Log in

No account? Create an account

Previous Entry | Next Entry

Guilty gay rights activist thoughts--

Is it really worth the legal battle *right now* to overthrow Prop 8? It was just passed. Granted, it's a typically odious law that might not have passed without millions of dollars being pumped into it from out of state. But is immediately following the passage of a law *by popular vote* with legal challenges the best idea? It'd be nice to find someone who was well-informed, but didn't have an agenda on this one, and talk to them.


( 11 comments — Leave a comment )
Mar. 1st, 2009 05:10 pm (UTC)
I'm not sure how useful pushing the legal overturning of the law is, long-term, for exactly the reason you describe. But I do think it's very appropriate to publicize how manipulated the vote was, and to make sure that everything possibly is done to shift public opinion over to a more reasonable stance.
Mar. 1st, 2009 09:28 pm (UTC)
Well, yes, I absolutely agree with that point. Education is not the same as challenging--and education is going to need to be a pre-step before a successful challenge.
Mar. 1st, 2009 05:13 pm (UTC)
If not now... when?
Mar. 1st, 2009 09:31 pm (UTC)
That's not really a constructive statement, it's a cliche. If now is non-constructive, then when might be "after a campaign of positive education" or "when, statistically, we might achieve a victory." I'm not totally certain that agressively challenging something that just passed is helpful, because the state just made a (bad) decision. Is there any point to telling the state--the majority of the population, at least as defined by the last vote--"no, sorry, you're wrong, and we're ignoring your opinion?" You don't re-open a legal case without new evidence.
Mar. 2nd, 2009 06:41 am (UTC)
Good point, though I still think waiting has just as many drawbacks as trying to overturn it as soon as possible.
Mar. 2nd, 2009 02:35 pm (UTC)
It's so hard to know! With the CAlifornia thing there's been an awful lot of...well, really bad press. The vandalism that the GLBT/Supporters (or not supporters? It'd be a good move for anti-GLBT's to slash some tires...) have been demonstrating has created some, maybe a lot, of ill-will.

It's easy to say "let's put that off until it's a better time..." really easy, because rights struggles are uphill fights, but on the other paw, attacking an amendment also seems like an attack on the democratic process and the will of the majority (even if the entire process was manipulated by outsiders from start to finish). And I do tend to be a bit passive, so maybe I'm not the best judge.
Mar. 2nd, 2009 02:07 am (UTC)
I think it is worth fighting now, on a strategic basis.

Right now the religious right has used a batch of their money. If we can overturn Prop 8 now, our enemies must either 1) try to come up with enough money from their rich folk and enough emotional support from their rank and file to put it through again, when everyone's tapped out on energy (even the LDS doesn't have infinite bank accounts); or 2) leave the issue alone for a while, and by the time they could pose a new challenge, there might be enough married Queers out there that people understand that this is okay. King said that most of what appears to be evil is actually ignorance, and time overturns ignorance. So I definitely approve of basically, buying time.
Mar. 2nd, 2009 02:37 pm (UTC)
That's a good argument--though the entire world is out of money right now, it seems :( Ach, well. I read in a news article that you couldn't use "liberal" as a slander word anymore, because Barack is just that cool and because "conservative" seems to have utterly destroyed the financial system (in a visible way, not the standard "rot behind a painted wall" way). Maybe, hey, if liberal is okay, we'll get other sexy words like "equality" and "choice" again :)
Mar. 2nd, 2009 04:29 pm (UTC)
The legal battle that's being fought, when I last looked anyway, is one that needs to be fought now because it's invalidating the way that the measure was put up for vote to begin with. That sort of argument loses power the longer the law is on the books. (basically the argument at the heart of the current court battle is that since the ban actually removed a right from a group of people that the measure needed approval of the legislature before even being put on the ballot. And if it shouldn't have been on the ballot the fact then it shouldn't have been voted on/passed)
Mar. 2nd, 2009 04:39 pm (UTC)
Oh. That, I didn't know! Thanks :) That helps me understand the situation a bit better.
Mar. 7th, 2009 04:30 pm (UTC)
There’s also the question of why queers want to be married in the first place – specifically, there’s increased monetary and healthcare safety for married couples. While the symbolic gesture of having marriages legally recognized by a state is a particularly visible index of acceptance, I yearn for the privileges of marriage to not be privileges – the fight for marriage, in part, exposes problems of a larger system, and focusing upon the system, rather than fighting for a good position in that system, may lead to a transformation that’s less exclusionary.
( 11 comments — Leave a comment )