Conservapedia - User contributions [en]

Proposition 8

2009-12-20T01:16:03Z

Theloufus: /* Vandalism and Protests */

[[Image:Yes on prop 8 prop 4 sign.jpg|right|thumb|A house in California showing support for Prop 8 and other conservative causes]]
'''Proposition 8''' was a ballot proposition in [[California]] that added the following text to Section 7.5 of Article I of the California Constitution: ''Only marriage between a man and a woman is recognized in California.'' <ref>Voter Information Guide, ''Proposition 8'' [http://www.voterguide.sos.ca.gov/text-proposed-laws/text-of-proposed-laws.pdf#prop8]</ref> It sought to return [[traditional marriage]] to the state. The proposition passed with 52.3% of the vote on November 4, 2008.

The proposition only affected whether same-sex couples could call themselves married under California law, and did not affect any substantive rights. Same-sex couples can still file joint state tax returns, adopt children, and enjoy other marital benefits under the California domestic partnership law. They could not call themselves under federal law anyway, and the federal government does not recognize any same-sex marriages.

After the election, demonstrations and protests occurred across the state and nation. Numerous [[lawsuits]] were filed with the California Supreme Court by same-sex couples and government entities, challenging the proposition's validity and effect on previously administered same-sex marriages. The court heard oral arguments on March 5, 2009.

==History of Marriage in California==
Historically marriage in the state of California had always been between a man and a woman as that was the understood definition of marriage. There was no need to include language that specified gender. In 1977, amidst a changing climate that saw the advent of the gay rights movement, the California legislature amended the California Family Code to make it clear that marriage was between a man and a woman. <ref>UC Berkeley Institute of Governmental Studies, ''Same-Sex Marriage in California - Overview and Issues''[http://igs.berkeley.edu/library/htGayMarriage.html]</ref>

In 2000 the possibility of same-sex marriage being legalized in other states led to Proposition 22 being passed, adding language to restrict California from recognizing the marriages of same-sex couples from other states as valid. <ref>California Voter Guide, ''Limit on Marriages. Initiative Statute. Text of Proposition 22'' [http://primary2000.sos.ca.gov/VoterGuide/Propositions/22text.htm] Section 308.5 was added to the Family Code, to read, "Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California."</ref> Proposition 22 passed easily with 61% of the vote, but it was overturned by California's Supreme Court in May of 2008. The court also mandated that [[gay marriage|same-sex marriage]] licenses be issued by judicial degree, not by the will of the voters or the legislature. The licenses were not recognized by the federal government and most of the nation.

==The Campaign for Proposition 8==
Proposition 8 was written in anticipation of four California Supreme Court Justices who overturned the will of the people and sought to redefine traditional marriage in California.

With a total of over 70 million dollars being spent, it became the most expensive campaign on a social proposition in history. The campaigns for and against Proposition 8 raised $39.9 million and $43.3 million, respectively.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5hKiw9iO4JJqxjTDd98GqpwyqDEewD963PUK00|title=Donors pumped $83M to Calif. gay marriage campaign|publisher=The Associated Press|date=2009-02-02|accessdate=2009-02-03}}</ref>

The measure passed with 52% of the votes being for to 48% against. While much was made of the fact that it was losing in the polls up until the time of the election, proponents pointed out that similar measures were often reported as polling poorly, but the actual vote was different. For instance Proposition 22 was supposed to be too close to call in 2000. Although it had been claimed that minority voters were against the message, exit polling on election day showed that latinos favored it overall while blacks favored it with a 70% yes vote. The large number of blacks who came out to vote for [[Barack Obama]] helped to tip the scale for Proposition 8's passing. Obama ironically stated that he did not support same-sex marriage, though also against Proposition 8.<ref>[http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20081106/news_1n6exit.html Blacks, Latinos helped Prop. 8, exit polls say]</ref>

===Proponents===
ProtectMarriage.com was the main proponent of the measure. It sponsored the initiative that placed the proposition on the ballot and spearheaded the campaign.
====Political Figures====
*Presidential-nominee and Senator [[John McCain]]
*Vice presidential-nominee and Governor [[Sarah Palin]]
*Former Speaker of the House [[Newt Gingrich]]
*California State Senator [[Tom McClintock]]

====Religious Figures====
*[[Rick Warren]]
*[[Roman Catholic Church]]
*[[Knights of Columbus]]
*[[The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints]]
*[[Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations of America]]
*[[Eastern Orthodox Church]]
====Others====
*Grossmont Union High School District

===Opponents===
Equality For All, which ran NoOnProp8.com was the lead organization in opposition to Proposition 8.
====Political Figures====
*Then-presidential nominee and Senator [[Barack Obama]]
*Then-vice presidential nominee and Senator [[Joe Biden]]
*California Republican Governor [[Arnold Schwarzenegger]]
*House Speaker [[Nancy Pelosi]]
*Senator [[Dianne Feinstein]]
*Senator [[Barbara Boxer]]
*Mayor [[Gavin Newsom]]
*Mayor [[Antonio Villaraigosa]]
*California Attorney General [[Jerry Brown]]
====Religious Figures====
*[[Episcopal Church of America]]
*[[Jewish Mosaic]]
*[[American Jewish Committee]]
*[[Anti-Defamation League]]
====Others====
*[[Google]]
*[[Apple Inc.]]
*[[Los Angeles Unified School District]]
*[[California Teachers Association]]
*Eight of the state's largest newspapers plus ''[[The New York Times]]''

==Results==
Proposition 8 passed with a 52.30% majority (7,001,084 votes) over a 47.70% minority (6,401,482 votes) with 340,611 invalid or blank votes. 79.42% of the Californian population turned up to vote on voting day.

Ron Prentice, the chairman of ProtectMarriage.com issued a statement saying, ""The people of California stood up for traditional marriage and reclaimed this great institution." The organizers of the "No on Prop 8" campaign issued a statement on November 6 saying "Tuesday’s vote was deeply disappointing to all who believe in equal treatment under the law."

==Vandalism and Protests==
Both opponents and supporters of same-sex marriage vandalized Prop. 8-related yard signs, sent hate mail, and otherwise showed their dissent. One same-sex marriage supporter went so far as to issue death threats, which was condemned by both sides of the Prop. 8 fight.<ref>ABC 30HD, Fresno, CA. "[http://abclocal.go.com/kfsn/story?section=news/local&id=6479879 Prop 8 Threat: Fresno Police close to Arrest]"</ref> Post-election anger among marriage equality advocates led to many protests and arrests.<ref>FoxNews.com, ''Several Gay Marriage Ban Protesters Arrested in Clashes With Police in California'', Thursday, November 06, 2008 [http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,447744,00.html]</ref> Continuing protests months after the election have led to more issues.<ref>[http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,450884,00.html Cross-Bearing Woman Says She Was Attacked by Gay Marriage Supporters, May Press Charges] </ref> Both The Holy Redeemer Catholic Church and Clovis Unitarian Universalist Church experienced vandalism from activists on either side of Proposition 8.<ref>[http://abclocal.go.com/kfsn/story?section=news/local&id=6479879 Prop 8 Threat: Fresno Police close to Arrest]</ref>

==Aftermath==
Due to the text that Proposition 8 added to the states constitution, same-sex marriage licenses are no longer being issued in California.

California Attorney General Jerry Brown has argued that the 18,000 same-sex marriages that were performed before Proposition 8 passed should still be considered valid in California.<ref>[http://www.aclu.org/lgbt/relationships/37701prs20081105.html ACLU:''California Will Honor Marriages of Same-Sex Couples Married Before the Possible Passage of Prop. 8, Initiative Would Apply to Future Marriages'', 11/5/2008]</ref> Others have postulated the marriages may be converted to domestic partnerships <ref>[http://www.volokh.com/posts/1225907782.shtml The Volokh Conspiracy, ''What Will Happen to California Same-Sex Marriages?'', Eugene Volokh, 11/5/2008]</ref>, which in California have the same state-law rights as marriage.<ref>[http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2008/11/the_odd_legal_g.html Concurring Opinions,''A small wrinkle regarding the Volokh proposal on Prop 8 retro-activity'', by Kaimipono D. Wenger, 11/5/2008]</ref> Regardless of the court, any California couple can convert to a domestic partnership any time the couple wishes.

Following the passage, a group of gay couples and governmental entities (a small collection of coastal cities and counties) have filed suit against Proposition 8. The California Supreme court accepted the three lawsuits which sought to overturn Proposition 8 (Strauss v. Horton, Tyler v. California, San Francisco v. Horton). According to the AP, "All three cases claim the ban abridges the civil rights of a vulnerable minority group. They argue that voters alone did not have the authority to enact such a significant constitutional change."<ref>AP, ''Calif. Supreme Court to take up gay marriage ban'', Nov 19, 2008 [http://apnews.myway.com/article/20081119/D94I8U1G3.html]</ref> Similar laws upholding traditional marriage had already been passed in 30 other states.

The sponsors of Proposition 8 asked the California Supreme Court on December 19th to no longer recognize the alleged marriages of the estimated 18,000 same-sex couples who exchanged vows before voters approved the ballot initiative that said that same-sex marriages were not to be recognized. <ref>[http://www.foxnews.com/wires/2008Dec19/0,4670,GayMarriageLawsuits,00.html Prop.8 sponsors seek to nullify 18K gay marriages] AP, December 19, 2008</ref> "Proposition 8's brevity is matched by its clarity. There are no conditional clauses, exceptions, exemptions or exclusions,".

Oral arguments were heard March 5, 2009, and the decision was rendered May 26, 2009. The California Supreme Court voted to uphold the proposition, but maintain state recognition of same-sex marriages already performed.<ref>http://www.courtinfo.ca.gov/opinions/documents/S168047.PDF</ref>

A group of Hollywood actors led by musical theater composer Marc Shaiman wrote “Prop 8: The Musical.” The music video mocks Christians, defames Christ, and distorts the teaching of the Bible through a series of "pick and choose" doctrines. Marc Shaiman is also the composer for “Hairspray” and “South Park: Bigger, Longer & Uncut.” <ref>[http://www.cnsnews.com/public/Content/Article.aspx?rsrcid=40318 Group Calls for Hollywood to Apologize for ‘Prop 8: The Musical’] CNSNews, December 4, 2009</ref>

==See also==
*[[Anti-Defamation League]]

==References==
<references/>

[[Category:Law]]
[[Category:California]]
[[Category:Homosexual Agenda]]
{{Liberalism}}

Homosexual rights advocacy

2009-12-15T06:25:04Z

Theloufus: /* Ludicrous arguments */

{{Homosexuality}}
The '''gay rights''' movement seeks to elevate [[homosexuality]] to the same level of social and political respectability as heterosexual relationships.

With arguments against homosexuality largely dispelled, the gay rights movement seeks to remove the stigma of [[sexual perversion]] from homosexuality by arguing that either,
# Homosexuality is an immutable trait, and discriminating against immutable traits is wrong (cf. race discrimination), or,
# Homosexuality, if not immutable, is highly correlated with personality, and discriminating against such deeply rooted notions of self is wrong, as well (cf. religious intolerance).

Gay rights are a favored topic of [[liberals]], and are based on [[moral relativity]], the wrongheaded idea that there is no absolute Right or Wrong.



==History==
[[Harry Hay]] is regarded as the father of the modern gay liberation movement. As a [[Communist Party of the United States]] (CPUSA) organizer, he turned out "essays, position papers, critical studies, and manifestos concerning what it means to be gay in the world." <ref> [http://www.aim.org/media_monitor/A269_0_2_0_C/ Red Roots Of Gay Movement], Cliff Kincaid, Accuracy in Media, September 10, 2003. </ref>

The first step Hay took in organizing the gay rights movement was to recommend to the CPUSA that he be expelled. In
light of his 18 years of service to the party <ref>[http://www.sojournertruth.net/ipp.html#i In Partial Payment Class Struggle, Sexuality and Gay Liberation (1978)], by A. Rausch. Retrieved from ''Urgent Tasks: [[Leftist|Journal of the Revolutionary Left]]'', Sojourner Truth Organization Digital Archive , 10 May 2007. </ref> they released him as “a security risk but a life-long friend of the people.” The early leadership of the Foundation shaped the organization to reflect the cell structure of the Communist Party, in which "secrecy, hierarchical structures, and centralized leadership predominated." <ref>John D'Emilio, ''Sexual Politics, Sexual Communities: The Making of a Homosexual Minority in the United States'' (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1983), quoted in Martin Meeker, Behind the Mask of Respectability, ''Journal of the History of Sexuality'', (2001) 78-116. </ref>
Hay and his fellow gay rights activists began circulating the [[USSR]] and the East European Communist parties sponsored anti-war [[Stockholm Peace petition]] against the [[Korean War]] <ref>[http://www.kimsoft.com/2000/germberia.htm New Russian Evidence on the Korean War Biological Warfare Allegations: Background and Analysis,]Milton Leitenberg, Cold War International History Project, Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars. </ref> at a gay beach in Los Angeles. The first months produced hundreds of members.

Amid growing public focus on gays and lesbians, 91 homosexuals were found to be employed in the [[U.S. State Department]]. Congressional investigators discovered homosexuals employed in 36 of 53 branches of Government, as well as in the armed forces. Between Jan. 1, 1947 and April 1950, 4,954 cases had come to light among some three and a half million people in Government service. Most were in the armed services. 574 cases were found involving civilian Government employees; in all the other cases the accused had either quit, been cleared or fired. The investigators found the greatest batch of civilian cases—143—in the U.S. State Department. State had cleared or gotten rid of all but a dozen whose cases were still pending. The Veterans Administration was found to have 101 cases. Others included the Atomic Energy Commission, 8; EGA, 27; Congress' legislative agencies (Library of Congress, congressional employees, etc.), 19. One Senator remarked, "It follows that if blackmailers can extort money from a homosexual under threat of disclosure, [[espionage]] agents can use the same type of pressure to extort confidential information." <ref>[http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,859060,00.html Object Lesson], ''TIME magazine'', Dec. 25, 1950.</ref>

The [[Human Rights Campaign]] referred to Hay as "founder and architect of the modern movement for gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender rights" and "Harry was one of the first to realize that the dream of equality for our community could be attained through visibility and activism". <ref>[http://www.hrc.org/Content/ContentGroups/News_Releases/20021/HRC_Mourns_the_Death_of_Gay_Rights_Pioneer_Harry_Hay.htm Human Rights Campaign Mourns the Death of Gay Rights Pioneer Harry Hay], Press Release, Oct. 24, 2002.</ref> Hay not only promoted homosexual rights, he actively campaigned for the "rights" of pedophiles. ''The Boston Phoenix'' noted that nowhere was this more evident than in Hay's persistent support of the right of the North American Man-Boy Love Association, [[NAMBLA]], to march in gay-pride parades. <ref>''The Boston Phoenix'', [http://bostonphoenix.com/boston/news_features/other_stories/documents/02511115.htm The real Harry Hay], Michael Bronski, October 31 - November 7, 2002. </ref> NAMBLA maintains a website with a body of Hay's work and a tribute to Harry Hay on its homepage. The Human Rights Campaign and other gay rights organizations, while revering Hay for his contributions to gay rights, do not support NAMBLA or communism.

== Legal Success ==
Courts, including the Supreme Court, have accepted either one or both of these rationales. In ''[[Romer v. Evans]]'', the Court found that discriminating against homosexuals could only be explained by a rational of animus laid bare, which was not enough even to allow state condemnation of homosexuality under the [[rational basis review]] test. ''Romer'', then, protects the status of homosexuality from undue discrimination that occurs without a rational basis.<ref>Romer v. Evans, 517 U.S. 620</ref>

Homosexual conduct was formerly illegal in many states.<ref>See generally ''Bowers v. Hardwick'', 478 U.S. 186</ref> In the last decade of the twentieth century, although these laws existed, they were rarely (if ever) enforced.<ref>''Lawrence v. Texas,'' 539 U.S. 558, Justice Anthony Kennedy, in the Opinion of the Court, found this in his historical analysis.</ref> Without disclosing whether it saw homosexuality as a status protected from discrimination at as high of a level as gender and race, the Court struck down bans on homosexual conduct, framing it as an expansion of its privacy jurisprudence.<ref>''Lawrence v. Texas'', 539 U.S. 558</ref>

The status of homosexuality before the law, then, is in some degree of flux. While bare discrimination against homosexual status is facially unconstitutional lacking a rational basis, and while preventing homosexual conduct is similarly unconstitutional, the Supreme Court has held in these landmark cases that the state may discriminate against homosexuals to preserve an "institution that the law protects" - namely, [[marriage]].<ref>''Lawrence v. Texas''; Kennedy & O'Connor both reached this conclusion explicitly.</ref> As such, the standard to be applied in deciding if discrimination against homosexuals is wrong is somewhere in between [[rational basis review]] and [[strict scrutiny review]]. Justice [[Antonin Scalia]] thinks that this uncertainty will surely be resolved in the favor of gay rights, and he warns that such a legal erosion will result in the downfall of the law's moral authority.<ref>''Lawrence v. Texas'', Scalia, J., dissenting.</ref>

In 2006, [[Catholic Charities]] of Boston closed their adoption program after more than a century of finding homes for [[orphans]] and [[unwanted children]] when it was reported by the ''Boston Globe'' that gay couples had received children placed from the agency.<ref>[http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2006/03/11/catholic_charities_stuns_state_ends_adoptions/ Catholic Charities stuns state, ends adoptions], By Patricia Wen, ''The Boston Globe'', March 11, 2006.</ref> Massachusetts law, barring "orientation discrimination", prohibited one of the nations oldest adoption agencies from refusing service to gay activists, and a mass resignation of the agency's Board in protest followed. <ref>[http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/012/191kgwgh.asp Banned in Boston], by Maggie Gallagher, ''The Weekly Standard'', 05/15/2006, Volume 011, Issue 33.</ref>

== Opposition to Gay Rights ==
A poll reveals that a majority of US citizens<ref>[http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/18/AR2007031800484.html | Clinton, Obama Slow to Respond to Questions on Homosexuality] Washington Post, March 18, 2007</ref> disapprove of homosexuality, or at least consider it less than ideal, and prefer that public policy does not encourage it. They also believe that accepting homosexuality would require the loss of rights to free speech, freedom of religion, freedom of association, and traditional [[marriage]].<ref>Traditional Values Coalition - [http://www.traditionalvalues.org/modules.php?sid=2963 Homosexual Marriage In Canada Killing Free Speech]</ref>
Conservatives criticize attempts by gay rights activists to prohibit any statements which are critical of homosexuality, such as the idea that it is "unnatural" or "sinful", using [[hate crime]]s statutes and anti-[[discrimination]] laws.

Conservatives also oppose attempts by homosexual activists to indoctrinate children by using liberal tactics such as ''tolerance'' or forcing ''diversity'' programs onto children in schools which strongly encourage the acceptance of homosexual behavior. Notable figures including [[Tony Perkins]] have expressed concerns.

*The EU parliament called on Polish authorities to publicly condemn and take measures against declarations by officials "inciting discrimination and hatred based on sexual orientation." [http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8OOFTCO5&show_article=1]

== Support for Gay Rights ==
An April 2009 CNN poll showed the public evenly divided over the US military's Don't Ask Don't Tell policy, with 48% in favor and 47% opposed.<ref>Polling Report http://www.pollingreport.com/civil.htm</ref> Polls consistently show that most people are opposed to same-sex marriage. Thirty states have had a public referendum on same-sex marriage, and all thirty have voted against it.

==Tactics==

*Kirk and Madsen predicted a mass public change of heart would follow, even among opponents, "if we can actually make them like us." <ref>[http://www.leaderu.com/jhs/socarides.html How America Went Gay], by Charles W. Socarides, M.D., ''America'', November 18, 1995.</ref>

Advocates routinely use [[deceit]], notably pursuing various goal while pretending not to. For example, some advocates will claim:
*The movement does not seek to convince others that homosexuality is ''right''

Yet clearly the drive for "[[tolerance]]" is only one step toward the ultimate goal of "[[approval]]".

Blurring distinctions: Advocates routinely fail to distinguish between [[homosexual behavior]] and homosexuality as an "identity".

===Presenting outstanding homosexuals as contributors to society===



Turing was arrested in 1952 for [[homosexuality|homosexual acts]] and subsequently lost his security clearance. He was allowed to stay out of prison by agreeing to be injected with female hormones (which would supposedly decrease his sex drive). He later confided to a friend that the hormones caused him to grow breasts.<ref>''Oddballs and Eccentrics''. Shaw, Karl. Edison, New Jersey: Castle Books, 2004</ref> This may have contributed to his suicide by [[cyanide]] poisoning in 1954.<ref>http://www.turing.org.uk/turing/index.html</ref> The British Government issued a formal, official apology for the way Alan Turing and other homosexuals were treated in the past.<ref>http://www.number10.gov.uk/Page20571</ref>

==See also==
*[[ACT-UP]]
*[[Anti-Defamation League]]
*[[H.R. 1592: Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2007]]
*[[Intimate Partner Violence]]
*[[Human Rights Watch]]

== References ==
{{reflist|2}}

[[Category:Homosexual Agenda]]
[[Category:Homosexuality]]