看板gay
California voters approve Proposition 8 ban on same-sex marriages
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-gaymarriage6-2008nov06,0,2331815.story
The measure was the most divisive on the state ballot. Its passage throws
into doubt the unions of thousands of recently wed couples.
* Proposition 8: Gay marriage ban Yes 52.0% No 48.0% Precincts
reporting: ~95.0%
By Jessica Garrison, Cara Mia DiMassa and Nancy Vogel
8:35 AM PST, November 5, 2008
A measure to once again ban gay marriage in California was passed by voters
in Tuesday's election, throwing into doubt the unions of an estimated 18,000
same-sex couples who wed during the last 4 1/2 months.
As Proposition 8, the most divisive and emotionally fraught issue on the
state ballot this year, took a lead in early returns, supporters gathered at
a hotel ballroom in Sacramento and cheered.
"We caused Californians to rethink this issue," Proposition 8 strategist Jeff
Flint said.
Early in the campaign, he noted, polls showed the measure trailing by 17
points.
"I think the voters were thinking, well, if it makes them happy, why
shouldn't we let gay couples get married. And I think we made them realize
that there are broader implications to society and particularly the children
when you make that fundamental change that's at the core of how society is
organized, which is marriage," he said.
In San Francisco on Tuesday night at the packed headquarters of the "No on 8"
campaign party in the Westin St. Francis Hotel, supporters heard from San
Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom, whose decision to issue same-sex wedding
licenses in his city led to the court ruling that made gay marriage briefly
legal in the state. .
"You decided to live your life out loud. You fell in love and you said, 'I
do.' Tonight, we await a verdict," Newsom said, speaking to a roaring crowd
before final returns were in.
Elsewhere in the country, two other gay-marriage bans, in Florida and
Arizona, also won. In both states, laws already defined marriage as a
heterosexual institution. But backers pushed to amend the state
constitutions, saying that doing so would protect the institution from legal
challenges.
Proposition 8 was the most expensive proposition on any ballot in the nation
this year, with more than $74 million spent by both sides.
The measure's most fervent proponents believed that nothing less than the
future of traditional families was at stake, while opponents believed that
they were fighting for the fundamental right of gay people to be treated
equally under the law.
"This has been a moral battle," said Ellen Smedley, 34, a member of the
Mormon Church and a mother of five who worked on the campaign. "We aren't
trying to change anything that homosexual couples believe or want -- it
doesn't change anything that they're allowed to do already. It's defining
marriage. . . . Marriage is a man and a woman establishing a family unit."
On the other side were people like John Lewis, 50, and Stuart Gaffney, 46,
who were married in June. They were at the San Francisco party holding a
little sign in the shape of pink heart that said, "John and Stuart 21 years."
They spent the day campaigning against Proposition 8 with family members
across the Bay Area.
"Our relationship, our marriage, after 21 years together has been put up for
a popular vote," Lewis said. "We have done what anyone would do in this
situation: stand up for our family."
The battle was closely watched across the nation because California is
considered a harbinger of cultural change and because this is the first time
voters have weighed in on gay marriage in a state where it was legal.
Campaign contributions came from every state in the nation in opposition to
the measure and every state but Vermont to its supporters.
And as far away as Washington, D.C., gay rights organizations hosted
gatherings Tuesday night to watch voting results on Proposition 8.
"This is the biggest civil rights struggle for our movement in decades. . .
." said Human Rights Campaign President Joe Solomonese, speaking from a
Proposition 8 gathering at a brewery in the nation's capital. "The outcome
weighs incredibly heavily on the minds of every single person in the room."
Eight years ago, Californians voted 61% to define marriage as being only
between a man and a woman.
The California Supreme Court overturned that measure, Proposition 22, in its
May 15 decision legalizing same-sex marriage on the grounds that the state
Constitution required equal treatment of gay and lesbian couples.
Opponents of Proposition 8 faced a difficult challenge. Bob Stern, president
of the Center for Governmental Studies, said California voters "very, very
rarely reverse themselves" especially in such a short time. Both sides waged
a passionate -- and at times bitter -- fight over whether to allow same-sex
marriages to continue. The campaigns spent tens of millions of dollars in
dueling television and radio commercials that blanketed the airwaves for
weeks.
But supporters and opponents also did battle on street corners and front
lawns, from the pulpits of churches and synagogues and -- unusual for a fight
over a social issue -- in the boardrooms of many of the state's largest
corporations.
Most of the state's highest-profile political leaders -- including both U.S.
senators and the mayors of San Francisco, San Diego and Los Angeles -- along
with the editorial pages of most major newspapers, opposed the measure. PG&E,
Apple and other companies contributed money to fight the proposition, and the
heads of Silicon Valley companies including Google and Yahoo took out a
newspaper ad opposing it.
On the other side were an array of conservative organizations, including the
Knights of Columbus, Focus on the Family and the American Family Assn., along
with tens of thousands of small donors, including many who responded to
urging from Mormon, Catholic and evangelical clergy.
An early October filing by the "yes" campaign reported so many contributions
that the secretary of state's campaign finance website crashed.
Proponents also organized a massive grass-roots effort. Campaign officials
said they distributed more than 1.1 million lawn signs for Proposition 8 --
although an effort to stage a massive, simultaneous lawn-sign planting in
late September failed after a production glitch in China delayed the arrival
of hundreds of thousands of signs.
Research and polling showed that many voters were against gay marriage, but
afraid that saying so would make them seem "discriminatory" or "not cool,"
said Flint, so proponents hoped to show them they were not alone.
Perhaps more powerfully, the Proposition 8 campaign also seized on the issue
of education, arguing in a series of advertisements and mailers that children
would be subjected to a pro-gay curriculum if the measure was not approved.
"Mom, guess what I learned in school today?" a little girl said in one spot.
"I learned how a prince married a prince."
As the girl's mother made a horrified face, a voice-over said: "Think it
can't happen? It's already happened. . . . Teaching about gay marriage will
happen unless we pass Proposition 8."
Many voters said they had been swayed by that message.
"We thought it would go this way," Proposition 8 co-chair Frank Schubert
said. "We had 100,000 people on the streets today. We had people in every
precinct, if not knocking on doors, then phoning voters in every precinct. We
canvassed the entire state of California, one on one, asking people face to
face how do they feel about this issue.
"And this is the kind of issue people are very personal and private about,
and they don't like talking to pollsters, they don't like talking to the
media, but we had a pretty good idea how they felt and that's being reflected
in the vote count."
--
◆ From: 72.43.25.226
※ 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc)※ 文章網址: https://www.ptt.cc/bbs/gay/M.1225905054.A.124.html
→ Tutt:fXXk!!!! 11/06 01:12
推 anson999:sad...原來美國也不過如此 (茶) 11/06 01:12
→ puru520:哇賽！還好我英文爛到爆～不然我一定看得懂你想說的！ 11/06 01:12
→ fefy:我想我需要翻譯... 11/06 01:14
推 Tutt:快翻！免得有人跑出來噓說「賣弄語言！」ㄎ 11/06 01:15
推 jojoliu:愛情不需翻譯。 11/06 01:16
推 pensees:連加州都這樣了.... 11/06 01:16
推 QQOliver:真情快譯通~ 11/06 01:20
推 manphage:怒 11/06 01:23
推 pedroremorse:對加州人感到失望...希望麻州不要也有樣學樣搞公投 11/06 01:24
→ pedroremorse:本來像麻州這麼liberal的地方 似乎不用擔心 但是看到 11/06 01:25
→ pedroremorse:加州這樣 我再也不敢過度樂觀了... 11/06 01:26
推 noruas:這不是一場單純的公民投票..教會在背後大力運作,也砸了大錢 11/06 01:26
→ pedroremorse:是啊 砸大錢拍了一堆愚蠢至極的濫宣傳廣告... 11/06 01:26
→ noruas:各種宣傳鋪天蓋地而來,很可怕的.. 11/06 01:28
→ noruas:在同志結婚場所的外面,動員來的抗議民眾比來支持的人還多 11/06 01:29
推 Kukulza:加拿大現在是保守黨執政 令人擔憂會不會效法也辦公投 11/06 01:30
→ pedroremorse:唉 各國同志要努力撐住啊 目前通過結婚法案的國家 11/06 01:31
→ noruas:我看BBC報導..那些人用大聲公對著結婚同志大喊:DEVIL(惡魔) 11/06 01:31
→ pedroremorse:數目停滯不前 ~"~ 美國是大國 所以能通過的意義很大 11/06 01:32
→ handschuhe:有種多數暴力的感覺 11/06 01:32
→ pedroremorse:我總覺得合法結婚國家數目要突破10 還要至少十年~"~ 11/06 01:33
→ pedroremorse:只能期盼西歐與北歐了 亞洲我不敢抱任何期待...= =+ 11/06 01:34
推 weichlai:What a shock！ 11/06 01:51
→ pigwayne:加州算有進步，2000年時公投是以64%的高贊成率通過禁止 11/06 02:17
→ pigwayne:今年是52%的樣子。 11/06 02:17
→ pigwayne:不過在加州，除沒有一張結婚證書，同性伴侶享有大部分的 11/06 02:19
→ swow:WTF!! 11/06 02:20
→ pigwayne:異性戀已婚伴侶的權益及福利 11/06 02:21
→ timright:照樓上這麼說 那我寬心了些 但是通過禁令還是難免失落 11/06 02:22
→ pigwayne:其實Floria也通過禁止同性婚姻...Arkansas是禁止收養 11/06 02:31
→ ursamajor:但之前加州之所以給同性伴侶有異性戀伴侶的權益是因為 11/06 03:51
→ ursamajor:當時並憲法沒有規定婚姻必須一男一女的變通辦法, 但現在 11/06 03:53
→ ursamajor:憲法已經上架, 我只能悲觀的想這些原本有的權力會被拿掉 11/06 03:54
推 cder:還是加拿大比較好，全國承認同姓婚姻 11/06 04:00
推 twowugs:加拿大去年已經重新提案過，被否決，當時Harper就已經說不 11/06 06:16
→ twowugs:會再提，這幾年不太可能再來一次 11/06 06:17
→ pigwayne:之前有定義過公民結合和婚姻的不同，所以權利應該還在 11/06 06:17
→ pigwayne:畢竟此次的憲法增修只是規定"婚姻"屬於一男一女 11/06 06:18
推 winddolphin:摩門教會總會聽說捐款佔了yes on 8的25%.... 11/06 11:48
推 ahchoo:動員就是暴力 11/06 13:25
→ ursamajor:看到有人開始討論這一只憲法是否牴觸聯邦憲法增修條文 11/06 20:44
→ ursamajor:14條平等的部分... 也許這是另一條路 11/06 20:47