State Constitutional Ban on Gay Marriage

I was looking for a thread on this too. Very backwards.

I was gonna post this and I see yours...

The motto: End all hate, vote no on Eight



* SF Church Weds Gay Couples Ahead Of Prop. 8 Vote Play Video Video: SF Church Weds Gay Couples Ahead Of Prop. 8 Vote CBS 5 San Francisco
* Voters weigh in on amendment to ban gay marriage Play Video Video: Voters weigh in on amendment to ban gay marriage AP
* Full Obama Victory Speech Play Video Video: Full Obama Victory Speech ABC News

San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom crosses his fingers as he speaks at a rally AP – San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom crosses his fingers as he speaks at a rally against California Proposition …

LOS ANGELES – In an election otherwise full of liberal triumphs, the gay rights movement suffered a stunning defeat as California voters approved a ban on same-sex marriages that overrides a recent court decision legalizing them.

The constitutional amendment — widely seen as the most momentous of the nation's 153 ballot measures — will limit marriage to heterosexual couples, the first time such a vote has taken place in a state where gay unions are legal.

Gay-rights activists had a rough election elsewhere as well. Ban-gay-marriage amendments were approved in Arizona and Florida, and Arkansas voters approved a measure banning unmarried couples from serving as adoptive or foster parents. Supporters made clear that gays and lesbians were their main target.

In California, with 95 percent of precincts reporting Wednesday, the ban had 5,125,752 votes, or 52 percent, while there were 4,725,313 votes, or 48 percent, opposed.

Similar bans had prevailed in 27 states before Tuesday's elections, but none were in California's situation — with about 18,000 gay couples married since a state Supreme Court ruling in May. The state attorney general, Jerry Brown, has said those marriages will remain valid, although legal challenges are possible.

Spending for and against the amendment reached $74 million, making it the most expensive social-issues campaign in U.S. history and the most expensive campaign this year outside the race for the White House.

Elsewhere, voters in Colorado and South Dakota rejected measures that could have led to sweeping bans of abortion, and Washington became only the second state — after Oregon — to offer terminally ill people the option of physician-assisted suicide.

A first-of-its-kind measure in Colorado, which was defeated soundly, would have defined life as beginning at conception. Its opponents said the proposal could lead to the outlawing of some types of birth control as well as abortion.

The South Dakota measure would have banned abortions except in cases of rape, incest and serious health threat to the mother. A tougher version, without the rape and incest exceptions, lost in 2006. Anti-abortion activists thought the modifications would win approval, but the margin of defeat was similar, about 55 percent to 45 percent of the vote.

"The lesson here is that Americans, in states across the country, clearly support women's ability to access abortion care without government interference," said Vicki Saporta, president of the National Abortion Federation.

In Washington, voters gave solid approval to an initiative modeled after Oregon's "Death with Dignity" law, which allows a terminally ill person to be prescribed lethal medication they can administer to themselves. Since Oregon's law took effect in 1997, more than 340 people — mostly ailing with cancer — have used it to end their lives.

The marijuana reform movement won two prized victories, with Massachusetts voters decriminalizing possession of small amounts of the drug and Michigan joining 12 other states in allowing use of pot for medical purposes.

Henceforth, people caught in Massachusetts with an ounce or less of pot will no longer face criminal penalties. Instead, they'll forfeit the marijuana and pay a $100 civil fine.

The Michigan measure will allow severely ill patients to register with the state and legally buy, grow and use small amounts of marijuana to relieve pain, nausea, appetite loss and other symptoms.

Nebraska voters, meanwhile, approved a ban on race- and gender-based affirmative action, similar to measures previously approved in California, Michigan and Washington. Returns in Colorado on a similar measure were too close to call.

Ward Connerly, the California activist-businessman who has led the crusade against affirmative action, said Obama's victory proved his point. "We have overcome the scourge of race," Connerly said.

Energy measures met a mixed fate. In Missouri, voters approved a measure requiring the state's three investor-owned electric utilities to get 15 percent of their electricity from renewable sources by 2021. But California voters defeated an even more ambitious measure that would have required the state's utilities to generate half their electricity from windmills, solar systems, geothermal reserves and other renewable sources by 2025.

Two animal-welfare measures passed — a ban on dog racing in Massachusetts, and a proposition in California that outlaws cramped cages for egg-laying chickens.

Amid deep economic uncertainty, proposals to cut state income taxes were defeated decisively in North Dakota and Massachusetts.

In San Francisco, an eye-catching local measure — to bar arrests for prostitution — was soundly rejected. Police and political leaders said it would hamper the fight against sex trafficking. And in San Diego, voters decided to make permanent a ban on alcohol consumption on city beaches.

____

cutback wrote:

absolutely sickens me :mad:

I was torn because I am hetero sexual adult female and many of the tapes I have been taught reel through my mind. But a school teacher pointed out to me that freedom of choice has been salvaged by the blood of our fallen peoples and even though sometimes we might not agree, we should always try to promote that freedom.

In nature, I try to abide.

A sad mark on an amzingly happy night.

I'm sure when the votes are broken down, the same throngs of Latino voters that supported Barack Obama will also have voted yes to banning gay marraige.

My girlfriend's brother is gay, he was devistated this morning. They are a Latino family, and even though her son is gay, her mom voted Yes to ban gay marraige ... it was a polarizing debate.

People have a tough time believing me when I say if you get away from the coast, California is one amazingly conservative state.

It was a heated battle, almost as much as the presidential race.

Just as with the presidential race, the people have spoken.

I'm happy about Obama getting elected, but I am disappointed that bans on gay marriage passed in many states. Especially in California where it was just allowed. Taking away a right they were just granted.

I'm hoping it will be tangled in the courts for a while and gay marriages won't be undone somehow. I hope. The Yes on 8 ads were so disgusting. I just think about my gay friends who are fabulous parents and my creepy Mormon neighbor with the giant Yes on 8 sign in his front yard, a bad parent, a man who cheated on his wife and divorced her, just a pig of a guy.

I'm rambling, I'm really angry and sad about this.

meistereder wrote:

1. A very tough setback, and it makes me sad. I am in CA and I honestly don't know where all these yes-on-8 people came from. I only know one or two people who would have voted yes on 8.

where do you live?

I took my girlfriend to Tahoe last week for her birthday ... and it only took me about 30 minutes to get out of the city and see TONS of "Yes on 8" banners ... again, outside of L.A. and S.F., this state DOES have a lot of conservative folks.

jimed14 wrote:

where do you live?

I took my girlfriend to Tahoe last week for her birthday ... and it only took me about 30 minutes to get out of the city and see TONS of "Yes on 8" banners ... again, outside of L.A. and S.F., this state DOES have a lot of conservative folks.

I live in LA. Most of my friends are pretty liberal, although I have a couple conservative friends too, who have strong religious views on marriage.

decides2dream wrote:

thanks for the info.




to be blunt and none too eloquent.....that's just fucked.

Yeah, I agree. They spent more money on this proposition apparently than in the history of elections on social issues. The biggest lie they were putting out was that if gay marriage was upheld, it would require teachers to "teach gay marriage" whatever that means. The superintendent of schools point blank said that is a lie, and the school districts were adamant that they were against the amendment, since it promotes discrimination.

In the end, the money bought the ads that led the ignorant to believe the lie.

meistereder wrote:

Yeah, I agree. They spent more money on this proposition apparently than in the history of elections on social issues. The biggest lie they were putting out was that if gay marriage was upheld, it would require teachers to "teach gay marriage" whatever that means. The superintendent of schools point blank said that is a lie, and the school districts were adamant that they were against the amendment, since it promotes discrimination.

In the end, the money bought the ads that led the ignorant to believe the lie.

it's so sad the time, energy, money and emotional investment some may make to fight against the rights of others...to enjoy the freedoms and rights that they do, all within the borders of the same country.....and why? LEGAL rights have NOTHING to do with religion, and vice versa. we are more alike than different....love is love......2 consenting adults, etc, etc...yada, yada.......wtf? it truly saddens me.


and people wonder why change takes so damn long? two steps forward, one step back...and so it goes. the lager the group, the more resistance to change...even positive change.