After major same sex marriage research, liberal CA org says: "We do not see a path to victory."

[Newsjock]

Source: San Francisco Chronicle

The effort to get same sex marriage on the California ballot in 2010 took a hit Monday. Rick Jacbos, the leader of the 700,000-member Courage Campaign just told us that after spending more than $200,000 on "qualitative research" into the issue in California that "We do not see a path to victory."

So, the Courage Campaign sent a note to its supporters Monday calling for "for more research and time to change hearts and minds before returning to the ballot." Lambda Legal, a LGBT legal organization, said largely the same thing Monday.

Jacobs told us that the research -- led by Obama confidante Steve Hildebrand -- found that "The biggest hangup people have is that right wing has done a very good job of telling people that somehow children will be affected" should same sex marriage become legal. It worked in both Maine and California, even though top public officials in both places said it would not.

... So what does this mean to the folks at Restore Equality 2010, who are gathering petition sigatures for a ballot run next year?

"Realistically, if you don't have the larger organizations like Equality California and Courage Campaign on board it becomes next to impossible with such a short time to gather signatures," said Chaz Lowe, a Restore Equality organizer who and founder of Yes on Equality.

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/nov05election/detail?entry_id=52602&tsp=1

[endless october]

1. i see a path.

"No state shall deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

once again, the Constitution gets it right and bigoted justices get it wrong.

[Atticus]

2. How unfair of you to state the obvious. nt

[xchrom]

3. people hate simple.

it confuses them.

[AngryAmish]

11. Ted Olsen (Bush v. Gore) agrees with you

[gmpierce]

13. they saw you coming..

Unfortunately, the bigoted justices got there first. Check 1873 and a set of court cases known as the "Slaughterhouse Cases". The Supreme Court of the time shot down the Equal Protection clause - except for corporations.

[The Stranger]

26. Sure glad the Senate Democrats, as usual, politely welcomed Robertson and Scalito.

They represent their people well.

[depakid]

14. Unfortunately, equal protection is among the weakest of constitutional arguments

Don't blame the messenger- that's just how the body of law developed.

My path here would be to first aim for civil unions and domestic partnerships- as Oregon and Washington have done. After some time has passed, the right wing boogeymen don't seem so scary anymore.

[SharksBreath]

19. Exactly

As long as you get hung up on the word marriage your going to lose people.

A lot of people.

When you use the word marriage people automatically think church and religion.

Your not going to win that battle in this country for another 20 years.

[Hekate]

21. Civil marriage and religious marriage need to be separate. In many countries they already are...

When a couple wants to get married they do so at the courthouse. If they are religious they arrange a separate wedding with their clergy. But the clergy don't have the power to sign off on the wedding licenses -- for that you have to have gone to the courthouse.

See how easy that is? Churches/temples/synagogues/ whatever religious institution you adhere to -- they would get to decide whose union they will or will not sanctify, but they would not get to decide who can marry because that is a civil matter.

In the US we already halfway understand this, because Presbyterians know better than to ask a Roman Catholic priest to perform their wedding in a Catholic church and Catholics don't go asking a rabbi to officiate their wedding in a synagogue. Some people go to a Justice of the Peace to get married, but we confuse the issue by giving clergy the authority to sign off on the wedding license. Their job should just be to have the religious ritual.

Hekate

[TommyO]

22. We "get hung up" on marriage because it's the only legal means for equal treatment

Nothing else provides the same legal rights, protections, benefits and responsibilities.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

23. I suddenly feel an urge to watch a Western movie. One starring Kurt Russell and Val Kilmer. -nt

[Psephos]

18. Expect that to be treated about as faithfully as the Commerce Clause.

I agree with you, the language is unambiguous and simple, and marriage between two consenting persons is a no-brainer. However, the "Living Document" approach to interpreting the Constitution has rendered clear, simple language to be secondary to implied meaning, hidden intention, and unicorn stories.

The Founders would puke to learn that the Constitution has proven so porous to the end-run.

[Johnboi70]

4. We need to take the fight to the hate groups first.

By letting them make their case in the clear, we allow hate groups to use the marriage ballots to attack gays. I mean, WTF, now people think we can't be allowed near children?? It comes down to a choice... Expose the haters first, then get our rights OR ignore the haters, then find ourselves hated.

[Peace Patriot]

5. I see a path: Get rid of 'TRADE SECRET' voting machines, with the code owned and controlled

by far rightwing-connected corporations, for instance, ES&S, which just bought out Diebold and now has a monopoly in U.S. voting systems, and whose major investor is reclusive, far rightwing billionaire, Howard Ahmanson, who also gave one million dollars to the extremist 'christian' Chalcedon foundation--an organization that touts the death penalty for homosexuals!

THAT's who is 'counting' all our votes with 'TRADE SECRET' code, and, in half the states in this country, NO audit/recount controls (no paper trail at all; no way to verify the vote), and only a miserable 1% audit in even the best states. (A minimum 10% audit is needed to detect fraud in electronic voting systems.)

So, Pukes know that if they can buy an anti-gay initiative onto the ballot, ES&S & brethren can make sure it wins. This is the operative problem, believe me. There are other problems--as with other votes, and other issues. Fascists controlling the media. Billions of dollars poured into rightwing 'think tanks,' to devise strategies of brainwashing. Religious fanatics and powermongers getting their views trumpeted in the media, and catered to by both Pukes and Dems. And so on. Those matters also need addressing. But if you can't verify the vote count, and a nutball like Ahmanson is controlling it, you are defeated before you begin.

[Imajika]

8. Just no..

Gay marriage has lost in 31 out of 31 states. Voting machines are not the problem.

Attitudes are changing though, slowly but surely. Full marriage rights are pretty much inevitable, it is just a long, difficult fight changing people's views on the subject.

The folks that oppose marriage equality will continue to win some battles, but they will lose the war in the end - and I think even they know that.

[EFerrari]

16. H8 was won in Los Angeles County.

Los Angeles County was rife with voting problems all the way back to the primaries.

We should never have lost Los Angeles County and to this day, I don't believe we did.

[Peace Patriot]

25. "Gay marriage has lost in 31 out of 31 states. Voting machines are not the problem." Logic?

'TRADE SECRET,' PROPRIETARY CODE voting machines are now used in virtually EVERY state in the U.S.! (New York is the only exception and the bad guys are working on New York.) There is not a single state in the U.S. where the vote is verifiable (outside of New York). And Ahmanson's creepy corporation now has a monopoly of (I think it's) 70% of the U.S. 'market.'

And the few other corps involved are not much better than ES&S as to rightwing politics.

Someone mentioned Los Angeles, above. L.A. has one of the most troubled voting systems in the country. It was set up by a county registrar (Connie McCormack) whose best friend was Diebold's chief sales person in California (Deborah Seiler) before Seiler became country registrar of San Diego (where yet more troubles abound). L.A. has an Ink-a-Vote system unique to L.A. but a Diebold central tabulator, where ALL votes in L.A. are tabulated, in one central place, in complete mystery and secrecy. The secrecy is so severe that the county refused to disclose who made the central tabulator, but election integrity activists in L.A. believe it is a Diebold GEMs tabulator--with ES&S now as the controlling manufacturer. Diebold was bad enough, before it withdrew behind the name "Premier," and got bought out by the far worse ES&S. ES&S is so bad that it got BANNED in California, at one point. But now it owns and controls the 'TRADE SECRET' code in much of California, by having bought out Diebold.

Does none of this strike you as odd? You say, very confidently, "Voting machines are not the problem." How do you KNOW? They are run on 'TRADE SECRET' code that the public has NO RIGHT to review, with virtually no audit/recount controls. This is a privatized vote counting system controlled by rightwing corporations. Conflicts of interest and other highly questionable practices abound in this privatized, corporatized system.

If major shenanigans are possible in a vote counting system, major shenanigans are very likely to occur--because the stakes in power and money are very high. Electronic 'TRADE SECRET' vote counting is MADE TO ORDER for enormous shenanigans. And the initial funder and major investor in the biggest electronic voting corp apparently wants homosexuals to be executed!

Do the math!

[Iowa]

9. Well said. I agree.

[WriteDown]

24. Yep....

Its how they got Obama elected. :eyes:

[Bluenorthwest]

6. They may be right, but Hildebrand is not to be trusted

The 'Courage Campaign' sat by while Prop 8 passed all their attention was on Obama. Now Hildebrand tells them to say 'give up' and from behind the gates in Bel Aire, the command comes down. I dumped those double crossing money grubbers months ago, for they have been playing both sides, and they continue to. Fuck 'em. They are the past. And their lack of support is a huge part of the problem in and of itself.

[dysfunctional press]

7. if the hang-up everyone has is that 'children will be affected'...

why is divorce legal...especially for couples with children?

[AlbertCat]

12. 'children will be affected'...

Which children? The ones that are ...or rather will be gay when they grow up or the one's who will be straight when they grow up or the ones who will be gay and pretend to be straight when they grow up? I mean, it's not like outside forces make someone gay, y'know.

The only affect I can see on children is that they will see that some religious bigots think being gay is somehow not normal in homo sapiens, which of course it is.

[dysfunctional press]

17. i have no idea how they'll be affected...

children, of today especially, seem a lot less bigoted and more accepting even than the generation that spawned them.

we'll get there.

[bc3000]

20. I think the children thing is actually a big issue for a lot of people.

I think there may be many people out there who aren't comfortable with homosexuality but would support gay marriage rights because they believe people have the right to make their own decisions. But I think that gays raising children still freaks them out. Maybe more shows like Modern Family will help.

I really do sympathize with gay people, but it's going to take time. The democrats have full power and we can't even get them to stop two wars. We can't even get them to put a serious public option in a health care bill. Democrats are fucking up left and right. They can't even get shit done when the polls show overwhelming support.

Our people are not yet mature enough to accept the reality of homosexuality. But some day I am sure we will become enlightened enough to consider sexual orientation in the same light as race and gender. And if it's any consolation, I'm sure that as soon as we reach this plateau we will run around the world criticizing everyone else for not realizing the obvious at the same exact moment we did. If we have any economic clout left we can impose sanctions on those primitive imbeciles.

[krabigirl]

28. And what about people with kids who agree with same-sex marriage?

Of course, I'll just have to teach my kids real morals, since these h8teful jerks won with their version of morality, which is utterly cruel and immoral.

[bluestateguy]

10. 2012 might be the more promising year

Generational currents are with us, and not them. Every day that goes by more pro-equality young people reach voting age and more homophobic old farts kick the bucket (OK, they aren't all homophobic; just a majority of them).

Having said that, I have no problem putting this issue on the ballot every year until the voters get it right. I would sign a petition to put it on the ballot if I still lived in CA.

[Bigmack]

15. I'm not advocating waiting....

so don't get me wrong, but gay marriage, removal of DADT, and legalized pot will happen.

Just wait around for the old farts - other than me, of course - to die off.

It's coming as sure as... well... death and taxes.

Let's all write down the dumbshit things people say now about topics like gay marriage so we can have a laugh in a few years. I can only hope that some of the Fundie Generation are around to see that the world didn't end because two guys got married and smoked a ceremonial doobie afterward.

[JonQ]

27. Not an ideal solution

but waiting will work. Giving the opinions of various age groups gay marriage is pretty much guaranteed to win once the current crop of older voters die off.

To those who are middle aged right now it doesn't seem to be a major issue either way, and most of the younger generation seems to support it.

Sucks to have to wait on this, but it will happen eventually, that is guaranteed.