Obscanity: You'll know it when you see it

California Council of Churches: Marriage Equality.

Recent events have converged to make the freedom to marry a concern to all people in California. The California Council of Churches and IMPACT have long stood strong against discrimination against any of God’s children. At the same time, we recognize that many churches and people of faith believe they must oppose the freedom to marry based on what they have been taught the Bible has to say on the subject. Therefore, we have produced this study guide to help congregations in California struggling with differences of opinion on the subject of marriage equality to discuss the biblical texts, theology, church traditions, and civil rights from a place of compassion and love of neighbor — the central elements of Jesus’ teachings.

They have joined the barrage of organizations and entities filing lawsuits to invalidate Prop 8 – and bless ’em for it.

Wayne Besen – Broad Outlines For Change Within the GLBT Movement.

Pretty great article…

My favorites:

4) We have to give America a civics/history lesson. a) People don’t understand that the courts are there to protect minorities from mob rule – tyranny of the majority. b) People buy the line that anti-gay churches are just voting their values. Voting values is only to ensure that a religious group can practice their beliefs and live their values. It does not allow them to force other people to live by the rules of their church – effectively making everyone members – against their will.

5) We must do a better job making people understand the difference between civil and religious marriage. It must be hammered home. Until people get this simple point – we will have trouble.

CA Supreme Court, Order to Show Cause, etc.. (PDF)

Issued today, November 19.

Text:

The motion for judicial notice filed in S168047 by petitioners on November 5, 2008, is GRANTED. The requests for a stay of Proposition 8 filed by petitioners in S168047 and in S168066 are DENIED. Respondent Secretary of State Bowen’s request to be dismissed as a respondent in S168066 is GRANTED. (Kevelin v. Jordan (1964) 62 Cal.2d 82.) The motions to intervene in S168047, S168066, and S168078, filed on November 17, 2008, by Proposition 8 Official Proponents et al. are GRANTED. The motions to intervene in S168047, S168066, and S168078, filed on November 10, 2008, by Campaign for California Families, are DENIED.

The State of California, the Attorney General, the State Registrar of Vital Statistics, and the Deputy Director of Health Information and Strategic Planning of the California Department of Public Health are ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE before this court, when the above entitled matters are called on calendar, why the relief sought by petitioners should not be granted. The issues to be briefed and argued in these matters are as follows:

(1) Is Proposition 8 invalid because it constitutes a revision of, rather than an amendment to, the California Constitution? (See Cal. Const., art. XVIII, sections 1-4.)

(2) Does Proposition 8 violate the separation of powers doctrine under the California Constitution?

(3) If Proposition 8 is not unconstitutional, what is its effect, if any, on the marriages of same-sex couples performed before the adoption of Proposition 8?

The return is to be filed by respondents, and a brief may be filed by intervenors, in the San Francisco Office of the Supreme Court on or before Friday, December 19, 2008. A reply may be filed by petitioners in the San Francisco Office of the Supreme Court on or before Monday, January 5, 2009. Any application to file an amicus curiae brief, accompanied by the proposed brief, may be filed in the San Francisco Office of the Supreme Court on or before Thursday, January 15, 2009. Any reply to an amicus curiae brief may be filed in the San Francisco Office of the Supreme Court on or before Wednesday, January 21, 2009.

Moreno, J. joins this order except that he would grant the requests to stay the operation of Proposition 8 pending this court’s resolution of these matters.

Kennard, J. would deny these petitions without prejudice to the filing in this court of an appropriate action to determine Proposition 8’s effect, if any, on the marriages of same-sex couples performed before Proposition 8’s adoption.

Votes: George, C.J., Baxter, Werdegar, Chin, Moreno, and Corrigan, JJ.

Not sure what to think about the fact that Kennard, who JOINED the majority in the marriage cases, now seems to think that they should let Prop 8 stand. That’s upsetting and a little disturbing considering the precedent this would set – if Prop 8 stands, then any minority group could have their rights abridged by popular vote, particularly those groups not expressly protected by the US Constitution – gender being one of them. Interesting, huh? Don’t think it would happen? Don’t forget that this is the same state that literally responded to an anti-discrimination bill by voting by an overwhelming majority to allow racial discrimination in housing.

As somebody said on another blog (can’t remember where): You might not be gay, but you might be next.

At least the court is willing to listen and consider. That’s nice to know, considering the fact that this so-called “amendment” literally strips the court of its power in every respect. If you don’t believe that, consider that the Yes on 8 people are already starting their extortionist tactics, threatening to remove any judge who votes against them.

Consider that Brown v. Board of Education, Loving v. Virginia, and all of the other major civil rights court decisions were unpopular and contrary to the majority’s opinion. What if those decisions had been subject to the whim of the popular vote? We would still have segregation and interracial-marriage bans today.

The purpose of the judiciary is to protect the minority from the tyranny of the majority. And this “amendment” removes their power to do that, and completely undermines the institution of equal protection under the law by saying that the Constitution only affords equal protection to those belonging to and approved by the majority. That is not what the Constitution is for – and I guarantee you that if Prop 8 stands, the “Yes” folks will not be sated merely by dissolving the rights of the LGBT community. They will go after you next.

I hope the Court thinks about this long and hard before they issue their opinion.

[Edit: Now that I look, Justice Kennard wrote in her concurrence to the original marriage cases:

In holding today that the right to marry guaranteed by the state Constitution may not be withheld from anyone on the ground of sexual orientation, this court discharges its gravest and most important responsibility under our constitutional form of government. There is a reason why the words “Equal Justice Under Law” are inscribed above the entrance to the courthouse of the United States Supreme Court. Both the federal and the state Constitutions guarantee to all the “equal protection of the laws” (U.S. Const., 14th Amend.; Cal. Const., art. I, § 7), and it is the particular responsibility of the judiciary to enforce those guarantees. The architects of our federal and state Constitutions understood that widespread and deeply rooted prejudices may lead majoritarian institutions to deny fundamental freedoms to unpopular minority groups, and that the most effective remedy for this form of oppression is an independent judiciary charged with the solemn responsibility to interpret and enforce the constitutional provisions guaranteeing fundamental freedoms and equal protection. (See Davis v. Passman (1979) 442 U.S. 228, 241 [describing the judiciary as “the primary means” for enforcement of constitutional rights]; Bixby v. Pierno (1971) 4 Cal.3d 130, 141 [stating that, under our constitutional system of checks and balances, “probably the most fundamental [protection] lies in the power of the courts to test legislative and executive acts by the light of constitutional mandate and in particular to preserve constitutional rights, whether of individual or minority, from obliteration by the majority”].)

Here, we decide only the scope of the equal protection guarantee under the state Constitution, which operates independently of the federal Constitution. (See Cal. Const., art I, § 24 [“Rights guaranteed by this Constitution are not dependent on those guaranteed by the United States Constitution”].) Absent a compelling justification, our state government may not deny a right as fundamental as marriage to any segment of society. Whether an unconstitutional denial of a fundamental right has occurred is not a matter to be decided by the executive or legislative branch, or by popular vote, but is instead an issue of constitutional law for resolution by the judicial branch of state government. Indeed, this court’s decision in Lockyer made it clear that the courts alone must decide whether excluding individuals from marriage because of sexual orientation can be reconciled with our state Constitution’s equal protection guarantee. (Lockyer, supra, 33 Cal.4th at pp. 1068-1069.) The court today discharges its constitutional obligation by resolving that issue.

So I am seriously confused as to where she stands now since she suggested denying the petitions. Is she saying she doesn’t think the Court should retain its original jurisdiction, but should rather let the case go through the lower courts first? Is she saying Prop 8 should stand? That seems SO inconsistent with her prior statements.]

‘Pregnant man’ and wife: We’re a normal couple – CNN.com.

I have been reading people’s comments on the various blogs discussing this story. I will *never* understand how people can be so ignorant that they do not understand the difference between sexual orientation and gender identity. So let’s try to spell it out in an easy way.

Some people who are born as women identify as men. Some people who were born as men identify as women. Some people identify with neither gender, and some people identify with both. People who don’t identify with one particular gender sometimes call themselves “genderqueer.” People who identify with an opposite gender sometimes call themselves “transgender.”

Sometimes this dissonance is because their brains are hard-wired to identify with one gender, while their bodies reflect another gender. Many trans people will tell you that they always felt that their bodies were not right, that their bodies did not belong to them. This is called gender dysphoric disorder, and has led many a trans kid to suicide out of sheer confusion and helplessness. *Many* trans people know that they are transgender even from childhood – in fact there are many transgender children even now who are living their lives as a gender different from the one they were born with. You think this is a sexual deviancy thing, but if you could see these children who are *so much* happier being able to live as they *are*, you would understand.

You cannot “fix” a person’s gender identity. You identify with the gender you are, regardless of what your body says. We have known for years that there are really more than two genders – some societies have known it for generations. We are a society that loves its dichotomies, though, so we try to force people into boxes. This doesn’t always work. Most of us are born with a physical body that reflects our genetic and spiritual gender. Some people are not.

Now, sometimes people identify with an opposite gender because genetically and chromosomally, they ARE that opposite gender, but physically, something went wrong. In more cases than most of us actually realize, babies are born with ambiguous genitalia, and the doctors decide it will be easier to just do reconstructive surgery and make the baby a girl or boy and hope they made the right guess. Sometimes they are right – and sometimes they are not. This is called “intersex,” and is an absolute abomination on the part of the doctors, who make a life-changing decision for a child based on what is most convenient for themselves.

None of this has ANYTHING to do with sexual orientation. Gender identity is about the gender you *are*. Sexual orientation is about the gender you *love.* Many trans people are heterosexual. They share their lives with their partners in a heterosexual relationship. Some trans people are gay. Some trans people are bi. Gender identity and sexual orientation are not the same thing so quit trying to tell this man that he is a gay woman. Believe me – if you knew trans people, you would know that this approach is ridiculous and unnatural. A straight man is not a gay woman just because he happened to be born with the wrong genital parts. So he chose not to have a full hysterectomy – that is a dangerous procedure that not all trans people choose to have. And if he has the opportunity to have biological children when his wife is infertile, why shouldn’t he take it? Wouldn’t it be nice if more women with difficulty conceiving could pass that particular duty on to their husbands?

Frankly I just wish people could get the hell over themselves and realize that just because they can’t relate to something, it doesn’t mean it’s wrong or morally corrupt.

Pam’s House Blend:: Newt Gingrich: angry gays promoting secular fascism.

Oh please, Newty. Don’t give me this bullshit. What about the gay man who was punched in the face by a Yes on 8 proponent who got out of his truck to hit him? What about the family – including children – who had a gun flashed at them by an off-duty CORRECTIONS OFFICER who was taunting them, saying “Look what I have…” What about our community members who have been beaten, tortured and murdered just for being LGBT? What about the way we’ve had our fundamental rights ripped from us time and time again? What about the teenagers who have been so rejected and mistreated by their families and communities, and forced to feel such deep and misguided shame, that they have taken their own lives to get away from the pain?

This protesting is NOTHING compared to what we’ve had to deal with as a community, and it’s NOTHING compared to what you deserve.

And you’re going to criticize the boycotts? SERIOUSLY? After the American Family Association has been staging wide-scale boycotts on companies for YEARS, for “sins” including providing domestic partnership benefits, advertising on gay-themed television shows, including sexual orientation in their non-discrimination policies, or saying “Happy holidays” instead of “Merry Christmas”?

Seriously? You’re going to complain about us refusing to fund companies that fund our oppression?

And all from a guy with a lesbian sister? Why are the most hateful always the ones with queer family members? (Don’t forget, Pete Knight had a gay son and a gay brother.) Are you that unwilling to deal with your own families instead of trying to legislate us away and punish the rest of us for your inability to accept that you have a gay family member? If you believe in “family values” so much, why don’t you start valuing your own families, and leave ours alone???

Incidentally… the major leaders in this fight for marriage equality are religious leaders. We’re not all godless heathen, and you know it, Newt Gingrich. You, on the other hand… YOU are the one who cheated on your wife (even while you were leading the crusade against Pres. Clinton for doing the same), bringing shame to yourself, your family, and your party. YOU are the one who needs to take inventory of your sins. So go sit in a corner and start counting them, and leave us the HELL alone. Glass houses, man. Glass fuckin’ houses.

No on Prop. 8 rally produces anxious minutes when gun appears – San Bernardino County Sun.

So far the only violence and threats have been by YES on 8 supporters, against gay people and No on 8 supporters. The only act of violence so far was when a guy ripped somebody’s Yes on 8 sign and the homophobic asshole got out of his truck and punched the guy squarely in the face. And now we have “correctional officers” taunting protesters with the fact that he’s carrying a gun? What the hell has this state come to?

Protests to be a key test for Proposition 8 opponents – Los Angeles Times.

Mr. Schubert, you and your supporters did not “participate in the democratic process.” You HIJACKED the democratic process in order to strip a protected class of citizens of their fundamental rights. We have EVERY RIGHT not to provide economic support to those who participated in this mass crime against our community.

Anna Quindlen: The Loving Decision.

The last word here goes to an authority on battling connubial bigotry. On the anniversary of the Loving decision last year, the bride wore tolerance. Mildred Loving, mother and grandmother, who once had cops burst into her bedroom because she was sleeping with her own husband, was quoted in a rare public statement saying she believed all Americans, "no matter their race, no matter their sex, no matter their sexual orientation, should have that same freedom to marry." She concluded, "That's what Loving, and loving, are all about."

Mormons Tipped Scale in Ban on Gay Marriage – NYTimes.com:

Suggested talking points were equally precise. If initial contact indicated a prospective voter believed God created marriage, the church volunteers were instructed to emphasize that Proposition 8 would restore the definition of marriage God intended.

But if a voter indicated human beings created marriage, Script B would roll instead, emphasizing that Proposition 8 was about marriage, not about attacking gay people, and about restoring into law an earlier ban struck down by the State Supreme Court in May.

Of course, they don’t mention Script C, for those who indicated support for gay marriage. “Oh, you support gay marriage? Great! So do we! Don’t forget to vote YES on Prop 8 to protect gay marriage!”

SHAME.

Revolution No. 8  | PROPOSITION 8 | Advocate.com.

I’ve been waving a sign on street corners since H8 passed: “Black Queers.” Responses have varied — from honks of support to looks of disapproval from both blacks and whites. A black woman came up to me at a rally and asked me if I didn’t think the sign was offensive to black people. I said, “It’s who I am, and people should know.” [Read more]

Pam’s House Blend:: Fired by owner of Mormon-owned business for voting against AZ Prop 102.

Yes, indeed — more of the loving faith-based behavior we saw out in California is also at work in Arizona. Jim Burroway received a letter from a reader who was canned by her employer, a CPA firm, that is owned by a member of the LDS. He removed identifying information.

Lesbian mom asked to quit PTA over Prop. 8 – Sacramento News – Local and Breaking Sacramento News | Sacramento Bee.

Robin McGehee, who enrolled her son Sebastian at St. Helens Catholic School, says she went to a vigil for the "No on Proposition 8" campaign last Thursday. After that, a priest from the Diocese of Fresno told her to step down because she had gone against church teachings.

Pam’s House Blend:: Californians Against Hate founder files complaint against LDS.

Memo: Same-sex marriage strategy discussed by Hinckley in 1997 – ABC 4.com.

Interesting that the LDS Church also basically informed church members that they were expected to donate their time and money to this effort. I don’t think people appreciate just how much influence the church has over its members. Check out this letter to church members. (PDF)

Pam’s House Blend:: Marriage Matters to Us.

An excellent article challenging the notion that marriage equality is not important to black same-gender couples; it’s a response to Jasmyne Cannick’s article in the LA Times, in which she suggests that marriage equality is (or should be) a low priority for black queer folks, or that somehow the entire community deserves what it got because the No on 8 campaign failed to reach out to black voters. At least, that’s what the article sounds like to me. But this first article I posted definitely combats the myth that marriage rights are really only important to rich white people who have property to protect. In fact those are the ones who are least likely to NEED marriage protection, because they have the resources to hire attorneys and create trusts and stuff. They are also less likely to be working in public sector jobs and therefore relying on family benefits provided to county, state and federal employees.

Anyway, yeah. Check out the article.

Lisa Derrick: Prop 8 Boycott Called on Legendary El Coyote Restaurant.

I tried giving the lady the benefit of the doubt because she was only an employee of the company according to her donation form, where she claimed she was just the restaurant manager… but it seems she lied. She’s a co-owner and her family has had ownership in the restaurant since it opened.

Pam’s House Blend:: Legislators file friend of the court brief to stop Prop 8.

Protect Marriage, Protect Children, Prohibit Divorce from Jonathan Smith.

I would never truly support this because I think divorce has saved lives, but they make a powerful point – if you want to protect marriage, protect it from the things that destroy it (divorce, shotgun weddings, “Who Wants to Marry a Millionairre”), not the things that strengthen it (loving, committed couples).

Armed guards keep watch over church services – CNN.com.

Uh, yeah. Welcome to what the Jewish community has had to deal with for years. I remember during the first Gulf War we were afraid to go to Hebrew school because there were reports of bomb threats against Jewish institutions around the city. My synagogue has had an armed security guard for as long as I can remember.

It’s not so much fun realizing that people hate you, is it?

Thousands March Against Prop 8 in Silver Lake.

Okay, so I’ve been seeing this argument about gay marriage being “taught in schools,” and I simply cannot let it stand anymore.

Your children were never going to learn about gay sex. They were never going to learn that they could marry a princess if they couldn’t find their prince. They were never going to be taught to be gay. They were only going to learn that some of their classmates had two mommies or two daddies. And guess what? They still are going to learn that some of their classmates have two mommies or two daddies. Just because their parents aren’t married, it doesn’t mean they stop being parents.

As a Jew, I would be horrified to be told I needed to tuck my Jewish star into my shirt because some Christian parents were worried that their children might become confused if they learned that some people don’t believe in Jesus as the messiah. It is not the responsibility of the school to make sure your children grows up with your values. That is YOUR responsibility.

Similarly, as a gay person, I will not tell my future children that they have to hide their family just because some other children might be confused. We have the right to exist. You cannot take this away from us by taking away our right to get married – all you do is hurt our children by refusing them the same protections that your children have.

If you don’t want your children to know that some people are different from you, don’t send them to a public school where they will encounter people with differences. Don’t let them see disabled people, because they might ask questions. Don’t let them see people of different races and ethnicities, because they might ask questions. Keep them away from children who write with their left hands, because they might ask questions. Don’t let them associate with people of different religions, or people whose parents are divorced and have remarried, because they might ask questions. Let them think that all people are the same as you. It is your right as a parent to exercise your choice to keep your children out of public schools if you disagree with their decision to serve all children and not just yours. But do not challenge my right to EXIST.

As for the “sexuality” issue – you cannot reduce me to a sexuality. Do your children know that their parents love each other? Of course they do. Does that have to be prefaced with an explanation of how sexual intercourse works? Of course not. So why do you seem to think that children cannot understand the love between me and my wife without turning it into a sex lesson? It is not about sex. YOU were the ones who said it was about sex. Children understand LOVE. They understand that people love each other. That’s all anybody can ask for.

Gay marriage supporters take to California streets – CNN.com.

I am so glad they are covering this in the national news, although I do have to say that the numbers are being downplayed tremendously. Generally speaking, whenever they give you a numeric estimate, you can almost guarantee that the real number present was at least twice that, if not three or four times the official estimate. But other than that little flaw, I’m glad they’re reporting on it. It’s been truly inspiring to see so many people take to the streets, especially since these are both LGBT Californians AND their straight allies, friends, family, etc. People are furious.

It still amazes me that church leaders have actually suggested that Prop 8 wasn’t directed toward any particular group. Just who do they think they are kidding?

N-Word Hurled at Blacks During Westwood Prop 8 Protest.

I understand that people are angry, and I understand that a 70% victory for Prop 8 in the black community looks really bad – if that number is even correct. But there are some things you need to remember:

1) The numbers simply do not add up. We would have had to turn at LEAST an additional 20-25% of black voters into NO votes to even have a CHANCE at flipping the result. A similar shift in only 2-3% of white voters would have had the same result. Yes, many black voters came out to support Obama and also supported Prop 8, but you have to look at more than percentages in order to get the real picture here. We can be disappointed in or saddened by the breakdown of the black vote on Prop 8 without placing blame or turning this into a racial dispute. We might also suggest that the No on 8 campaign could have done a hell of a lot more to create allies in and be allies to the black community, and not only so they would have something to remember on election day when they voted on our rights. In the end, don’t forget that black LGBT Californians want and deserve the right to marry too.

2) Remember that by arguing that this is the black community’s fault, you’re accepting the logic of the Yes on 8 campaign, which INSISTS that their victory was the result of the surge in black voters. Doesn’t this sound at all suspect to you? To me, it seems like this is a way for them to get in a triple-whammy – increase homophobia AND increase racism AND deepen the divide between the LGBT and black communities (thereby increasing strife between oppressed minority groups), all the while standing back and pretending like their lies and money had nothing to do with it.

Are we going to let them get away with that?

If you want to place blame, place the blame on the people who funded, contributed to, endorsed, and ran the Yes on 8 campaign of lies and deceit. Blame them, because THEY are responsible for this outcome.

Below is a list of resources to help you in your boycott of those individuals, businesses and organizations who either publicly endorsed or contributed money to the passage of Proposition 8. I cannot stress enough that this list must NOT be used for illegal activity, including but not limited to violence. This is not a witch-hunt, and it must not turn into discrimination. It is purely and simply about the refusal to subsidize your own oppression. It is about not handing money to those who will turn around and use that money to harm you. That is IT.

• Secretary of State’s searchable contribution database
• Mormons for 8 – A detailed resource that shows you exactly where the Mormon contributions occurred. The VAST majority of donations over $1,000 came from Mormon individuals.
• Californians Against Hate – Dishonor Roll – A list of the top donors to Prop 8.
• A list of those who made public endorsements of Yes on 8 through their campaign homepage
• The Secretary of State’s . It is an Excel file. Download it. Save it. Search it. Be aware that there may be a few multiple entries due to some confusion on my part regarding the Secretary of State’s different spreadsheets. No matter – if somebody donated, they donated. NOTE: THIS WAS UPDATED NOVEMBER 10 BECAUSE I REALIZED THERE WERE ADDITIONAL ORGANIZATIONS THAT COLLECTED DONATIONS ASIDE FROM THE MAIN CAMPAIGN
• A compilation (Excel) of Mormons for 8‘s spreadsheets. They have changed LDS members’ names to first name, last initial; the point is for you to see just how much they contributed, especially those who made large donations.

If you know of any further resources, please let me know. And remember, we do not fight hate with hate – use these lists ONLY to prevent your money from being used to fund your oppression. We do our cause no favors with violence or hatred – it’s wrong, and it makes us no better than them. And I cannot stress the importance of talking to people about why you are doing this. You are not punishing them for their beliefs – you are exercising your right to avoid contributing to the cause of hatred with your own money. If people who only donated a minimal amount come to understand that Proposition 8 was about hatred, and vow not to continue support for it or for similar propositions, then you can safely resume business with them without worrying that you will be funding oppression.

This is the message that went out to my friends and family on Wednesday:

I have been wondering what I would to say to everybody if Proposition 8 passed.

I am by no means an optimistic person. I was here when Proposition 22 passed, watching the returns come in, and it was the worst night of my life.

But when we were so far ahead only a month ago, I made the mistake of letting myself believe, even as the gap was narrowing, that Californians were not so supremely stupid and ignorant that they would fall for the lies being put forth by the Yes on 8 campaign. I made the mistake of letting myself hope. I made the mistake of letting myself have faith in California and its people.

It just seemed so obvious. “Protecting California’s children”??? Seriously? Protecting them from what?

Well, I think we all know “what.” The underlying suggestion is and always was that we as gay people are either a) child molesters, or b) going to turn your children gay. That was the foundation of the Yes on 8’s campaign, and if you voted “yes,” then you bought it, hook, line and sinker. Congratulations on your gullibility.

“Gay marriage” was never going to be taught in schools. Yes on 8 knew that. No church was going to lose its tax exempt status. Yes on 8 knew that. No religious institution was going to have to shut down or perform same-gender marriage. Yes on 8 *knew* that. They also *knew* they were lying when they told supportive people that “Yes on 8” meant “yes on gay marriage.” Again: They knew they were lying to thousands upon thousands of CA voters when they called them and told them a “yes” vote was a vote to support gay marriage.

They *knew* they were lying.

But you didn’t?

I find this hard to believe.

So I’ve decided what I’m going to say to everybody *if* Prop 8 passes. (I cannot accept that it has, as long as my own personal vote has not been counted, which it has not. Provisional ballots and absentee ballots delivered on election day will not be fully counted until about 30 days after the election, and there are at least a million votes missing in LA County, based on the estimates of 4+ million registered voters and 80%+ turnout.)

So what will I say?

Well, if you voted NO on Proposition 8, you are wonderful. Heterosexual and voted no? Even more awesome. Thank you for seeing through the lies and recognizing that none of us are safe unless all of us have the same rights. You are on the right side of history. Our fight is not over, and we will keep fighting until we are treated as EQUALS under the laws of California and the laws of the United States. We will not accept second-class citizenship.

Support equality but did not vote? You are the face of complacency. Hopefully next time you will realize that your vote is necessary. You are partially to blame for this. I hope you can live with yourself.

If you voted YES on Proposition 8?

I struggled with this one. I really did. My first inclination was to say, “You are dead to me.” I am still trying to talk myself out of that reaction. At this point I have decided that the most fair approach is to return to you what you have given to me. So here goes:

I don’t hate you. Of course I don’t hate you. Because of course you don’t hate me, as many of you have said repeatedly throughout this whole campaign. It’s not about hate. It’s not about hate. So in return I will not hate you.

But I will not accept you.

I will not respect you.

I will not treat you as my equal.

I will not recognize that you deserve the right to marry, and I will not recognize your union as equal to mine.

Oh, I’ll smile and nod and shake hands when you introduce your husband or wife, but secretly I will be thinking, “What kind of marriage is so weak it needs protection against me?” So I will recognize your union for what it is – not a lasting commitment based on love, trust and mutual responsibility, but rather, a privilege that was achieved through active oppression of those you deemed unworthy of inclusion in this civil institution. That is no marriage.

That’s not to say that I will view all marriages this way. Only yours, because you admitted with your vote that your marriage was not strong enough to survive the possibility of equality for all Californians. I can only do you the favor of agreeing with you.

And someday in the near future, when it is your civil rights on the line, I will remember Prop 8.

Don’t think it won’t happen – now that we are in the habit of enshrining discrimination in our constitution, there *will* be more discriminatory amendments offered to CA voters, and some of them *will* pass. And I *will* remember Prop 8. When your opposition starts telling lies about you in order to garner support for your oppression, I will pretend I believe them, and I will pretend I have the same concerns, as you pretended when you “believed” the lies spread by Yes on 8 despite being shown time and time again that they were indeed lies.

That’s not to say I will vote to take away your civil rights. In the end, you and I are different, because I will actually struggle with whether or not I can live with myself if I am responsible for stripping somebody of their fundamental rights. But maybe I can. We won’t know until it happens. It may be that the only thing that saves you is my unwillingness to punish others for your sins. Either way, do know this: What goes around comes around. When I go to vote, I will do it with the memory of Prop 8 in my mind and in my heart. And when the results come in, I will not pity you, because I will remember how quick you were to take away my rights. You learn from experience – so maybe that’s the experience you need in order to learn.

And if I never get the opportunity to vote on your rights? It doesn’t matter. You are on the wrong side of history. Your children will know how you voted on Prop 8, and they will feel deep shame. And if they don’t know, I will tell them, and they will be ashamed of you. Your vote will not be forgotten. I will make sure of that.

Ultimately I will, as they say, “tolerate” you – which is a fancy way of saying that I will make do with the fact that you exist. That’s what toleration is. Maybe I’ll talk to you if I’m feeling particularly generous or feel like patting myself on the back for not hating you. I might even tell people I have a friend who voted Yes on 8, to prove that I don’t hate you all. Because of course it’s not about hate, right?

This may sound harsh, but if you feel that it seems over the top, go look in the mirror. Remind yourself that it is purely and literally identical to the treatment you have given me by voting Yes on 8. I believe in equal treatment. That is what you will receive.

May God forgive you. I certainly will not.

Catholics, Mormons defend backing same-sex marriage ban – CNN.com.

I don’t know how these people can POSSIBLY argue that this initiative “is not against any group.” Are you kidding me? This entire campaign was about “protecting” children from big bad scary gay people. It was an absolute SCAM, and completely illegal as far as Constitutional revisions go. It eliminates the concept of equal protection under the law, and removes the ability of the Court to protect minority groups against the tyranny of the masses. That goes to the very core of our Constitution.

In any event, the number counts are totally off on the rallies. The one Wednesday night was about 8,000-10,000 people – gay AND straight. I was there. I saw it. I marched. And it was fucking amazing.

Thursday’s protest was also much, much larger than the media and police are willing to report. I was not there but I know many who were. The news was initially reporting about 3,000-5,000, which probably means it was much higher than that. The sheriff then downgraded it to 1,000 even as the crowd was growing. This is typical of protests – they try to lessen the public perception of these inspirational images by pretending that nobody actually showed up. But they were there. Thousands of them. And generally speaking, despite the actions of a few individuals (including anti-gay counter-protesters who bloodied at least two protesters), it was a peaceful rally. Same with Wednesday night – I was shocked and appalled when I turned on the news and all they were showing was the one or two individuals who got out of hand and were promptly arrested. Even as the voiceover announcers explained that this was a peaceful protests and these incidents were anomalies, they still focused on the images of the arrests.

The bottom line, though? What are you are seeing in these marches is not *just* the gay community. It is not *all* of the gay community. This is, to a great extent, the *youth* of this city, the new generation, gay and straight and bi and queer and trans and religious and secular and black and Latino and white and Asian and Indian and Middle Eastern and Native American and Jewish and everybody else – the youth who are PISSED OFF that they will now inherit a California full of hatred and ignorance and inequality under the law, instead of the California they deserve, a California full of progress and hope.