Skip to main content

The decision not yet (we hope) made: will California's Prop 8 remove civil rights?

The final results are not in, and both side say it will get closer before we know for certain.

But with 63% of the votes counted Prop 8--the measure to remove the civil rights of same-sex married couples in California--is up 53.1% to 46.9%.

This is a national disgrace, and President-elect Barack Obama's reluctance to throw his weight behind the defeat of this measure is more than disappointing.

Comments

Anonymous said…
Agreed. One of the major beefs I have with Obama is his limp stance on gay rights.

We have a group of Americans who do not enjoy the same rights as the majority. How is the fight against that hard to get behind?
I found this result very surprising. I'm not sure what to make of our electorate; they seem to be giving mixed signals.

Simlarly, in San Francisco of all places, a measure to decriminalize prostitution was defeated. Huh? I think that the way it was written wasn't the best, but just found this odd.
Anonymous said…
I didn't find it surprising at all. Lots of Democrats are homophobes, and Obama campaigned vigorously with homophobes.
Anonymous said…
Tolerating and legitimizing are whole different animals.
Tolerating and legitimizing are whole different animals.

So are Jim Crow laws and real civil rights.
Anonymous said…
The issue is economic: should the homosexual partner of a co-worker get spousal health care coverage? That is, are you willing to expand your group to include the costs of another member? Are you willing to support the government giving an entitlement you must pay part of to someone without your consent?

Someone other than a bigot/homophobe may vote "no."
If someone currently in your group decides to marry a person of the opposite sex, you now have no right to veto their selection vis a vis coverage, do you?
Anonymous said…
No, Steve, I do not have veto option.
I would LIKE to have a vote, though.
Anonymous said…
The issue is economic: should the homosexual partner of a co-worker get spousal health care coverage? That is, are you willing to expand your group to include the costs of another member? Are you willing to support the government giving an entitlement you must pay part of to someone without your consent?

That's funny, because health benefits are private -- and my employer pays them to everyone because they want smart and experienced people like me to join the company and make them money (rather than a competitor).

As for the social redistribution argument, lots of LGBT people are slowly waking up to the fact that a great deal of the anti-gay agenda on this issue is a form of redistribution from the families of gay people to others. And it's starting to make them question their electoral support for the Democratic Party... something that could cost Democrats close elections in future contests.

Popular posts from this blog

The Obligatory Libertarian Tax Day Post

The most disturbing factoid that I learned on Tax Day was that the average American must now spend a full twenty-four hours filling out tax forms. That's three work days. Or, think of it this way: if you had to put in two hours per night after dinner to finish your taxes, that's two weeks (with Sundays off). I saw a talking head economics professor on some Philly TV channel pontificating about how Americans procrastinate. He was laughing. The IRS guy they interviewed actually said, "Tick, tick, tick." You have to wonder if Governor Ruth Ann Minner and her cohorts put in twenty-four hours pondering whether or not to give Kraft Foods $708,000 of our State taxes while demanding that school districts return $8-10 million each?

New Warfare: I started my posts with a discussion.....

.....on Unrestricted warfare . The US Air force Institute for National Security Studies have developed a reasonable systems approach to deter non-state violent actors who they label as NSVA's. It is an exceptionally important report if we want to deter violent extremism and other potential violent actors that could threaten this nation and its security. It is THE report our political officials should be listening to to shape policy so that we do not become excessive in using force against those who do not agree with policy and dispute it with reason and normal non-violent civil disobedience. This report, should be carefully read by everyone really concerned with protecting civil liberties while deterring violent terrorism and I recommend if you are a professional you send your recommendations via e-mail at the link above so that either 1.) additional safeguards to civil liberties are included, or 2.) additional viable strategies can be used. Finally, one can only hope that politici

More of This, Please

Or perhaps I should say, "Less of this one, please." Or how about just, "None of them. Ever again. Please....For the Love of God." Sunshine State Poll: Grayson In Trouble The latest Sunshine State/VSS poll shows controversial Democratic incumbent Alan Grayson trailing former state Senator Dan Webster by seven points, 43 percent to 36 percent. A majority of respondents -- 51 percent -- disapprove of the job that Grayson is doing. Independents have an unfavorable view of him as well, by a 36/47 margin. Grayson has ignored the conventional wisdom that a freshman should be a quiet member who carefully tends to the home fires. The latest controversy involves his " Taliban Dan " advertisement, where he explicitly compares his opponent to the Taliban, and shows a clip of Webster paraphrasing Ephesians 5:22 -- "wives, submit to your husbands." An unedited version of the clip shows that Webster was actually suggesting that husba