The Orbis

Issue date: 11/12/08 Section: News/Features

Media Credit: The Bilerico Project Anti-gay rights activits rally outside San Francisco's City Hall this summer to protest marriage equality.

In what was otherwise a very good election night for activists of the left, gay rights took a pretty heavy drubbing. Arkansas voters barred gay couples from adopting children. Both Florida and Arizona amended their constitutions to state that marriage is between a man and a woman. In California, voters bestowed chickens with more rights (CA Proposition 2) while they eliminated same-sex marriages via constitutional amendment (CA Proposition 8).

I congratulate the chickens on their momentous victory.

As unjust as it may be, the outcomes in Arizona, Arkansas and Florida did not come as a great shock except to the most naively optimistic gay activists and the most fearful Christians who are convinced that gays are waging a covert campaign to recruit people's children and take over the world. To be sure, the polls predicted a close vote in Arizona, the only state to have rejected a gay marriage ban (in 2006), and likewise in Florida, where the amendment needed at least 60 percent of the vote, but few were holding their breath that the amendments would be defeated. Arkansas, home to 2008 Republican presidential candidate Mike Huckabee, was largely written off beforehand as a victory for the religious right.

California's result on Tuesday night, however, came as a shock to many people, both inside and outside the state. After all, California has a reputation for being America's bastion of progressive values and causes. The California Supreme Court ruled earlier this year that same-sex couples had a (state) constitutional right to marriage. Polls taken from May through September suggested that the amendment would fail. October polls painted a much tighter race but still gave the edge to the "no" vote. Both sides sensed a challenge and turned Proposition 8 into the most expensive ballot initiative in American history. Nevertheless, when it came down to it, Californians opted to approve Proposition 8 with around 52 percent in support.

At first blush, the reasons for passage of Proposition 8 are fairly self-evident. One thing is clear: supporters of the amendment were well organized and well funded. Leaving aside the irony that Mormons were the epitome of "alternative lifestyles" in regards to marriage a little over a century ago, Mormons contributed more than a third of the dollars to organizations supporting the amendment and lent considerable manpower to the effort. There were also some false and provocative suggestions made by Proposition 8's supporters claiming that teachers in California's schools would be forced to devote class time to the topic of same-sex marriage and that all religious institutions would be required to perform same-sex marriages.

At any rate, something apparently worked.

This is not to say that the gay activists opposing Proposition 8 ran a particularly good campaign. Fundraising trailed significantly behind Proposition 8's supporters until the last few weeks before the election and many people have criticized the "No on 8" television advertisements as lackluster. Some overly enthusiastic opponents, such as San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom, made it seem like gay marriage was going to be forced down Californians' throats whether they liked it or not. Understandably, people often do not like the insinuation that they have to accept something and this may have turned off a number of people in the middle.

Yet the reasons for Proposition 8's passage may run a bit deeper than the aforementioned factor and are not entirely limited to the state of California.

Some of the things working for Proposition 8 were demographics. A solid majority of African-Americans and Hispanics oppose same-sex marriage and they comprised a significant percentage of the electorate in California during this year's elections. Similarly, a lot of older people turned out, and a majority of them oppose same-sex marriage as well.

On the other hand, Proposition 8 opponents also followed failed strategies and tactics that many other gay rights campaigns have used in the past. Canvassers often did not venture outside of the safe confines of urban and coastal California, areas that were already leaning against Proposition 8. While it might be more fun to campaign in places where you are already loved in an effort to increase turnout, supporters of Proposition 8 did go into the cities and to places where they were not welcome and it is quite possible that they managed to pick up some votes that way.

Furthermore, the coalition opposing Proposition 8 was composed mostly of gay activists and no one else (with the exception of the state's teacher union). Given that gay rights is usually considered a progressive cause, working with other aligned groups to form a broader and greater coalition may have proved helpful and should certainly have not been too difficult a feat to accomplish in California. True, the amendment's supporters basically only had the support of the religious right, but as it stands, the religious right far outnumbers activists for gay rights.

Belittling and ridiculing (and sometimes physically attacking) those opposed to gay marriage is counterproductive for gay rights activists. There is certainly a sizeable percentage of the population who are bigots and homophobes and nothing anyone can say or do will change their minds. Even so, there is also a sizeable percentage of the population who believe in some degree of equal civil rights and non-discrimination policies but feel that marriage is a matter best relegated to tradition and religion. Calling these people names makes them far more likely to show up and vote to ban gay marriage. A better tactic might be to reassure such voters that gay marriage will in no way affect the sanctity of other marriages and that no religious institution will be forced to conduct marriages contrary to its beliefs (which is already the case, as one Christian sect can refuse to conduct a marriage ceremony for members of another Christian sect). Likewise, laying all of the blame on Mormons for Proposition 8's passage and calling for boycotts of Utah (where two-fifths of the people are not even Mormon) is shortsighted, disregarding the fact that Californians, not just Mormons (or even the religious right), passed the ban, and makes the opponents of Proposition 8 look like sore losers. Even if they are understandably hurting from the loss, nobody likes sore losers.

Despite all this, there is still a silver lining to be found in Proposition 8 and gay rights this election. While anti-gay marriage ballot measures have succeeded in every state where they were offered, support for such initiatives has decreased from routinely exceeding 60 percent (often an overwhelming 70-plus percent) less than a decade ago to a weak majority of 50 to 60 percent today. A 2000 California ballot measure to ban gay marriage via statute garnered 61.2 percent support while that number has fallen nearly 9 percent to around 52.5 percent for Proposition 8 in 2008. It might not be victory, but it is progress; the number represents a decline of more than a percentage point per year. In the meantime, same-sex (and heterosexual) couples in California can continue to register for domestic partnerships which provide many of the same advantages afforded to those in a heterosexual marriage.

Most importantly, gay activists should not give up hope that a change in public sentiment and laws will not arrive within the next decade. Almost any state with a desire to ban same-sex marriage has done so by now and thus leaves far less ammunition for any further anti-gay ballot initiatives, although the religious right can still pursue bans on gay couples adopting children in some states. In addition, the appeal of bashing gays at the polls appears to be losing its most enticing attribute: turning out voters for the Republican presidential candidate in swing states. Florida ended up in the Obama column this year after having voted for George W. Bush twice (or at least once) even though its gay marriage ban passed.

Finally, as macabre as it might sound, a good number of the most ardent supporters of gay marriage bans are going to be succumbing to old age and its complications in the next few years. Except in very select elections (1960, Kennedy versus Nixon), the dead cannot vote. Combined with the fact that younger Americans tend to be supportive of same-sex marriage, falling support for anti-gay ballot measures, and perhaps a change in tactics by gay activists, the outlook for gay rights in the United States is still hopeful.

Page 1 of 1

Article Tools