Gay Marriage Ban Qualifies for California Ballot | News

SUBSCRIBE
Print Edition
Digital Edition
SUBSCRIBER SERVICES
Print Edition
Digital Edition

|| News ||

Comments (30)Post a Comment Tag this page

June 03, 2008

Gay Marriage Ban Qualifies for California Ballot

An initiative that would again outlaw gay marriage in California has qualified for the November ballot, the secretary of state announced.

California secretary of state Debra Bowen said Monday that a random check of petition signatures submitted by the measure's sponsors showed they had gathered enough names for it to be put to voters.

The measure would amend the state constitution to ''provide that only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.''

If approved by a majority of voters on November 4, the amendment would overturn the recent California supreme court ruling that legalized same-sex marriage in the state. It is similar to gay marriage bans that have been adopted in 26 other states.

''This signifies the fact that California voters really do favor and will come out to vote for the protection of historic marriage,'' said Ron Prentice, executive director of ProtectMarriage.com, a coalition of religious and social conservative groups behind the initiative.

In response to the court's May 15 ruling, California public health officials already have amended marriage license applications to read ''Party A'' and ''Party B'' instead of "bride" and "groom." Local officials have been told to start issuing the revised licenses to same-sex couples on June 17.

Gay men and lesbians would still be able to get married between then and the election, even with the initiative pending, unless the court agrees to stay its decision until after November 4, as the amendment's sponsors have requested.

If the marriages proceed during the next five months, it is unclear whether they would be nullified if the amendment passes. Some legal scholars have said the state supreme court might be called on again to settle that question.

Kate Kendell, executive director of the San Francisco-based National Center for Lesbian Rights, said gay marriage advocates have already launched a campaign to defeat the measure.

''There is just so much at stake now in terms of what kind of state we are going to live in and what values we are going to uphold,'' Kendell said.

To qualify for the ballot, the measure needed 694,354 petition signatures, an amount equal to 8% of the votes cast during the last governor's race.

Proponents submitted 1,120,801 signatures in late April, and county clerks determined the measure qualified by verifying the validity of 3% of the signatures they received, according to Bowen.

Recent polls have found California voters are about evenly split on whether gay couples should be allowed to marry. (Lisa Leff, AP)

Keywords: california marriage marriage

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: Violet
Date posted: 2008-06-17 4:50 PM
Hometown: Martin County

Comment:

We can't have it both ways. We promote the idea of separation of church and state. Freedom of religion (as well as freedom from religion). These are religion based laws - no citizen should have the right to vote against the equal rights of another. If your religion tells you gay marriage is wrong - don't enter one. We have no right to tell others what they should do in the adult privacy of their relationships. This is embarrassing......a prurient interest in the sex lives of other people. Anytime people wish to enter into an arrangement that brings benefit to themselves - they should be left alone to pursue it. If it's wrong for you it's wrong for YOU......you have no business in someone else's private life. I am not gay but it's not my business to make other people adhere to my rules and my religion.

Name: Joe Parrott
Date posted: 2008-06-11 8:30 PM
Hometown: Los Angeles

Comment:

Marriage is a"Civil Rights" issue. The courts uphold civil rights. Civil rights are not up to voters to decide, they are for the courts to decide. Suppose interracial marriage was put to a vote... it would still be illegal to marry inter-racially...absurd right? That's why the courts made the decision in 1967 to over turn the statute that barred whites from marrying non-whites, it was not put to a vote for the reason that for most of US history, in most communities these unions were Taboo. You may say that the homosexual lifestyle is a choice... I am here to tell you that it isn't, as much as hetrosexuality is not a choice. But even if homosexuality were a choice, the United States Constitution upholds fundimental choices, such as the freedom to choose ones religious faith. No one is born a Christian or a Jew- that is a personal decision and you cannot be discriminated against for this choice, it is a fundimental right, and so is marriage, and the freedom to choose ones partner.

Name: Thomas Quackenbush
Date posted: 2008-06-07 2:10 AM
Hometown: Oak View, California

Comment:

Yes, but in the sense that we speak of basic rights it pertains to the Constitution of the US as well as the State Constitutions. I confess that I do not know as much about the issue as I suppose that I should to be discussing it openly. However, it seems to me that it might be possible to afford homosexuals similar or the same rights as heterosexual married couples without essentially disintegrating the traditions of Marriage. On the issues of tax cuts and whatnot I do agree that it appears unfair that homosexuals, who, to put it lightly, would find it difficult to marry a member of the opposite gender, are denied these benefits. However, there are some functions of matrimony that homosexuals might find it difficult to fulfill, such as rearing children. This is one area in which dissolving the lines between Marriage of Homosexual Partnerships might be problematic.

Name: Jim Lagergren
Date posted: 2008-06-06 7:45 PM
Hometown: Irvine

Comment:

First the issue becomes that marriage is not a US Constitutional issue, it is to the effect that state laws must be constitutional, however, this is a states rights issue. I do not believe anti-gay marriage views to be founded upon ignorance, however, I do protest that they are not founded upon a spirit of love an tolerance. I believe that acting out of compassion would be allowing those who choose to have a different lifestyle to be afforded the same rights as myself, thus eliminating discrimination in yet another arena of life. I will not do it here, but the majority of the organizations who organized the proposed amendment are supported from a vast array of MOSTLY not all Judeo-Christian organizations. I see no direct correlation to anything that contradicts my faith and gay marriage. If this is to be pursued as a faith-based politics issue than this. I fully support that the State Supreme Court's ruling being upheld.

Name: Thomas Quackenbush
Date posted: 2008-06-06 1:34 AM
Hometown: Oak View, California

Comment:

Regardless of the obvious parallels between this issue and other civil rights issues (most notably the 60's), the question really doesn't simply boil down to minority vs majority. Being a minority doesn't make one right, nor does being a majority make one right. Certainly either could be true, but simply being one does not include the other. A more applicable parallel might be drawn to the issue of abortion. Unborn children are significantly more helpless than homosexuals, as they aren't simply facing a loss of 1099 benefits unique to married couples, rather they face the loss of life. They are a minority with no voice, dependent completely on those who can speak for them.

Name: Mike
Date posted: 2008-06-04 4:13 PM
Hometown: Buffalo

Comment:

To voice your opinion in SUPPORT of the Supreme Court's decision on LGBT marriage: 1. call 916.445.2841 (9am-5pm Pacific M-F) 2. press 1 for English or 2 for Spanish 3. press 5 to voice your opinion on a current hot issue 4. press 0 to speak to a representative 5. simply give a one line statement to voice your opinion which will continue to be tallied, such as: "I support the Supreme Court's decision on marriage equality". 6. The representative will ask for your name, city & zip * You do not have to be a California resident to participate. The whole process usually only takes a couple minutes. * The menu options may change again, as they already have twice since this event was posted. Please listen carefully to your choices. After you've done this, please invite all of the Equal Rights supporters you know.

Name: Derek B
Date posted: 2008-06-03 4:34 PM
Hometown: San Diego, CA

Comment:

I just can't believe how ridiculous all of this is. I think it is absolutely terrible what they are doing. Gay marriages for San Francisco! No, lets take those back. Gay Marriage in June 2008, wait, lets put something on the ballot to stop it. RIDICULOUS! Obviously we are all here for the same reason. We are sick and tired of the ignorant ideas fueling angry people. These people are treating gays exactly as they treated the black, it is just wrong. I have fought many battles, and as a recovering Mormon myself, I want to take action. For the first time I have tagged my car proudly with the symbol for equality. I was hoping someone could help direct me to an organization or gathering in southern California where I could help spread the word and our opinions. Or share my heart, sweat, and tears with the world somehow and voice our opinions.

Name: Terre
Date posted: 2008-06-03 4:16 PM
Hometown: San Luis Obispo

Comment:

When I met my beloved in 1999, into my head popped "I want to marry this woman." That was before marriage was even being talked about widely. When we married in San Francisco in 2004, they annulled it a few months later, but here we are in 2008 with full and equal marriage rights in California. Our earlier marriage remains "null and void" but we plan to return to San Francisco this summer and get married again. We'll get our license from our local county, because they have denied us before, but we'll spend our wedding dollars in San Francisco. This is a short time to have come so far and the people with their heads stuck in 300 AD are having a hard time with it all.

Name: Terre
Date posted: 2008-06-03 4:15 PM
Hometown: San Luis Obispo

Comment:

Remember that the funders of this initiative -- groups like the Mormon Church and Focus on the Family -- paid signature gatherers to stand outside grocery stores with stacks of petitions, the marriage inequality petition buried among them. Once someone is taken in and starts signing petitions they don't even read the rest, they just sign and sign again. They weren't there to 'vote' on equal rights for gays, they were on their way to grocery shop. These are low-quality signatures, not votes. Continue to visualize and plan for marriage equality for gays. Put our energies there, on what we want to see, not what we don't want to see.

Name: Ted Dewey
Date posted: 2008-06-03 10:42 AM
Hometown: Eugene, Oregon

Comment:

Oddly, I hope it passes - if only because I think the strength of the equal protection clause of both California's and Oregon's constitutions would REQUIRE the end of "Marriage" across the board - gay and straight. And that, well, that would be particularly delicious, wouldn't it? That the defenders of Marriage would be the end of Marriage in the most populous state in the union, well, that might stop this silliness (defending marriage by continuing to punish others.) Is it possible to get a legal reading of whether this amendment would trump Equal Protection, or whether it would have this unforeseen consequence? Thanks.

Name: Brian Summers
Date posted: 2008-06-03 10:14 AM
Hometown: Chicago

Comment:

I've said it before, and I'll say it again. "The people" have absolutely NO right in this world to vote on this or any other civil right. Those advocating for this audaciously unnecessary amendment are clearly and conveniently failing to ask themselves how they would feel if their right to be with and marry the one they loved were put to a popular vote. Chances are, they would be just as outraged as we are. These idiots actually have the gall to declare that we, the gay community, are trampling their rights! Well, what about OUR rights as fellow red-blooded, air-breathing human beings? Does "live and let live" and "love thy neighbor" mean absolutely nothing anymore? I am SO sick and tired of these self-righteous hate-spreading bible-thumpers! That book was written thousands of years ago, by flesh and blood men, for a completely different culture that no longer exists. And they have the nerve to call us anarchists?!? Sorry, but that's plain and simply absurd!

Name: Jonathan Kesler
Date posted: 2008-06-03 12:02 AM
Hometown: Las Cruces, NM

Comment:

Bravo to Ms. Palmer! It is unconstitutional for anyone to vote on whether some group should have equal rights. The 14th Amendment clearly mandates "equal protection of the laws" and that means everyone! Ultimately, the whole issue will be decided by the US Supreme Court. That's why it is important to vote. The Bush regime has installed two hard right justices - John Roberts and Samuel Alito to match the views of Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas. We are one vote away from turning the clock back to the 1920's. McCain has already promised the radical right that he, too, will appoint those types of justices to the Supreme Court. That is why we need to elect a Democrat in November. McCain would be George W. Bush's 3rd term as far as the GLBT community is concerned!

Name: Lynne Palmer
Date posted: 2008-06-02 11:41 PM
Hometown: Syracuse

Comment:

So, once again the courts abdicate their responsibility to defend our minority interest. Why is no one in the media is contrasting this situation to the civil rights struggles of the 60's? The parallels are obvious. In the 60's a majority of state legislatures, hidebound by the racial prejudices of the time, would NEVER have "voted" to allow black citizens equal access to public facilities. So why are we calmly accepting that another state legislature is going vote on whether we are fully human or not?? Given the ignorance and prejudice of our times, I envision CA marriage rights gone in a matter of months. What's next? We are already denied the right to adopt. in some states Will one of the 50 states vote to sterilize us or seize our kids in the name of god? History reminds us there is no limit to the injustices and atrocities a deluded majority can justify when dealing with those they believe to be less than equal human beings.

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.

More Exclusives

U.S. Politics From a Distance
As America continues to rejoice in election of Barack Obama -- while gay Californians lament the passing of Prop. 8 -- overseas, political activists look on from a distance. Zachery Scott has watched the drama following Election Day unfold as he serves in the Peace Corps in Mozambique.

Shoshana Bean Is Lookin' for a Superhero
Not many girls can wow a Broadway crowd in shows like Wicked and Hairspray, then turn around and bring the audience to its feet at the Soul Train Lady of Soul Awards. But Shoshana Bean goes far beyond what most people might expect, as evidenced by her soulful debut album, Superhero.

30 Years Later, We Can Still Learn from Milk
COMMENTARY: Thirty years after the death of Harvey Milk, Americans can still learn from his inspiring and profound work as an activist, politician and friend. With the story of his life opening in theatres this week, Lane Hudson takes a look back at how Milk's legacy lives on -- and what we can to do pay tribute to the legend.

Urban Cowboy
How does a brand that is over a century old make itself cool again? With a little help from the gays. Levi Strauss & Co. sponsored the world premiere of Milk at the Castro Theatre in San Francisco in October, and The Advocate sat down with the out president of the denim company, Robert Hanson, that afternoon to find out what Levi's and Harvey Milk have in common.

L.A. Gay Center Responds to Prop. 8 Criticism
In the December 16 edition of The Advocate, writer Ben Ehrenreich analyzed the differing opinions of why Prop. 8 passed at the polls in his article, "Anatomy of a Failed Campaign." Los Angeles Gay and Lesbian Center chief public affairs officer Jim Key responds to the criticisms raised by that article.

Billy Baldwin Pleads for Return of Dirty Sexy Money
Actor William Baldwin is half of one of TV’s most groundbreaking couples -- his Dirty Sexy Money character is in love with a transsexual, played by Candis Cayne -- but it’s one plot that may not get to play itself out, as the show is in danger of cancellation. Baldwin sat down with Advocate.com to talk about rumors that ABC is "de-gaying" its lineup, what the future holds for Money, and whether network heads ever interfered with his controversial story line.

The Kid Stays in the Picture
Lana Turner's lesbian daughter, Cheryl Crane, has penned her second memoir about her late, great movie star mother -- Lana: The Memories, the Myths, the Movies. Crane sits down with The Advocate to relive that fateful night she killed her mother's mobster lover, share some untold stories, and give us a sneak peek at the new photographs of their life together.

The Soul of Seal
Armed with a new album of soul classics and his trademark blunt outlook on the state of the world, Seal sat down with Advocate.com to discuss the rumors that he and wife Heidi Klum would have left the country had John McCain been elected, the gay rights movement, and what makes Seal's sound so damn sexy.

Finding the Silver Lining in Defeat
Three weeks ago, like many LGBT Americans, I woke up with, to say the least, mixed feelings. The euphoria of Barack Obama’s election and the expansion of the pro-LGBT majority in Congress was tempered by sadness and anger at our devastating losses in Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, and, of course, California. The silver lining of these defeats has been a renewed focus nationwide on the issue of marriage equality.

Separation of Sundance and State
In 2009, Sundance will celebrate 25 years of bringing together international cinema and a variety of cultures in Park City, Utah. But with California's gay community reeling from the passage of Prop. 8, activists and filmmakers are suggesting a boycott of the festival and theater chain Cinemark, whose CEO donated a substantial sum to the marriage ban's campaign. But just how realistic is a boycott of an entire state?

Democratic Supermajority No Guarantee for Gay Progress
The 2008 election may already be one for the record books, but triumphant Democrats are still vying for an elusive political prize -- the 60-seat supermajority required to overcome Republican filibuster attempts and advance their legislative agenda swiftly beginning in January. But what are the odds of actually getting 60 seats -- and will it really push gay rights to the front of the line?

From the Great White Way to the White House
While there won’t be a woman in the White House anytime in the near future, 24 took the reins and elected to cast two-time Tony Award winner Cherry Jones as its first female president, Allison Taylor, who is likely to have everything including terrorists, WMDs, and the kitchen sink thrown at her. Jones sat down with The Advocateto talk marriage, the White House, and her "fluid" relationship with partner Sarah Paulson.

Handicapping the LGBT Priorities of President-elect Obama
As the Obama-Biden transition ensues, insights are surfacing into the new administration's agenda for gay Americans. While many of the policy pronouncements read like a list of old favorites, some lesser-known initiatives will likely gain momentum early on.

A Fortune 500 Take on Prop. 8
The old saying goes that every cloud has a silver lining. And on November 5, the day after California voters stripped same-sex couples of the right to marry, so many around the country were searching for one. Although thousands of individuals, organizations, and businesses donated to the Yes on 8 campaign, not one Fortune 500 company is among those names. But on the opposite side, the side of fairness and basic rights, you’ll find some of the nation’s most successful and powerful corporate players.

Chevy Volt: The Jolt GM Needs?
Launching a new vehicle while the American auto industry is asking Congress for a $25 billion bailout might seem like illogical timing, but for General Motors and the people behind Chevy Volt, it’s essential. With their backs against the wall, GM is rolling out their much-anticipated first plug-in electric vehicle -- and focusing their marketing efforts on the gay community.

Dr. Phil Weighs in on Prop. 8
Advocate.com gets an early peek at a very heated episode of Dr. Phil. Gavin Newsom, HRC's Joe Solmonese, and L.A. attorney Gloria Allred face off against Prop. 8 supporters to talk same-sex marriage. In what may well be a first, Dr. Phil told the audience he would be keeping his opinions to himself.

An Unpopular Opinion: Blacks, Gays, and Prop. 8
The injection of race into the analysis of Proposition 8's passage is extremely disappointing. A battle for equal rights has now turned into an issue of whites versus blacks. But while some black gays think marriage shouldn't be a priority and that outreach to African-Americans should have been stronger, journalist Clay Cane says he has a vested interest in inequalities related to both race and sexual orientation ... and he doesn't need someone to hold his hand to believe that marriage equality is important.

Politics and Progress With Patti LaBelle
The last time girl-group Labelle dropped an album, the thought of a black president or same-sex marriage seemed as “far-out” as the band’s disco-spacewoman suits and fusion of disco, rock, and soul. But the button-pushing, soul-singing trio has reunited, and on the heels of Prop. 8 passing and Barack Obama being elected president, Patti LaBelle talks to The Advocate about the mix of emotions she's dealt with over the past few weeks.

Seth Meyers's Big Gay Saturday Night
SNL funnyman Seth Meyers talks to Advocate.com about last week's episode of Saturday Night Live -- the gayest episode in the history of the show, by some accounts. With touches including Justin Timberlake as Beyoncé's backup dancer and Snagglepuss crashing Weekend Update, it caused some bloggers to take offense ... but Meyers says it's just the sort of stuff that stemmed from many discussions about Prop. 8.

All Hands, Black and White, On Deck
The high number of African-Americans who voted to pass Proposition 8 may have surprised some people, but not the folks at the National Black Justice Coalition, a civil rights organization dedicated to empowering black LGBT Americans. NBJC's CEO offers some insights about the black-white divide and how to mend it going forward.