Issue Number 1015 | For Arizona, Three's a Crowd | Advocate.com For Arizona, Three’s a Crowd  |  | Advocate.com

Advocate.com health Channel
||  ACTIVISM  ||
 
For Arizona, Three’s a Crowd
All eyes are on California’s battle for marriage equality, but two other states also are facing ballot initiatives this November -- and folks in John McCain’s home state are starting to feel ignored.
From The Advocate  September 23, 2008
For Arizona, Three’s a Crowd

In the 10 years since Alaska passed a constitutional amendment banning marriage equality, 25 other states have followed suit. But in 2006, Arizona voters bucked the trend, defeating a proposed amendment that would’ve banned same-sex marriage -- and barred unmarried straight couples from receiving domestic-partnership benefits. The win gave gay rights activists nationwide hope that they too could prevail at the ballot box.

Now that hope is being put to the test in California, Florida, and once again, Arizona, which all face ballot initiatives against same-sex marriage this election cycle. But while donations are pouring in to defeat the initiatives in the first two states, money is only trickling into Arizona’s gay rights groups. Timing is partly to blame: The Arizona measure didn’t qualify for the ballot until June 27, compared to June 3 in California and February 1 in Florida. But a bigger factor could be the perception that Arizona’s antigay Proposition 102 is bound to win at a time when Republican John McCain, the state’s senior U.S. senator, is running for president. On July 28, McCain told the Associated Press that he doesn’t “believe what is decided in California should be imposed on my state of Arizona.” He could very well get his wish. If donations and attention are the currency of this campaign, marriage equality advocates could be up a creek.

“We’re hearing from individuals who have the money to fight these things that they’re giving to California and Florida because they feel like they can win there—and are skeptical about our chances here,” says Robert Tindall, a Phoenix human resources consultant and board member for the state’s American Civil Liberties Union. Adds Rebecca Wininger, a member of the Phoenix chapter of Parents, Families, and Friends of Lesbians and Gays, “To say that one fight is more important than another dismisses the other fights.” 

Page: 1 | 2 | 3
Additional reporting by William Henderson

Reader Comments

These comments are reproduced as written by visitors to this Web site. They have not been edited for content, grammar, or spelling. The viewpoints appearing here are those of the writer, and do not necessarily reflect the opinion or views of advocate.com, The Advocate, or its affiliates.

  • Name: Joyce A. Rogers
    Date posted: 2008-09-20 8:42 PM
    Hometown: Los Altos, CA

    Comment:

    My wife and I are Californians, and although we're pretty much tapped out for the moment by the battle to defeat Proposition 8 here, we made two monetary donations today to Arizona's No On 102 campaign. The battle in California is _the_ battle of _all_ our lives, as it will have enormous repercussions throughout the nation. But we are all in this together -- and we could not live with ourselves if we didn't do what we could to support our brothers and sisters in Arizona. Please join my wife and me in contributing to defeat _both_ Proposition 8 and Proposition 102.


  • Name: Steve Tuck
    Date posted: 2008-09-10 1:51 PM
    Hometown: Wichita,KS

    Comment:

    I'm from Kansas and we will get marriage equality the day after Sam Brownback, Todd Tihart, and Fred Phelps dress in drag. Honestly, marriage is not for my partner and I but we do believe that a CIVIL ceremony is not to be denied and CITIZEN of any state.We went throught a very expensive set of legal procedures to set iron clad confirmation of our desires as to health, property and what our families could and could not do (Trust Fund). We still need to fight for equality everywhere and expose those who oppose for who they are. We need to act to block funding of ANY kid to any company or organization operating in our state who openly discriminates and we need to get school boards to add sexual orientation and gender identification to all policies on harrassment, bullying, or discrimination.


  • Name: Inside Politics Arizona
    Date posted: 2008-09-06 9:48 PM
    Hometown: Az

    Comment:

    I'm from Arizona, and there is some dirty politics behind this. Several months before this was put on the ballot, the state house and senate rejected putting it on the ballot. This is looking like a Democratic year, and the local state Repubs knew that if they put this on the ballot it would mobilize their voters. They don't really care if it passes, as long as they win their reelection campaigns, in what is likely to be a strong Democratic year, in a state that is becoming increasingly Democratic.


  • Name: Rob
    Date posted: 2008-09-01 11:16 AM
    Hometown: Pasadena, CA

    Comment:

    California is very important fight because it's a liberal state and the CA Supreme Court has already ruled that marriage is legal here. Arizona on the other hand is a conservative state and in my opinion, gay rights is a losing cause there...I have never been able to figure out why any GLBT folks would want to live in a conservative place like Arizona. I personally don't see what the draw to Arizona is from the visits I have made to Phoenix and Scottsdale......HOT and CONSERVATIVE.


  • Name: John Vincent
    Date posted: 2008-08-30 12:27 PM
    Hometown: Wappingers Falls

    Comment:

    Your article didn't mention that McCain has been outspoken in favor of Arizona amending their constituion to ban same sex marriage, and his V.P. choice is an advocate of Alaska's same sex marriage constitutional ban. Like Bush, McCain has vowed that if elected president, gays/lesbians will continue to be second class citizens by paying taxes yet not having equal rights to serve openly in the US military, be Boy Scouts and Boy Scout leaders, marry, adopt children, enact laws protecting gay/lesbian students in schools, or see hate crime or equal rights legislation. Obama has vowed the opposite, including getting rid of DOMA, which would permit gays/lesbians who are legally married in some US states to receive federal marriage benefits. Our choice is clear.


Back to top

Submit a comment for this story:

*Type your comment here (Required, 1000 characters max.):

*Name (Required): 

*Hometown (Required): 

*E-mail address: (Required, but will not be displayed)

Is this comment for publication? 
Yes   No

Daytime phone number: (Required for print publication only and will not be displayed)

Please enter the words you see in the box, in order and separated by a space. Doing so helps prevent automated programs from abusing this service.

  

If you would like to submit a comment for posting, please fill out the form above. 

All comments submitted via this form are subject to posting or publication. (To send a private letter to an Advocate editor or writer, please use the e-mail button at the top of the page, or use snail mail.) If you would like your comment considered for publication in The Advocate magazine, please include your full name, your city of residence, and a phone number where you can be reached during business hours so that we can confirm your identity. Your e-mail address and telephone number are strictly confidential and will not be shared or used for any purpose other than to contact you about your comment.

Comments that do not concern specific articles in The Advocate or on Advocate.com will not be posted or published. See the Contact page for sending comments for reasons other than responding to Advocate editorial and news stories.

Please note that comments sent by fax or snail mail are unlikely to be posted, although they will be considered for publication along with all letters received via e-mail or via this Web page. Comments that chiefly concern Advocate.com content will be considered for posting only on the Web site. The Advocate reserves the right to edit submitted comments for grammar, spelling, obscenities, or libel; we will, however, do our best to preserve the original comment's style and intent. Comments considered for publication in The Advocate magazine may also be edited for length.