Proposition 8 - Back In The News
Way back after the successful passage of Proposition 8 by 52% of Californians who voted, I said I would write up my thoughts on the way the ‘No on Prop 8′ campaign had been run. In the end I didn’t do that because there was a rush to do so in other channels and by people probably better qualified to comment on American or Californian campaigning than I. I did feel strongly that the campaign could have done with a little Harvey Milk-style up frontness about it being a gay issue, rather than hiding behind the ‘fundamental rights’ banner and never showing a single gay person, and there were other points I’d have raised, but I left it to the better qualified.
But the issue is hot again because this week the California State Supreme Court will hear the arguments in the cases which have been brought to have the passage of the Proposition declared invalid. And once again I’ve looked at a campaign communication and had my hackles rise. This coming Thursday is the day of the hearing, and so on Wednesday night the ‘Eve of Justice’ events will constitute a series of vigils across the state. On the San Francisco event page of the Eve of Justice website (keep trying - it’s seriously buggy) appears the statement:
The evening will begin with a legal update from one of the attorneys who will argue against Prop 8 before the Justices of the Supreme Court the following morning. We will entrust them with our prayers for equal rights which they can convey to the rest of our legal team.
And just seeing the word ‘prayers’ there makes me want to scream. A prayer, by definition, is a religious concept - what does that have to do with my own desire to see other people gain or retain the same right that I enjoy with The Mrs? Considering the way religious structures have been used systematically to demonise lesbians and gay men for centuries and strip even the most basic respect and rights from us, I’d have thought that the last thing we want to be doing is showing any respect for those structures back.
A key argument in the Proposition 8 debate was that religious diktat has no place in determining civil policy. How did no one involved in assembling these materials consider that suggesting we’re all invoking God or gods ourselves is at best hypocritical, and at worst, massively offensive to those of us who hold no religious belief, and certainly don’t want our support for a political campaign to be construed that we believe in praying for what we want?
March 5th, 2009 at 3:06 am
What is the status of your uk civil partnership in the US?
I’m not quite sure what I’m trying to ask but do you have (for example) legally recognised next of kin status in California? Does that make sense?