Almost there...

Wednesday, November 05, 2008

The Battle, Not the War

It looks like Prop 8 is going to pass. This saddens me, but it's okay. We've learned a lot.

In the past few months, over 18,000 couples were married, and their marriages will not be annulled by this proposition.

Eight years ago, the proposition that started this all, Prop 22, passed with a 61% margin. Prop 8 looks like it will pass with 53%. That's a huge amount of progress in just eight years.

Just over a hundred years ago, Oscar Wilde was sentenced to two years hard labor for just having relations with another man. The idea of homosexual love was unthinkable then.

Times are changing and they're changing fast, but we have to be patient a while longer. It took until 1967 for the US Supreme Court to rule (unanimously!) in Loving v. Virginia that anti-miscegenation laws are unconstitutional. It took a hundred years. It won't take that long for same-sex marriage. We're almost there. We just need to convince a tiny margin to shift their perspective.

And now we know it only takes a simple majority to change the California Constitution. We can eliminate the effects of this law just as easily as it was put in place. It's only going to take a little time and a little attention. We'll get there. And when we do, the wedding industry will welcome a fresh set of clients (and their cash) once again to come and partake in marriage in California. In the meantime, I hope Massachusetts enjoys the benefits of our lost revenue.

2 Comments:

  • At 8am, it was still close. If it loses, there are already legal challenges being set up
    http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/11/5/125155/110/471/654479

    It seems that initiatives can only change the constitution in certain ways. The argument goes that you can't take away a fundamental right via initiative. You need another kind of process for that.

    By Blogger ChrisFS, at 10:27 AM  

  • I'll be interested to see how that plays out. It seems like a pretty novel argument to me ("novel" in the legal euphemistic sense). I get what they're saying, but essentially the argument is that a constitutional amendment can itself be unconstitutional. I have a hard time swallowing that one, myself.

    By Blogger Natalie, at 9:56 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home