In the wake of Michigan's passage of an anti-gay marriage constitutional amendment, John Corvino wrote:
It was a classic bait-and-switch. When gay-rights opponents sought to amend Michigan's constitution to prohibit, not only same-sex marriage, but also "similar union[s] for any purpose," they told us that the amendment was not about taking away employment benefits. They told us that in their speeches. They told us that in their campaign literature. They told us that in their commercials.
They lied.
The initiative passed, the constitution was amended, and before the ink was dry the opponents changed their tune and demanded that municipalities and state universities revoke health-insurance benefits for same-sex domestic partners.
A similar scenario is being played out, now, in Florida. The Sunshine State's Amendment 2 appears on the state ballot as follows:
"This amendment protects marriage as the legal union of only one man and one woman as husband and wife and provides that no other legal union that is treated as marriage or the substantial equivalent thereof shall be valid or recognized." (emphasis added)
Supporters of Amendment 2 are claiming no existing rights will be taken away:
Amendment 2 does nothing new. It merely protects something longstanding, something precious, something beautiful - natural marriage between a man and a woman.
But, as we know from Michigan, that's not what they'll be saying the day after the amendment passes. And, while unlike California, the Florida amendment requires 60 percent of the vote to enshrine anti-gay animus in the state constitution, defeating it remains an uphill battle.
Where's Obama? The Washington Blade takes note of Obama's silence on California's anti-gay marriage Proposition 8, and as we've pointed out, observes that:
...black support for Prop 8 could be the key to its approval. A new poll conducted by SurveyUSA shows overwhelming black support for Prop 8. Likely black voters favor it, 58-38 percent. That's a daunting and disappointing margin, especially considering black turnout is expected to be at record-breaking levels thanks to Obama's historic candidacy.
Likewise, in Florida (which, unlike California, is very much a swing state up for grabs), the Obama campaign is making registration of Caribbean-Americans and Democratic-leaning Hispanics (of which there are a growing number) a key priority. These groups are heavily anti-gay, and anti-gay marriage. Let us applaud the self-sacrifice being made by LBGT organizations, whose donations to the Democrats' "get out the vote" efforts may elect Obama, even if it means passing anti-gay state consitutional amendments.
Bait and switch, anyone?
17 Comments for “Bait and Switch Time, Again”
posted by BobN on
How very clever of Mr. Miller to figure out that over half a century of effort on the part of liberal and progressive Democratic gay men and lesbians was just cover for our real goal: delivering the word “marriage” to the fundies through the California Constitution. The clues were there, I know, but to put it all together. Amazing job, Stephen.
Now, having exposed us as the true enemies of gay people, perhaps you could pick up the phone and call any and all movers and shakers in the LCRs and ask them to find out why Arnold hasn’t said a word about Prop 8 since he promised to fight it, oh so many months back…
posted by Carl on
Stephen, are you going to mention anything about Sarah Palin saying she supports a federal marriage amendment? It’s a common misconception that Obama/Biden and McCain/Palin are identical on many gay issues. Gov. Palin has now proven otherwise.
As for the rest, I can’t really say that I am happy with Obama’s position on the amendment, but I also can’t say that the campaign for this amendment should ever have rested on begging Obama to voice opposition. It’s not going to do very much to change minds. And the alternative – hoping Obama voters will stay home – just means the amendment will pass and the courts will be packed by judges who virulently oppose gay rights.
posted by avee on
The federal marriage amendment isn’t going to pass — it didn’t pass with a GOP Congress, it certainly won’t be brought up under a big Democratic majority Congress. The state amendments very well might pass. They are what’s on the table now. Obama could help; he isn’t, despite the overwhelming support (dollars and labor) he’s received from the LGBT community and it’s pacs. Deal with that.
posted by Bobby on
The question isn’t why republicans don’t support us. The question is why minorities don’t support us after we’ve supported every one of their civil rights causes. When you think about that, maybe you’ll think twice about voting for Obama. If gays won’t vote republican, let them vote libertarian.
posted by Kevin on
Well said, Stephen. And I find it interesting how virulent the Obama partisans are against any form of independent accountability for his campaign/party and its undelivered promises. I guess it is a preview of what life under one-party rule in America will be like for gays — all talk, no action, and bitter, personal, thuggish attacks on anyone who dares to point it out. What a wonderful ‘change’ it will be…
posted by Josh Melendez on
Stephen,
As a gay Republican, I’ll be voting for John McCain. That being said, I do have respect for Senator Obama. The point that needs to be made here is that it is unfair to call minorities “anti-gay”. Sure a majority maybe “anti-gay marriage”. But “anti-gay” is going to far. On broad measures of acceptance and tolerance, latinos poll evenly with whites, and blacks average about eight point behind. Please comment on this – I’m also interested in what your readers have to say.
Josh Melendez
posted by Doug on
Yeah Kevin. Tell us how great one party rule was for the first 6 years of the Bush Administration. Like the way he got re-elected in 2004 by playing the anti-gay marriage card. Not to mention a 5 trillion increase in the national debt.
posted by Adrienne Critcher on
Let’s see Stephen–you’re blaming gay Democrats whose support for Obama and GOTV efforts (among homophobic minorities) may result in the passage of Prop 8. But where did Prop 8 and these other anti-gay marriage amendments come from?? Why, from Republicans!!! I agree that it is frustrating that many minority Obama supporters will vote for Prop 8, but Prop 8 wouldn’t even be on the table if it weren’t for Republicans. We wouldn’t even be having this discussion if it weren’t for Republicans pushing these anti-gay amendments. Log Cabin Republicans have much to answer for before even thinking about attacking Democratic LGBT groups. And of course both Obama and Schwarzenegger came out against Prop 8 some time ago, but neither has actively campaigned against it. (McCain is for it.) That doesn’t surprise me and as a realist it doesn’t really disappoint me either. If elected, McCain will appoint judges who will set back gay civil rights indefinitely. While I agree that Democrats don’t do enough positive for gays and lesbians, at least they don’t introduce legislation that is harmful. As a Stonewall Democrat, it is frustrating working together with Log Cabin Republicans to combat the legislative efforts of the very people the LCR’s have worked so hard to elect.
posted by BobN on
And let’s not forget that the California Legislature TWICE voted to legalize same-sex marriage with ZERO Republicans votes. ZERO. NADA. ZIP.
Which reminds me, where’s Arnold? He promised to campaign against Prop 8. WHERE IS ARNOLD?
posted by avee on
Well, BobN, the reason there’s no moral equivalency between Obama’s silence and GOP lack of support is that (now read carefully) the GLBT community and its activist shower $$$$ and staff hours on Obama’s campaign, and not McCain’s. Is that too difficult to understand?
posted by ? on
Avee, that makes as much sense as the underpants-gnomes’ profit strategy. Want to try again?
posted by Carl on
I usually hear more anti-Democrat talk here than any actual comment on what Republicans are doing, but Republican Patrick Guierriero is one of the main people working to defeat the California amendment:
http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/10/california_gay_marriage_prop_8.php
posted by Bobby on
“And let’s not forget that the California Legislature TWICE voted to legalize same-sex marriage with ZERO Republicans votes. ZERO. NADA. ZIP.”
—That’s because republicans respect the will of the people. Most people in California don’t want same sex marriage, they voted twice against it. Democrats are elitists, they care about what their Hollywood friends and liberal friends in academia and in the liberal media think about.
What the republicans are doing is respecting the will of the voters.
posted by Rob on
What the republicans are doing is respecting the will of the voters.
Who cares about the mob? Turns out that voters are actually a minority of the population. Remember, Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting for what’s for dinner. Benjamin Franklin said that, and he’s damn right. You argument goes against to the reason why the United-States declared independence. Fuck the voters, it’s the constitution that really matters.
posted by BobN on
avee: “Is that too difficult to understand?”
Well, I’ve always assumed that the Republican and Libertarian gay folks on here who always dump on the Dems actually, to use your words, shower $$$$$ and staff hours on GOP candidates. If, on the other hand, all you guys (and occasional gals) do is bitch on here and drink cocktails, I get your point.
posted by BobN on
“What the republicans are doing is respecting the will of the voters.”
Oh. I see.
P.S. The voters they represent would like you to go back into the closet. You gonna comply?
posted by Bobby on
“Who cares about the mob? Turns out that voters are actually a minority of the population.”
—Hey, democracy is our system. If you don’t vote, don’t bitch if politicians don’t do what you want. That’s like not wearing a condom, getting AIDS, and then complaining that there’s no cure for AIDS.
Personally, the only excuse for not voting is not liking either party and not having any passionate issues that your candidates support.
“You argument goes against to the reason why the United-States declared independence.”
—Not really, America’s independence was the result of high taxes from England and a lack of representation. When people vote republican, they’re not voting for same-sex marriage and gun control. They’re voting for low taxes, traditional marriage, the second amendment, and a whole bunch of issues.
Ask Joe Liberman what happens when you stop doing the will of the people. Luckily for him, there’s enough independents and moderate democrats that will keep electing him as opposed to far left zealots.
What you fail to realize is this, the mob matters! The mob is everything. Only the constitution protects the individual from the mob. And gay marriage isn’t a constitution issue, it’s a state’s rights issue.
And California, in spite of the radical liberals controlling almost everything. Has plenty of good conservatives in Orange County, the Inland Empire, Sacramento, and other parts of the real America.