have the character to stand up for his daugher like that.
We are going to see Perlman perform on Tuesday night at our friends’ synagogue. I will make a point of thanking him for making this ad.
Graeme
Just so you know, my wife and I have donated to the ‘No’ campaign, and we both cannot wait to vote no on 8.
I say that as someone who voted for W. in 2000, who skipped 2004, then finally voted against the GOP in 2004.
Not that I’ve ever had anything against gay people. Even in KY I knew some good guys @ my Catholic high school who were gay. It’s a civil rights issue – you guys pay tax and serve (now seemingly openly) in the military, so you should have full rights.
Really, it was crazy to invite my friends Zack and Jeff to our wedding in March, given they’d been together longer than Megan and I had known one another.
I’m rambling, and I’m not in the mood to proof this. Anyway – I can’t wait to cast the ballot.
Jon H
@Kevin
"Bullshit."
cain had an ellipsis, not a period. If you read it correctly, he said he didn’t know any *well*.
And, hell, he said he donated.
Unrepentent Dennis - SGMM
@ninerdave:
They are. What’s sad is that it’s making a difference in this of all states. I learned years ago that California is only marginally a Blue state: we elect plenty of Republicans. I was still surprised to see how many people here were swayed by the Yes on 8 campaign. The Perlman ad, though well intentioned, is a dud. People on this blog know who Perlman is for the same reasons that they know what The Establishment Clause is. Most of the public; not so much.
In 1880, California prohibited the issuance of licenses for marriage between a white person and "a Negro, mulatto, or Mongolian." The prohibition was codified in 1942 by California Assembly Bill SB 321 which was signed into law by then Governor Earl Warren. SB 321 was repealed in 1948. Here’s hoping that if 8 passes it won’t take us 68 years to strike it down.
ninerdave
@Unrepentent Dennis – SGMM:
Cheers to that. Only thing that can dampen my spirits on Nov 4th (assuming all goes well, knock on wood, salt over the shoulder, etc) is Prop 8 passing. Last I saw Field has it down by 4; one point out of the margin of error.
Unrepentent Dennis - SGMM
Too close but, this is the same California that elected Ronald Reagan our governor for two terms. We’ve also elected such exemplars of pure reason as Dana Rohrbacher, "B-1 Bob" Dornan, and the execrable Rep. Jerry Lewis. My own representative is David Dreier.
ninerdave
@Unrepentent Dennis – SGMM:
Yeah, we’re such a bastion of liberalism.
/snark
Zuzu's Petals
So where the hell is Arnold?????
LA Times
bootlegger
First. No need to apologize. Remind us about this every day from now until election day.
Second. Prop 8 is an existential threat to our republic. The premise of democracy is undermined by the tyranny of the majority. This is the expressed function of our Bill of Rights. It guarantees, among other things, that All are equal before the law. No spin about "family values" changes the fact that Prop 8 is a question of whether or not 2-person relationships are equal before the law.
Third. Its true that most of the other states have already run over this Stop sign and changed their constitutions to make an exception for this tyranny of the majority. It needs to stop. Now.
Fourth. The brave citizens of Vermont, Massachusetts, and even Arizona drew the line against marriage discrimination. I expect the people of California will have the courage to do the same.
Fifth. Donate to a good cause.
Good luck fellow Americans.
Rudi
mmmmm
ninerdave
@Zuzu’s Petals:
Well I think the Op-Ed makes it clear…he’s going to be running for the Senate. He’ll need the wingnuts to beat Boxer. Now, I’ll admit, I think he’s done a decent job as Governor. I don’t agree with him on a lot of issues, but he’s been a smart balance against the idiots in the state legislature. While I will for sure vote for Boxer, if he ran against Feinstein, he’d probably get my vote. She’s been absolutely horrible.
In fact I’d vote for McCain, Bush or Rove before I vote for her again.
MobiusKlein
@ninerdave: Feinstein should go. in 2006, she couldn’t commit to voting against the "it’s OK to torture a little" act – had to think about it before making a stand. The bill passed on my kids’ 5th birthday, for fucks sake.
Ditch her big time.
Arnold, we’ll have a different argument about later…
Scribble
@ninerdave
Oi! Be a little more fair! Some parts of the great In-Between are getting better.
I live out in the most atrociously redneck bit of the state (outside of the Klan towns anyway [and yes, they do still exist out here, mostly in the mountains]) and I’m seeing a few more NO signs than I would have expected outside of our version of the Castro district.
Also, as gbear said, we DO have relatives who aren’t straight (a cousin, in my case) who would/could be hurt by this. Even if I weren’t already planning to vote no on principle, I’d vote NO on this damn thing for her sake.
@Unrepentent Dennis – SGMM, that would apply most to the interior of the state where the conservatives, among other things, live. It’s rural out here, and the bits that aren’t are filled with suburbanites fresh off the farm.
ninerdave
@Scribble:
In my defense, I said "a bunch", implying not all y’all ;)
joe the gay plumber
joe the plumber is gay porno.
http://nifty.nisusnet.com/nifty/gay/adult-friends/joe-the-plumber
Zuzu's Petals
@ninerdave:
These ads look pretty good to me. I don’t know how many are running on TV, though.
ninerdave
@MobiusKlein:
Yup. Agreed. I’m hoping that a true Dem runs against her. However, I’ll vote for any serious contender that runs against her. I don’t care their politics, affiliation, whatever. Dobson? Sure, you’ve got my vote. Doesn’t matter. Whoever that person is will be one out of 100 and can’t be worse than Feinstein. Six years later we can put in a true progressive. The six year lag is IMHO worth it.
I hear rumblings that she might not run next term, I can only hope so.
Neil H
Ask them if they’d be willing to forego calling their own dedicated, opposite-sex relationship a "marriage" if they still got the same government benefits and responsibilities under the name "domestic partnership". If they say no, ask them why they think "domestic partnerships" are good enough for gay people but not good enough for straight people.
If they say yes (which happens fairly often when you’re asking people who aren’t married), sorry, can’t help.
Jeff
We figured Obama has enough and donated to the no’s last night. What pisses me off, besides the yes signs with blatant lies, is that it took until October for some of the big money folks to put their money where their mouths are. I hope better late, than never.
Darkrose
Just wanted to add my thanks to all of you who donated. The support from the lefty blogosphere has been really awesome.
ninerdave
@Zuzu’s Petals:
Now THAT’s an ad that works!!! Throws the bullshit back into their face. I have not seen that ad on TV though. Was the exact same argument I heard on Ronn Owens show on KGO when he had pro and con 8 people on. The Pro people talked about how "damaging" this would be to kids, the con said bullshit it has nothing to do with kids and is all about rights. The Pro people ended up looking like the bigots they are.
Darkrose
Also…this may be a crazy idea, but there seem to be a lot of BJers in Northern and Central CA, and I’m wondering if there’s any interest in doing a meetup kind of thing? Or are we too much a bunch of antisocial geeks for that?
ninerdave
@Darkrose:
I’d be up for it. I also personally know another person who posts here. I might be able to talk him into it.
Jeff
@ninerdave: Problem is most people just see the signs on the side of the road and say, "Oh yeah, I’m for parental rights and religious freedom, so I’ll vote yes."
What gets me is my religious "leaders" in the Conservative Jewish movement have said Rabbis can perform gay marriages. So they are actually impinging on my faith’s religious freedom by saying Conservative Rabbis should not be able to perform legal marriages in the state of California.
ThymeZoneThePlumber
The whole thing is symbolic. You could call it "hixinilly" and it would be the same thing. That’s the whole point, the m-word is just a word. The rights don’t belong to it, or shouldn’t. The rights should belong to the people to employ as they see fit. But churches and societies have attached a totally false set of assumptions around the m-word that mean nothing and have no real value. The fact is that the law improperly and in a dysfunctional fashion binds those things to the word.
The problem is that LGBT doesn’t get this. They want it to be about rights, and then insist on the word. The word comes with its defenders, and by making this stupid mistake, you invite those defenders to oppose you, which gains them, and you, nothing but a fight.
It’s totally stupid, and avoidable. But both sides seem happy with the endless fighting and posturing over it, and it serves all their purposes, so you are stuck with the way it is.
It’s not unlike the abortion "fight." The fight serves purposes, otherwise, it would be possible to seek agreement and move on. When LGBT finds out that agreeing works better than fighting, they can have their rights without much problem. Even the real gay-o-phobes don’t really care much about the rights themselves. They just like to rig the fight to let them use it as a political tool, and the other side plays along. Totally stupid.
Imagine if you will a bunch of people sat down and said, we want and need these rights. Now, what is the ONE THING WE CAN CALL THIS to make sure that we get the most resistance? Yeah, that’s how stupid it is.
Jeff
That whole separate but equal line did not fly in the 50s, so why should it now. You may say it is just a word, but laws are made up of words. There will always be some asshat judge or politician who will say they are different if you use a different name and that could have consequences.
ThymeZoneThePlumber
Yeah, I don’t know what that means, and I don’t think you do either. Laws are words? Of course. So are cereal box advertisements.
What is made of words is useless fights.
If LGBT came to the rest of the population and said, can we please have these rights? Call it anything you want … I think the answer would be, sure, whatever, live and let live.
But then LGBT says, but we want the WORD. We want it called marriage. Population says, not so fast, now we have a fight.
If you think choosing the fights over the rights is really worth having the precious word, then you have staked your claim on the ownership of that word, and you are in for a long and ugly struggle over nothing of value. And for doing that, you lose my support. I claim to be the most socially liberal person on this blog, and with that attitude you get no help from me. Yes, I’d vote NO on the thing in CA, and I will vote NO on a DOMA initiative here in ten days. But that’s it. Beyond that, don’t ask me to support the fight. The fight is ridiculous.
Blogs are for long fights over words. Long may they wave. But laws should be about what’s important. The ownership of the m-word is not really important. It means shit when the rights are what really matters. Take the rights, end the fights. Or, not, I don’t care.
Jeff W
With regard to the false point that California domestic partnerships are substantially "the same" as marriages: California domestic partnerships are not recognized as marriages by the state of New York but California marriages—all of them—are recognized by New York as marriages. Proposition 8 undeniably takes away the rights of those California same-sex couples who, if married, would have their marriages recognized in other jurisdictions, whether they are vacationing or changing residence.
Laertes (#10), ask your friends why it’s OK that California opposite-sex married couples can visit New York State and not give a moment’s thought as to whether, if one spouse falls ill, the other spouse may visit in the emergency room, but, if Proposition 8 passes, same-sex domestic partners might face anxiety and heartache in a hospital under a similar scenario?
The nine differences referred to in the Voter Guide may be found in the California Supreme Court decision (at footnote 24 of the decision here [PDF]) saying that California statutes limiting marriage to opposite-sex couples are unconstitutional. Many of those differences, while real, are fairly technical. I think the idea that marriage, unlike domestic partnership, affords a portable packet of rights that is instantly recognized in other jurisdictions, such as the State of New York (New Mexico, Canada, etc.), is much easier to grasp.
ThymeZoneThePlumber
Yes, but when you stop the tug of war over the m-word, those politicians lose their power to demagogue this. That’s the whole point.
ThymeZoneThePlumber
Argghh. Why would anyone put themselves in the position of letting politicans decide who can visit you in an ER?
ER rights to visit should belong to whoever the patient says can visit. Period.
Why wrangle over "marriage" to settle an issue like that?
If I want someone to be my proxy for health decisions if I am incapacitated, and visit in the ER, I should be able to declare that and have it printed on my driver’s license and no demagogue or politician should have any say about it.
Isn’t that what we really want? Or do we want to argue over what "marriage" means? What’s the real important issue here?
Jeff
Yes that is the real issue. But there are many of those real issues. Should we argue each one by one as some part of the population is affected or do we get it over with in one fell swoop.
Comrade Nikolita
@bootlegger:
Very well put. I couldn’t have said it better. :) Thank you for your comment.
I have family in CA and am considering asking my mom (who lives in BC, Canada like me) if they’re going to vote, and if so, which way.
Quick question – can people outside of CA (and the US) donate?
@ThymeZoneThePlumber:
If there wasn’t such a stigma associated to words like "civil union" and "domestic partnership", I’d agree with you. But while I agree the fight may seem arduous and pointless at times, I still think LBGT people deserve to be able to use the word "marriage" like any heterosexual couple.
Imagine if heterosexuality wasn’t the norm, and "marriage" was the word heterosexual couples had to settle for. Would they not be upset too?
It should just be "marriage" for everyone, gay or straight. Sexual orientation shouldn’t make a difference.
bago
A co-worker brought up the Apple donation today. I just held up my iphone and said "Of course they did". Nuff said.
Zuzu's Petals
@Comrade Nikolita:
People outside the state can certainly donate. I assume rules against non- US citizens donating also apply here.
Zuzu's Petals
@ninerdave:
Me too.
Comrade Grand Panjandrum
The only limitation government should be allowed to place on marriage is the age at which one is able to legally consent to such an arrangement. Period. Isn’t this what the Right used to call social engineering? Good grief, with all the hate and violence in the world I can find no fault or indecency in people loving one another and wanting to make the legal commitment that marriage offers.
Civil Union laws is Jim Crow for gay people and it is a disgrace. Everyone should be allowed to pick a spouse and have the government recognize that spouse in exactly the same way as all of those partnerships are recognized.
I hope CA does the right thing.
Unrepentent Dennis - SGMM
Try the San Gabriel Valley. It’s full of little bedroom communities where the McCain/Palin signs and the Yes on 8 signs flourish. I live in a snug, smug, little bedroom community at the end of the SGV, twenty-nine miles East of the LA city limit. The people who live here in the well-kept houses along the tree-lined streets are polite, friendly, churchgoing (There are six churches within a four block radius of where I sit.) and 90% Republican.
You’re correct in observing that the interior of the state is (sometimes scarily) conservative but, there are plenty of places here that are conservative and they’re closer to the beach than they are to the farm. They’re just more subtle about it.
Laertes
Thanks, Jeff. That’s very useful. I bet I’ll be able to make at least one no-on-8 vote out of that.
ThymeZoneThePlumber
I
Im sorry, I don’t understand that position. Where is the stigma?
First, I’m hopelessly straight, and because I was pretty when I was young, I was the target of frequent and often rather pushy homosexual advances from age ten to about age thirty. And these scared the hell out of me and pissed me off. It’s my opinion that homophobia is learned and not genetic. I learned it, and so I was able to unlearn it.
Result? Today I am about as liberal a social liberal as you will find, totally in favor of all rights, marriages and any other damned thing that LGBTs want. I just reached a point where I said, you know, I don’t have enough understanding of human sexuality to judge other people’s understanding of it, and it’s none of my business. Treat everyone the same, stop the bigotry.
Okay? Second, I don’t find any stigma at all attached to those terms. If there is any, it is in the heads of the bigots and the haters … and who gives a fig about them? Let them have their bigotry and hatred, you can’t change them and they aren’t going away.
So, I conclude that the win game here is to just go around them. They have the political advantage right now, so let them have it. Take the rights, end the fights. The m-word might be doable in future, but it’s a small thing.
Thoughts?
Polish the Guillotines
@ninerdave:
If you’re talking about me, I’d be interested.
If you’re not, then eff u.
Also, on topic, I managed to pony up some $$ to No on 8 when they were doing matching funds thing. Frankly, I’m pissed beyond belief that the LDS church in Utah is trying to undermine the constitution of MY state. Damn it, that just infuriates me.
Comrade Nikolita
@Zuzu’s Petals:
Awesome, thank you very much. :)
Marshall
@ThymeZoneThePlumber:
There is a strong symbolic component to marriage. It makes a public statement about your commitment to your partner. I am not religious, but the symbolic aspects of my marriage are very important to me. A civil union just doesn’t carry the same weight in the eyes of society.
I’m straight, but my mother-in-law is gay. She has been in a committed relationship for over 22 years. Several years ago she and her partner moved to Canada. One of the reasons was the ability to get married there. They wanted that symbolic affirmation of their mutual commitment.
We are symbol-using creatures. It’s deep in our nature. When you deny the LGBT community access to one of our most important symbols, it does send an important message. It says, "You are different. Your committed relationships are not the same as ours. They are not quite on the same level." Is that the message we want to send?
qi4all
There is also an amendment 2 on the ballot here in FL to constitutionally define marriage as between a man and a woman only. Thankfully, after the fiasco of the pigs amendment the good citizens of FL voted to require 60% voter approval to pass constitutional amendments so it is likely to go down in flames for the piece of crap that it is.