.
.
.
.
.
It was something e
lse again, wasn’t it, that Last Gasp of Hate? It was the GOP’s last stand in California, it was the Mormon Church’s big play for political relevance, and it was tragic to see it succeed even if only temporarily – a bare majority of voters in such a progressive state, amending their own Constitution to actually TAKE away rights from a popular minority.
But, like all things based on lies, distortions and misconceptions, this victory is proving a castle built on sand. 
A new Pew Poll shows that 8% of folks who had voted Yes on 8 have already changed their minds about it, meaning that it would fail now by about the same margin it succeeded four weeks ago. And 59% of all respondents believe that the same-sex marriages that have taken place here since May should remain valid – certainly counter to the intent of Prop 8.
Maybe 
Art and I were wrong about the protests being counter-productive Mulligan demands, maybe they ARE educating people and changing minds. We certainly didn’t manage to educate folks before the election, between the inept No on 8 leadership and the nonstop barrage of malevolent falsehoods spewing on a daily basis from Schubert-Flint. But when people know the truth, their support just slips away like the morning dew. Especially when they’re disabused of this particular common misconception:
NO, gays in civil unions (or domestic partnerships) do NOT have the same rights as straight married couples. As I posted here, there is “a whole array of crucial marriage-ba
sed tax, pension, visitation, inheritance, immigration, and legal standing rights granted to opposite-sex couples,” that our gay brothers and sisters are ineligible for. And the poll I posted the next day showed 3/8 of you OJ readers who had voted Yes on 8 to be concerned enough about that injustice that you favor repealing the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act.
Just for the record. Obama and Biden OPPOSED amending any Constitution to take rights away from gays, and they support full equality. The legalization of gay marriage does NOT require teaching school children about gay marriage, and was NEVER going to endanger the tax-exempt status or free speech of any churches.
When the courts inevitably declare this radical revision of the Constitution by a bare majority of voters to be a non-starter, we are going to hear a pandemonium of whining about “activist judges” overturning the “will of the people.” I just hope it comes up for some kind of vote again, now that the scales are falling from Californians’ eyes – this bigotry and divisiveness are just SO last millenium, and so are any political parties and religions that tie their fortunes to it.
My god, Vern! Great write up!
This is the 21st Century and we have a bunch of religious zealots with their tax-exempt status funding these bold attempts at stripping rights from folks who they deem are “sinning”. How many GLBT CALIFORNIA TAXPAYERS have had their rights -taken away by out-of-state TAX EXEMPT RELIGIOUS FASCISTS? Those groups are so out of control that they are stepping over state borders to impose their oppression on people who don’t want their brand of religion. We don’t want their meddling in our state business and we don’t want them screwing with the people that we love and work with every day. There is a reason why we live in California and not amongst the pedophiles and freaks in Utah.
The GLBT community will prevail in justice over this prop 8 Xtian Taliban evil.
“Marriage is neither a conservative nor a liberal issue; it is a universal human institution, guaranteeing children fathers, and pointing men and women toward a special kind of socially as well as personally fruitful sexual relationship. Gay marriage is the final step down a long road America has already traveled toward deinstitutionalizing, denuding and privatizing marriage. It would set in legal stone some of the most destructive ideas of the sexual revolution: There are no differences between men and women that matter, marriage has nothing to do with procreation, children do not really need mothers and fathers, the diverse family forms adults choose are all equally good for children. What happens in my heart is that I know the difference. Don’t confuse my people, who have been the victims of deliberate family destruction, by giving them another definition of marriage.”
Walter Fauntroy-Former DC Delegate to Congress, Founding member of the Congressional Black Caucus, Coordinator for Martin Luther King, Jr.’s march on DC
Fitz,
Welcome!
Rev. Walter Fauntroy = supporter of FMA and beneficiary of Bush’s faith-based largesse. He’s a sell-out and a bigot who happens to use his association with Rev. King for personal gain.
This was written about him nearly 4 years ago, when he helped get Bush reelected:
http://www.pamspaulding.com/weblog/2005/03/faith-based-billions-and-our-dry-drunk.html
Reverend Fauntroy’s argument against marriage equality is very feeble. First he claims that he’s defending the black family. Then he wanders off into the clouds to think up some vaporous link between gay marriage and the stability of Black families. He can’t find a link in concrete reality, so he has to wander way out into the moonie realms of existential sociological theory to find one. You want a link between gay rights and black families? AIDS destroys black families. Gay activists fight AIDS. There is nothing theoretical about that. Dick Cheney may not have a clue, but you won’t find a single gay AIDS activist who doesn’t know the mortifyng statistics on HIV reported by the Black AIDS Institute. I read the statistics in Gay City News. Reverend Fauntroy doesn’t read that paper or he’d know that when he attacks gay rights, he undermines the fight against AIDS. An army of gay and lesbian activists, some 10,000 strong according to Larry Kramer’s estimate, has been fighting a two-front war for 25 years. When Fauntroy attacks us on one front – the gay rights front – he weakens us on the AIDS front.
…Now, if Reverend Fauntroy claims that marriage equality is a greater threat to black families than HIV, he’s either seeing things or he’s taking money.
Red Vixen
Instead of attacking Fauntroy as a (gasp)associate of the Bush administration & a (obviously) someone opposed to same-sex “marriage”.
Perhaps its better to address the substance of his comments.
Wouldent you think?
Fitz,
I believe I did that by the quotes of a black gay activist at the link I posted. He keeps informed about people like Fauntroy.
Fauntroy has created a strawman out of gay marriage, when in fact, it is HIV/AIDS that is the most devastating issue confronting black families.
His organization has reaped the benefits of Bush’s giving taxpayer monies to churches and he is being a good soldier by reinforcing the party line on hate against gays. Follow the money….
Nope no sunstance yet…
Just an AIDs deversion, and unfounded accusations of coruption..
Kill the messenger huh…
Address his actual quote.
Address his actual quote.
His actions and his decisions speak much more loudly than his current pandering. Why would I take his word on what is the biggest threat to black families? He’s lying. His argument is “feeble” and he’s been paid well for expousing those lies. He’s no friend of humanity.
“His argument is “feeble” ”
Ok this is a close to substance as you have come.
But it is a dismissal not an argument.
FYI
the illegitamacy rate is 70% amoung African- Americans
(illigitamacy means bearing children outside marriage quo “marriage”)
DUDE, Where IS the substance? Fauntroy’s substance:
Don’t confuse my people, who have been the victims of deliberate family destruction, by giving them another definition of marriage.
What a racist ignorant prick, to think his flock of black folks are such mindless sheep that they’ll all turn gay because they see happy gay people getting married. Laughable.
By the way, I didn’t get around to mentioning in the article but that old figure of 69% of blacks voting Yes on 8 was erroneous, it was a hastily conducted CNN poll with a very small sampling; the figure was really 57% – still too high but not much higher than other races. And that was after last-minute deceptive ads insinuating that Obama supported 8.
Hey Vix, since this Fitz keeps pestering you to “address the substance” of Rev. Fauntroy’s nonsense, and you seem to be back amongst us for the weekend, you wanna do a post on the clown? I have a title for you…
Vern
“What a racist ignorant pr*ck, to think his flock of black folks are such mindless sheep that they’ll all turn gay because they see happy gay people getting married. Laughable.”
Well that would be laughable…but that’s not what he said or even remotely inferred..
Through what osmosis did you see that as his point?
Hey Vix, since this Fitz keeps pestering you to “address the substance” of Rev. Fauntroy’s nonsense, and you seem to be back amongst us for the weekend, you wanna do a post on the clown? I have a title for you…
Title, please! 😉
Hey Vern I thought you might have been in costume as “Fitz” just to pull my chain this am. Apparently his bigotry is legit!
What else you got, Fitz?
You blow your whole wad on that first post and you keep looking for more? You proposed a premise and you got no takers so you now want others to come up with supporting points of view?
I gotta say it, Fitz…. you got nothing.
Try again soon!
Try again soon!
No thank-you
I will retire to blogs of substance were men & women gay & straight have intelligent fruitfull conversation
OK Fitz, so maybe he was saying that black people will see gays getting married and decide that marriage is worthless and there’s no point being good mothers and fathers after all. Either way he has a low opinion of his fellow blacks and calls them easily “confused,” and I call him a self-hating racist.
I will retire to blogs of substance were men & women gay & straight have intelligent fruitfull conversation
LOL. Here is the kind of discussions at the Fitz site:
https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=11630525&postID=6406955142828032958&isPopup=true&pli=1
He gets some woman to respond to a ridiculous post and then he harasses her into silence. It looked pretty contentious to me. Nice.
I see that Fitz also retired to the safe havens of a place where he has spell-check, to help in convincing his unfortunate readers that he’s got some kind of law degree.
Also:
but that’s not what he said or even remotely inferred..
No, Fitz, “inferred” is what I did to Fauntroy, if I put words in his mouth.
“Infer” is also what PRETENTIOUS people say when they really mean “imply,” but “imply” just doesn’t sound intellectual enough for them.
This is like the Patriots calling Plaxico’s helmet the ground Vern.
AS A FULL DISCLAIMER: I WAS AN ADAMENT NO ON 8 SUPPORTER. I still am.
But, the big but, here is the No on 8 campaign FU*%ed up. They LOST. It’s up to the courts.
Let the new season take hold.
The hard truth is, the movement was complacent. MOST supporters did not speak out to their friends and family, most were uncomfortable with the subject matter. NO ON 8 failed to hmanize the message.
Holding a rally now and listening to the hyperboyle pisses me off. the time for that was October 10th.
Gay Marriage will never be accepted until it’s humanized and that message of humanity reaches the very people who defeated it.
STEVE SMITH AND NO ON 8 LOST THIS.