Americans United for Separation of Church and State

Greater Phoenix Chapter

Old Home Home Contact Us Upcoming
Events
Past
Events
Photos
Videos
Church State Issues Report Church State Violations Join
Email List
Leave
Email List
Membership Donations Request
Speaker
Take
Action
Legal
Resources
Facebook Meetup Links Send Letter to Editor

                                                                                                                       

Church State Issues

Gay marriage victories may signal larger shift

Nov 12, 2012

Los Angeles Times

Marriage should be a civil contract between two or more people. The government should have any business deciding who can and who can't get married.

Gay marriage victories may signal larger shift

By Maura Dolan and Alana Semuels, Los Angeles Times

November 8, 2012

Four years ago, opponents of gay marriage celebrated a winning streak, having persuaded California voters to end marriage rights for gays. If courts or legislatures bowed to the pro-marriage forces, the opposition figured it could just go to the ballot box to restore marriage bans.

But all that changed Tuesday, when gay marriage supporters succeeded in the four states where the question was on the ballot. Until then, voters had consistently opposed marriage rights, most recently in May in North Carolina.

The opposing sides differed on the significance, with Christian conservatives considering the election a blip and gay rights activists describing it as a monumental sea change. But the results emboldened activists to target other states for marriage rights and left their opponents reeling.

Gay rights activists singled out President Obama's change of heart in favor of same-sex marriage as a key ingredient in Tuesday's victories. Just four years ago, the sponsors of Proposition 8's ban on same-sex marriage made robocalls to California homes with a recording of Obama saying he opposed gay nuptials.

"His shift caused a lot of other politicians to feel free to change their positions as well and made it easier for African American churches to change their positions," said Jon W. Davidson, legal director for Lambda Legal, a gay rights organization.

With election victories in Maine, Maryland, Minnesota and Washington, gay rights activists said Wednesday that they would focus next on winning marriage rights both in the federal courts and in state legislatures, which could include states such as Rhode Island, Delaware, Hawaii and Illinois.

"When you have momentum on your side, it's the time to double down," said Chad Griffin, who launched the legal fight against Proposition 8. "That's exactly what we've got to do: We've got to take this momentum and move forward."

Gay rights supporters spent about $32.7 million in Tuesday's races, compared with $11.3 million by Christian conservatives. Four years ago, the spending on Proposition 8 was about equal on both sides. Activists said the Mormon Church largely stayed out of the races this time, letting the Roman Catholic Church carry the burden.

Supporters of same-sex marriage also enlisted the backing of churches and the African American community, which in the past tended to oppose gay marriage.

In Maryland, where African Americans make up about 30% of the population, a black megachurch helped spur support for marriage rights. An exit poll showed that 27% of voters were African American, and half supported marriage rights, according to the Human Rights campaign, a gay rights advocacy group.

Activists also changed their messaging from four years ago. Instead of asking voters for equal rights, they emphasized that gays, like heterosexuals, wanted to formalize their commitment and protect their children. Volunteers shared personal testimonials about their partners and family during nightly phone banks and door-to-door canvassing.

"We turned this into a conversation about love, family and commitment," said Griffin, head of the Human Rights Campaign.

Proposition 8 is now before the U.S. Supreme Court, which is considering whether to review a federal appeals court decision that overturned the 2008 ballot imitative. Gay rights lawyers said Tuesday's election demonstrates to the court that public opinion on same-sex marriage is moving rapidly in favor of gay rights.

"This will send an even clearer message to the justices about which way the winds of history are blowing," Davidson said. "And I think it may raise questions in their mind about whether to even take the case."

Opponents of same-sex marriage blamed their defeats on the Democratic nature of the states in play on Tuesday and the lopsided spending in favor of marriage rights.

"The other side is now going to try to pass more marriage laws, and we will have to work twice as hard," said Brian Brown, president of the National Organization for Marriage, which spent $5.5 million on Tuesday's ballot measures. "Today is a bad day for us."

Frank Schubert, who ran the campaign against gay marriage in all four states, downplayed the results as coming from "very liberal, deeply blue" states and insisted the issue remained hotly contested throughout the country.

"The American people continue to view marriage as a union between one man and one woman," Schubert said. "There's nothing about last night that changes that. There's no sea change in the country."

Tuesday's election also brought more liberals to the Legislature in Illinois, where state Rep. Greg Harris says he expects to introduce a bill supporting same-sex marriage in 2013. The Democrat introduced a bill on the issue this year that did not pass.

"The climate has changed in a huge way," Harris said in a postelection phone call, according to the newspaper Crain's Chicago Business.

Rhode Island, which recognizes same-sex marriages performed elsewhere but doesn't allow them to occur in the state, will probably introduce legislation permitting same-sex marriage this year as well.

Although gay marriage is still prohibited in Minnesota, Tuesday's victory at the ballot box may lead same-sex marriage advocates to try to overturn that law.

Minnesota voters on Tuesday rejected a proposed constitutional amendment banning gay marriage, with 52% of voters rejecting the amendment and 48% supporting it. Any voter who left the question blank counted as a "no" vote.

The governor of Minnesota is a Democrat, and on Tuesday, the party recaptured both chambers of the Legislature after a divisive year in which Republicans in the statehouse often warred with the governor.

Delaware Gov. Jack Markell, also a Democrat, has said that he believes it is "inevitable" that his state will pass a law approving gay marriage, and that advocates could introduce a bill as soon as next year.

A federal judge in Hawaii also set the stage for a potential battle there, ruling in August that the state's ban on same-sex marriages was constitutional. The ruling said any changes to the law would have to be made by lawmakers or through an initiative process.

Despite the progress, gay rights campaigns have a long way to go. Same-sex marriage is permitted in nine states and the District of Columbia but banned in 41 states.

Lambda's Davidson said California's gay community was particularly impatient after seeing the gains in other states, and noted that the wait could be long. Davidson said the high court could simply hold the Proposition 8 case for a year or so until it reviews rulings on the Defense of Marriage Act.

Whatever the court does, Tuesday's election shows that "eventually the country is going to be supportive of the rights of same-sex couples to marry," and the justices will not want to write a ruling that history abhors, Davidson said.

Or the vote could spur the court to decide to leave the marriage question to the states, anti-gay-marriage activist Brown said:

"The fact that states are working it out state by state undercuts the idea that you would need the court to intervene."

maura.dolan@latimes.com

alana.semuels@latimes.com


Gay rights and the marriage march

Source

Gay rights and the marriage march

November 8, 2012

It took a long time for same-sex marriage to win at the ballot box, but when it finally happened Tuesday, it happened in a big way. In the states where voters considered measures to recognize gay marriage rights — Maine, Maryland and Washington — all three won approval. In Minnesota, voters rejected a Proposition 8-like measure that would have embedded a ban on same-sex marriage in the state constitution.

Let's not fool ourselves: This nation has a long way to go before all gay and lesbian couples enjoy full marriage rights. The vast majority of states ban gay marriage. But that is going to change. Polls over the last several years have shown steady increases in acceptance of same-sex marriage.

The changing attitudes were visible in more than just the four states that voted on ballot measures. In Iowa, for instance, state Supreme Court Justice David Wiggins kept his seat even though social conservatives sought his ouster because he was among the justices to rule in 2009 that the state's ban on same-sex marriage was unconstitutional. Supporters of equal marriage rights were elected to legislatures in several states, and lawmakers in a few have said they will introduce marriage bills. And it is significant that on Tuesday, the nation for the first time elected a president who openly supports same-sex marriage (Obama said in 2008 that he opposed same-sex marriage but later changed his mind) and whose party adopted that stance in its platform, something that couldn't have happened a decade ago.

The nation is on a long, jagged ride that sometimes moves us closer to full marriage equality and then turns disappointingly back. In 2009, Maine's governor signed a marriage rights bill into law; voters overrode it. This week, they changed their minds. As Tuesday's election showed, through a combination of legislative efforts and ballot measures, gay marriage is working its bumpy way forward. But when lawmakers or voters deprive gay and lesbian couples of their civil rights — as California voters did when they approved Proposition 8 in 2008 — then it falls to the courts to step in and set things right. A federal appeals court did just that in California, declaring Proposition 8 unconstitutional. In less than two weeks, the U.S. Supreme Court will consider whether to let that ruling stand.

We like to think that if Californians had been considering Proposition 8 all over again on Tuesday, they would have rejected it. At this point, though, it's up to the nation's high court to make clear what California voters failed to recognize: The right to wed should not be denied on the basis of sexual orientation.