Historian: Prop 8 Played on Anti-Gay Stereotypes (Yale Professor Testifies)

[Hissyspit]

Source: Associated Press

Historian: Prop 8 played on anti-gay stereotypes
LISA LEFF
From Associated Press
January 13, 2010 5:14 AM EST
SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — A Yale professor testifying in a case challenging California's same-sex marriage ban said Tuesday that the 2008 campaign to pass Proposition 8 played on stereotypes historically used to portray "homosexuals as perverts who prey on young children, out to entice straight people into sick behavior."

George Chauncey, a historian who specializes in the subject of 20th century gay life, was the second expert witness to appear for two couples unable to marry because of the state's voter-approved gay marriage ban. Their lawsuit has led to the first federal trial to decide the constitutionality of laws limiting marriage to a man and a woman.

After viewing several television commercials produced by Proposition 8's sponsors, Chauncey said images and language suggesting the ballot initiative was needed to "protect children" were reminiscent of earlier efforts to "demonize" gays, ranging from police raids on gay bars during the 1950s to campaigns to rid public schools of gay teachers in the 1970s.

"You have a pretty strong echo of this idea that simple exposure to gay people and their relationships is somehow going to lead a whole generation of young kids to become gay," Chauncey said. "The underlying message here is something about the undesirability of homosexuals, that we don't want our children to become this way." Chauncey's views were introduced to help persuade Chief U.S. Judge Vaughn R. Walker, who is hearing the case without a jury, that the California measure unlawfully discriminates against gays because it was based on an underlying hatred or moral disapproval and serves no legitimate public aim.

Read more: http://enews.earthlink.net/article/us?guid=20100113/8585a886-6381-40e8-9ceb-7a0d85d826c0

[boppers]

1. History testimony?

Get an anthropologist in there. This is American as its first peoples.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two-Spirit

[No Elephants]

2. You need to be suspicious whenever a ballot requires you to vote no if you are for gay marriage and

yes if you are against it. ("Yes, we have no bananas.") So, start there.

Voters may know that a ballot initiative involves "gay marriage." However, they not tend to read much or very closely, and most are not lawyers anyway. Therefore, suspect ballot questions that seek counter-intuitive responses from voters--like "I favor gay marriage, so I'll vote No on Prop 8." Those favor the side with the most money to spend informaing people what the ballot issue is about and exactly how to vote on it, especially in one on one conversations (think phone banking from the Bible belt to California, as was done to Massachusetts, also about same gender marriage).

And the more long, dense and "legal-esed" the question is, the worse it gets.


So, let's start there next time.


How's this for a ballot question:

"Both the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of California require California to grant equal rights to all citizens. Bearing that in mind, do two people of the same gender who wish to marry in California have the right to a marriage license on equal terms as all other people who wish to marry in California?"

Please Note: This ballot question applies only the government of the State of California. It does not affect freedom of religious beliefs. It also does not affect the freedom of a church or individual to choose which marriage ceremonies they do or do not wish to perform.

[Beer Snob-50]

15. i think that is a fair ballot question

why doesn't someone start that ballot initiative in ca and see what happens (i am across the country and that is why i pass off the idea to others). i got a feeling same sex marriage would be legal in ca very soon if this happens.

[Bluenorthwest]

17. It is beyond ironic that the religion these bigots tout

Actually teaches specifically that your 'yes should mean yes, and your no mean no, for anything more comes from evil'.
And yet their wording was yes=no and no=yes. Typical hypocrisy.

[TexasObserver]

3. Recommend

[Solly Mack]

4. k/r

[fasttense]

5. I've always said it was the confusing nature of the ballot that allowed it to get more votes

for a ban. The RepubliCONS are always manipulating things so that rational people get confused. They couldn't have done it without the trickery. RepubliCONS can't do anything without conning someone.

[totodeinhere]

6. But that's no excuse. The California voters should have seen right through that deception.

And they should have voted against Prop 8. Nothing can mitigate the shame that a majority of voters in California brought upon themselves.

[No Elephants]

7. Point is, you don't fall for the same trick next time it's about to go on the ballot.

Whether it's gay marriage or any other issue that's important, you watch out for that kind of ballot question.

[totodeinhere]

8. In theory of course you are right. But...

I haven't lost my faith in the ignorance and prejudices of the average California voter. I hope I'm wrong but I'm not so sure that another Prop 8 wouldn't pass again, at least in the short term. Demographic trends are on our side, but exactly when those trends will be enough to make a difference I'm not sure.

[AlbertCat]

16. I haven't lost my faith in the ignorance

Also, folks who "don't care" whether gays get married or not are not as energized as those who are against it (or for it for that matter). Many of the "live and let live" people don't want to come down on either side, but want to appear neutral. They don't want to get involved. This gives the people worried about anyone who does things differently from them an advantage. Only if the people who think it's someone else's problem can be made to see it has an effect on their lives or especially the lives of their friends and family who are gay will they come out and brave the displeasure of the anti-gay people. The Prop 8 supporters don't mind screwing with the personal lives of others. People who think others can live their lives as they please (without breaking the law) don't want to champion or hinder others personal decisions... so they don't offer a lot of concrete support.

[Le Taz Hot]

9. How's the gay marriage fight going in NV?

. . .

[totodeinhere]

12. No gay marriage yet in Nevada

Nevada has a ban against same-sex marriage written into it's constitution due to the passage of Question 2 with 67% of the vote in 2002. I suspect that if it were back on the ballot today it would be closer but I don't think we're there yet. Rural areas of the state are very conservative and there are a lot of Mormons around. The legislature did pass civil unions legislation over the governor's veto last spring.

[Beer Snob-50]

14. NV is a strange state

When I was there, there were bulletin boards and placards on taxis and buses advertising nekkid dancing and then others spouting biblical passages. the old good v evil played out in public.

[WoodyD]

19. Good vs. Evil

When I was there, there were bulletin boards and placards on taxis and buses advertising nekkid dancing and then others spouting biblical passages. the old good v evil played out in public.

So which is good and which is evil?

[Beer Snob-50]

20. I will leave that up to the individual to determine

but (using the rw logic) because we are all democrats, nekkid dancing is good and bible is baddddddd.

[totodeinhere]

24. As a Nevada resident, I'm won't hesitate to say that ones spouting biblical passages are..

the evil ones. Those are the very types who are blocking gay marriage and raising all sorts of havoc.

[slackmaster]

13. Nearly half of us did see through all the lies and distortions, supported No on 8 and voted no

:hi:

[Gormy Cuss]

22. Picky, picky, picky.

:hi:

The same percentage of voters in ME voted in favor of upholding same sex marriage in spite of the fear campaign by the pack of liars behind Prop. 8.

[newtothegame]

10. We coulda stopped this at its source...

but I guess we were too busy commenting on how badass President Obama looked in sunglasses to stop and formulate a plan against Prop 8. Oh well, at least he's been a strong, purpose-driven leader on the fight to get Prop 8 repealed...oh wait...well at least he's using all those 'inspiring' speeches now to....oh wait.

[Fearless]

11. K&R!

[Raster]

18. Did someone say "fierce advocate"?

[xchrom]

21. Recommend

[radhika]

23. I was part of an Exit-Vote Audit in California

In Novemeber 2008, I was part of a citizen's audit of voting -part of the group 'ProtectCaliforniaBallot'. Prop 8 was on the ballot too. We we based in precincts that had experienced(ahem) vote irregularities in 2004. We asked exiting folks to fill out a paper ballot repeating what they voted for and put them in a box for later confirmatory counting. The official votes matched the audit forms. But that doesn't answer the question of the measure's wording. What I DO find relevant is the number of exiting voters who made critical comments about Gay Marriage or simply sneered. This was a poor largely Hispanic area with many older votes at time I was there.

California has a gamey relationship with deceptive ballot measures. They are deliberately crafted in Double Speak, although Secretary of State Debra Bowen is clamping down on that. The counter-intuitive use of Yes/No is rampant. But in my experience by election day, motivated voters who intend to vote on it know the score. They will have been pummuled by scare ads and robocall that also preach scare-scare-scare.

Ultimately, CA goes where the money fountain has lead them. CA is not all that liberal, these days.