The Radical Gay Agenda
The front page of the LA Times contained some good news today.
Infighting, voter fatigue and a slow fundraising start appear to have plagued efforts by conservatives to place a measure on the 2006 ballot banning same-sex marriage in California.
The attempts to amend the California Constitution suffered a setback in recent days when two groups conceded that they would not qualify for the June 2006 ballot.
One group, ProtectMarriage.com, gathered fewer than half the 598,000 signatures required by Tuesday's deadline. Organizers said they might still decide to press ahead for the ballot next November, but a confluence of events has made it unlikely.
While the battle against same-sex marriage was an issue to conservatives this summer, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's September veto of a bill to legalize such unions defused the issue for the time being. Furthermore, the California Supreme Court is not expected to rule until 2007 on whether the existing law limiting marriage to heterosexuals passes constitutional muster.
"Everything we need to educate voters about the need for such a measure has been temporarily taken away," said ProtectMarriage.com's legal counsel, Andrew Pugno. "I think it is very unlikely there will be any measure on the ballot this coming year."
I have never understood why the Religious Reich gets their knickers in such a frist on this issue. Is heterosexual marriage as an institution so fragile that it is in danger of collapsing entirely if another sector of the population gets to enter into the same social contract? If so, it probably needs to be hauled off to the dumpster even without the help of gays and lesbians.
The entire paranoia over the 'radical gay agenda' is also a puzzlement. As Mario Solis Marich (the substitute for vacationing Al Francken here in Los Angeles) mentioned today, if you look at just what gays and lesbians have been demanding over the last ten years (the right to serve in the military, the right to adopt unwanted children, the right to marry), the agenda looks to be more white bread than radical. Gays and lesbians just want basic human rights.
At any rate, Californians, who clearly support domestic partnership benefits, will be spared another foolish proposition in the April, 2006 election. One fewer measure on the ballot is always a good thing.
Infighting, voter fatigue and a slow fundraising start appear to have plagued efforts by conservatives to place a measure on the 2006 ballot banning same-sex marriage in California.
The attempts to amend the California Constitution suffered a setback in recent days when two groups conceded that they would not qualify for the June 2006 ballot.
One group, ProtectMarriage.com, gathered fewer than half the 598,000 signatures required by Tuesday's deadline. Organizers said they might still decide to press ahead for the ballot next November, but a confluence of events has made it unlikely.
While the battle against same-sex marriage was an issue to conservatives this summer, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's September veto of a bill to legalize such unions defused the issue for the time being. Furthermore, the California Supreme Court is not expected to rule until 2007 on whether the existing law limiting marriage to heterosexuals passes constitutional muster.
"Everything we need to educate voters about the need for such a measure has been temporarily taken away," said ProtectMarriage.com's legal counsel, Andrew Pugno. "I think it is very unlikely there will be any measure on the ballot this coming year."
I have never understood why the Religious Reich gets their knickers in such a frist on this issue. Is heterosexual marriage as an institution so fragile that it is in danger of collapsing entirely if another sector of the population gets to enter into the same social contract? If so, it probably needs to be hauled off to the dumpster even without the help of gays and lesbians.
The entire paranoia over the 'radical gay agenda' is also a puzzlement. As Mario Solis Marich (the substitute for vacationing Al Francken here in Los Angeles) mentioned today, if you look at just what gays and lesbians have been demanding over the last ten years (the right to serve in the military, the right to adopt unwanted children, the right to marry), the agenda looks to be more white bread than radical. Gays and lesbians just want basic human rights.
At any rate, Californians, who clearly support domestic partnership benefits, will be spared another foolish proposition in the April, 2006 election. One fewer measure on the ballot is always a good thing.
posted by Diane at 4:03 PM
1 Comments:
"Knickers in a frist" - that is worth borrowing.
Post a Comment
<< Home