<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: voting yes on prop hate</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.jon22.net/voting-yes-on-prop-hate/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.jon22.net/voting-yes-on-prop-hate/</link>
	<description>The Website of Jonathan Dobres</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 27 Sep 2011 03:58:50 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Brian</title>
		<link>http://www.jon22.net/voting-yes-on-prop-hate/comment-page-1/#comment-4850</link>
		<dc:creator>Brian</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 14 Nov 2008 19:13:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.jon22.net/?p=697#comment-4850</guid>
		<description>The California Domestic Partnership law is exactly the same as marriage when it comes to all state rights.  California domestic partners are entitled to all state tax benefits and legal rights (i.e. visiting someone in the hospital and not having to testify against them in court) and married persons.  A California domestic partnership does not, however, entitle the partners to any of the thousands of federal rights conferred on married couples.  (A gay marriage also won&#039;t entitle the spouses to the federal rights of marriage, due to the federal DOMA law.)  Incidently, California&#039;s Domestic Partnership law does not only apply to same-sex couples, opposite-sex couples over the age of 62 or 65 can also form domestic partnerships.  The legislature recently passed a law allowing all opposite-sex couples to form domestic partnerships, but I believe it was vetoed.  About a year ago, the legislature also passed a law allowing gay marriage, but the Governor vetoed the measure.  

So why did the homophobes pass Prop. 8 and not attack domestic partnerships?  It&#039;s kinda of long explaination.  In 2000, Californians approved Prop. 22 which was a law stating that marriage was between a man and a woman.  After the 2006 election, conservatives in California started to worry that the California Supreme Court might strike down Prop 22 as unconstitutional so they started to collect signatures for Prop 8.  They had to decide whether they were going to go after only marriage or domestic partnerships as well.  

They looked at the 2006 election in Arizona concerning gay marriage/partnerships and decided not to attack domestic partnerships.  In 2006, Arizona had on the ballot an initative to ban gay marriage and domestic partnerships.  Now Arizona is a pretty conservative place, so it was shocking when the ban was defeated in November.  The defeat was largely due to the fact that the ban included not only marriage, but domestic partnerships as well.  The proponents of Prop 8 looked at the Arizona election and decided to go only after gay marriage.  Incidentially, this year Arizona passed a gay marriage ban, which tacitly allows for domestic partnerships, by a large margin.  

Domestic partnerships are wildly popular in California.  Any attempt to strike domestic partnerships will likely fail.  In fact, an ultra-conservative group attempted to circulate a petition to ban gay marriage AND domestic partnerhships, but they couldn&#039;t get enough signatures to qualify for the ballot.  They is some talk about the homophobes attacking domestic partnerships, but it&#039;s likely not going anywhere.  

If the courts don&#039;t throw out Prop 8, then it&#039;s likely going to be on the ballot again in 2010, 2012, 2014, 2016, as long as it takes to repeal.  Unlike some states, California has no ban on voting over and over again.  Likewise a Prop 8 repeal can be put on either the primary or general election ballot, and in presidential years there are two primary elections.  So in the next six years Californians can vote seven more times on a repeal.  For example in the last six years, Californians have voted five times not to require parental notification or consent for a minor to have an abortion, and we are expected to have to vote this down again in the next election.  California politics is a contact sport.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The California Domestic Partnership law is exactly the same as marriage when it comes to all state rights.  California domestic partners are entitled to all state tax benefits and legal rights (i.e. visiting someone in the hospital and not having to testify against them in court) and married persons.  A California domestic partnership does not, however, entitle the partners to any of the thousands of federal rights conferred on married couples.  (A gay marriage also won&#8217;t entitle the spouses to the federal rights of marriage, due to the federal DOMA law.)  Incidently, California&#8217;s Domestic Partnership law does not only apply to same-sex couples, opposite-sex couples over the age of 62 or 65 can also form domestic partnerships.  The legislature recently passed a law allowing all opposite-sex couples to form domestic partnerships, but I believe it was vetoed.  About a year ago, the legislature also passed a law allowing gay marriage, but the Governor vetoed the measure.  </p>
<p>So why did the homophobes pass Prop. 8 and not attack domestic partnerships?  It&#8217;s kinda of long explaination.  In 2000, Californians approved Prop. 22 which was a law stating that marriage was between a man and a woman.  After the 2006 election, conservatives in California started to worry that the California Supreme Court might strike down Prop 22 as unconstitutional so they started to collect signatures for Prop 8.  They had to decide whether they were going to go after only marriage or domestic partnerships as well.  </p>
<p>They looked at the 2006 election in Arizona concerning gay marriage/partnerships and decided not to attack domestic partnerships.  In 2006, Arizona had on the ballot an initative to ban gay marriage and domestic partnerships.  Now Arizona is a pretty conservative place, so it was shocking when the ban was defeated in November.  The defeat was largely due to the fact that the ban included not only marriage, but domestic partnerships as well.  The proponents of Prop 8 looked at the Arizona election and decided to go only after gay marriage.  Incidentially, this year Arizona passed a gay marriage ban, which tacitly allows for domestic partnerships, by a large margin.  </p>
<p>Domestic partnerships are wildly popular in California.  Any attempt to strike domestic partnerships will likely fail.  In fact, an ultra-conservative group attempted to circulate a petition to ban gay marriage AND domestic partnerhships, but they couldn&#8217;t get enough signatures to qualify for the ballot.  They is some talk about the homophobes attacking domestic partnerships, but it&#8217;s likely not going anywhere.  </p>
<p>If the courts don&#8217;t throw out Prop 8, then it&#8217;s likely going to be on the ballot again in 2010, 2012, 2014, 2016, as long as it takes to repeal.  Unlike some states, California has no ban on voting over and over again.  Likewise a Prop 8 repeal can be put on either the primary or general election ballot, and in presidential years there are two primary elections.  So in the next six years Californians can vote seven more times on a repeal.  For example in the last six years, Californians have voted five times not to require parental notification or consent for a minor to have an abortion, and we are expected to have to vote this down again in the next election.  California politics is a contact sport.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tall One</title>
		<link>http://www.jon22.net/voting-yes-on-prop-hate/comment-page-1/#comment-4847</link>
		<dc:creator>Tall One</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 13 Nov 2008 22:55:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.jon22.net/?p=697#comment-4847</guid>
		<description>I don&#039;t know where my previous comment went.  Into the ether, I suppose.  Irritating!  

The one encouraging aspect of Prop 8&#039;s passage is the youth vote, as sociallytangent pointed out.  Us young&#039;uns don&#039;t generally have problems with TEH GAYS!!! the way the old racist/sexist/homophobic crowd does.  I agree with the sentiment that gay marriage will probably come back to California as a result of changing demographics.

...but I&#039;m not sure I&#039;m OK with the idea that we can &#039;wait out&#039; civil rights.  The one thing I&#039;m not real clear about (I&#039;ve read the law but damn if I understand it) is whether CA&#039;s domestic partnership rights are EXACTLY the same as marriage, or not.  In most states, civil unions are NOT the same as marriage in terms of their actual legal status.  If CA&#039;s domestic partnership laws really DO provide for the EXACT SAME rights, then I&#039;m confused about why Prop 8 was put together to begin with - shouldn&#039;t the homophobes have gone after the domestic partnership law instead?  Brian, with your experience with law, am I misreading something about the domestic partnerships?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I don&#8217;t know where my previous comment went.  Into the ether, I suppose.  Irritating!  </p>
<p>The one encouraging aspect of Prop 8&#8242;s passage is the youth vote, as sociallytangent pointed out.  Us young&#8217;uns don&#8217;t generally have problems with TEH GAYS!!! the way the old racist/sexist/homophobic crowd does.  I agree with the sentiment that gay marriage will probably come back to California as a result of changing demographics.</p>
<p>&#8230;but I&#8217;m not sure I&#8217;m OK with the idea that we can &#8216;wait out&#8217; civil rights.  The one thing I&#8217;m not real clear about (I&#8217;ve read the law but damn if I understand it) is whether CA&#8217;s domestic partnership rights are EXACTLY the same as marriage, or not.  In most states, civil unions are NOT the same as marriage in terms of their actual legal status.  If CA&#8217;s domestic partnership laws really DO provide for the EXACT SAME rights, then I&#8217;m confused about why Prop 8 was put together to begin with &#8211; shouldn&#8217;t the homophobes have gone after the domestic partnership law instead?  Brian, with your experience with law, am I misreading something about the domestic partnerships?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Brian</title>
		<link>http://www.jon22.net/voting-yes-on-prop-hate/comment-page-1/#comment-4842</link>
		<dc:creator>Brian</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 13 Nov 2008 03:25:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.jon22.net/?p=697#comment-4842</guid>
		<description>I never meant to demonize African-Americans, the 70-30 split is actually more tolerant than initial polling suggested.  And 89 percent of conservative white men voted yes, so if I&#039;m going to blame anyone...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I never meant to demonize African-Americans, the 70-30 split is actually more tolerant than initial polling suggested.  And 89 percent of conservative white men voted yes, so if I&#8217;m going to blame anyone&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: sociallytangent</title>
		<link>http://www.jon22.net/voting-yes-on-prop-hate/comment-page-1/#comment-4836</link>
		<dc:creator>sociallytangent</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 12 Nov 2008 19:48:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.jon22.net/?p=697#comment-4836</guid>
		<description>Brian,

While the initial exit polling data did support your conclusions, the full range of information we have access to now indicates otherwise:

&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/11/prop-8-myths.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;538 article on the myths of Proposition 8&lt;/a&gt;

It&#039;s important that we don&#039;t demonize African-Americans in our haste to find problems. We need to address that particular issue with more voter education and friendship; fostering racial negativity, even mildly, is simply not productive. However, you are correct that it &quot;is only a matter of time.&quot; As others are saying, the repeal will happen one funeral at a time. The older generation of voters (who were really the voting bloc most responsible, as the article I linked points out) will eventually die off and be replaced with more tolerant people.

And the best part? Since the California constitution is so easy to amend, we can just throw another initiative out as often as possible. The real problems of the election are Arkansas, Arizona, and Florida, since the latter will require a vast shift in the mindsets of the population (or a miracle of the judiciary) to be reversed.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Brian,</p>
<p>While the initial exit polling data did support your conclusions, the full range of information we have access to now indicates otherwise:</p>
<p><a href="http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/11/prop-8-myths.html" rel="nofollow">538 article on the myths of Proposition 8</a></p>
<p>It&#8217;s important that we don&#8217;t demonize African-Americans in our haste to find problems. We need to address that particular issue with more voter education and friendship; fostering racial negativity, even mildly, is simply not productive. However, you are correct that it &#8220;is only a matter of time.&#8221; As others are saying, the repeal will happen one funeral at a time. The older generation of voters (who were really the voting bloc most responsible, as the article I linked points out) will eventually die off and be replaced with more tolerant people.</p>
<p>And the best part? Since the California constitution is so easy to amend, we can just throw another initiative out as often as possible. The real problems of the election are Arkansas, Arizona, and Florida, since the latter will require a vast shift in the mindsets of the population (or a miracle of the judiciary) to be reversed.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Damian</title>
		<link>http://www.jon22.net/voting-yes-on-prop-hate/comment-page-1/#comment-4834</link>
		<dc:creator>Damian</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 12 Nov 2008 19:15:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.jon22.net/?p=697#comment-4834</guid>
		<description>I, too, am hopeful that the California Supreme Court will invalidate Prop 8, and am encouraged by the drop in support for a gay marriage ban in this state over the last 8 years. However, I&#039;m a little troubled by this idea floating around that places the blame for its passage on black people. Maybe it&#039;s a white liberal guilt thing that functions like one of Asimov&#039;s Laws of Robotics--&quot;Do Not Antagonize Black People&quot;--but there are so many different ways to analyze the statistics* that I don&#039;t think it&#039;s fair or practical. There is a very vocal segment of the black community that likes to think that black people have a monopoly on civil rights, and they need to be challenged on the merits of that belief, not on the circumstances of their race.

* - e.g.: &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/11/prop-8-myths.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;FiveThirtyEight.com: Prop 8 Myths&lt;/a&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I, too, am hopeful that the California Supreme Court will invalidate Prop 8, and am encouraged by the drop in support for a gay marriage ban in this state over the last 8 years. However, I&#8217;m a little troubled by this idea floating around that places the blame for its passage on black people. Maybe it&#8217;s a white liberal guilt thing that functions like one of Asimov&#8217;s Laws of Robotics&#8211;&#8221;Do Not Antagonize Black People&#8221;&#8211;but there are so many different ways to analyze the statistics* that I don&#8217;t think it&#8217;s fair or practical. There is a very vocal segment of the black community that likes to think that black people have a monopoly on civil rights, and they need to be challenged on the merits of that belief, not on the circumstances of their race.</p>
<p>* &#8211; e.g.: <a href="http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/11/prop-8-myths.html" rel="nofollow">FiveThirtyEight.com: Prop 8 Myths</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Brian Lee</title>
		<link>http://www.jon22.net/voting-yes-on-prop-hate/comment-page-1/#comment-4832</link>
		<dc:creator>Brian Lee</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 11 Nov 2008 22:26:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.jon22.net/?p=697#comment-4832</guid>
		<description>I spent the last three months campaigning against Prop 8, now I&#039;m working on the legal team trying to overturn it (I just finished up law school), it&#039;s kinda difficult to overturn a constitutional amendment, but it can, and has, happened.  Wikipedia or google Colorado Amendment 2 or Romer v. Evans. 
 
The one thing that particularly upsets me about Prop 8 is that 70 percent of African-Americans voted &quot;yes&quot; and put discrimination into the California constitution.  Had Obama not been the nominee the African-American vote would have not turned out as much as it did and Prop 8 would have been defeated.  

It&#039;s only a matter of time before California gets gay marriage.  Prop 22, which was a law to ban gay marriage, passed by a 22-point margin eight years ago.  Prop 8 passed by four.  In two or four years, Prop 8 could easily be repealed.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I spent the last three months campaigning against Prop 8, now I&#8217;m working on the legal team trying to overturn it (I just finished up law school), it&#8217;s kinda difficult to overturn a constitutional amendment, but it can, and has, happened.  Wikipedia or google Colorado Amendment 2 or Romer v. Evans. </p>
<p>The one thing that particularly upsets me about Prop 8 is that 70 percent of African-Americans voted &#8220;yes&#8221; and put discrimination into the California constitution.  Had Obama not been the nominee the African-American vote would have not turned out as much as it did and Prop 8 would have been defeated.  </p>
<p>It&#8217;s only a matter of time before California gets gay marriage.  Prop 22, which was a law to ban gay marriage, passed by a 22-point margin eight years ago.  Prop 8 passed by four.  In two or four years, Prop 8 could easily be repealed.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Minified using disk: basic
Page Caching using disk: enhanced (User is logged in)

Served from: www.jon22.net @ 2012-02-11 05:52:51 -->
