RECENT  POSTS:  » Audio: Tony Perkins minimizes actual religious persecution; pretends he and anti-gay pals face 'deadly consequences' » Ryan Anderson, Mark Regnerus, Rick Warren, other inequality advocates urge Pope to 'commit to marriage' » GLAAD: Are some anti-LGBT activists missing a self-awareness gene? » FRC faults Dems for broken, obstructionist Congress while advocating for broken, obstructionist Congress » FRC senior staffer: 'Ex-Gays: The Best Kept Secret in Your Child’s School' » Video: In inclusive ad, AZ Sec. of State hopeful makes discrimination his rival » That discriminatory OR baker is really overthinking reason why she's national news » Robert Oscar Lopez confirms belief that gay parents are like slave owners » Video: Values Voter Summit marriage panel was particularly boring, bad, ineffective this year » Conservative Catholic professor: Gay activists like segregationists in 'single-minded heedlessness'  

« Go back a post || Return to G-A-Y homepage || Haul tail to next post »

06/03/2008

CA: Proposed historical blemish gets go-ahead

by Jeremy Hooper

200806030911Oh, if you haven't already heard: California's gay marriage opponents were yesterday given word that their anti-gay initiative has qualified for the November ballot:

Gay marriage ban qualifies for California ballot [AP via Google]

Upon hearing the news, we immediately began thinking of ways we can connect with the hearts and minds of Golden Staters to show them we're really not the evil turdburgers that our socially conservative opponents want folks to think we are. Meanwhile, producers of the 2015 documentary, An Acceptable Bias: How So Many Otherwise Decent Americans Were Duped Into Supporting Cruel, Unjust Bias put a new tape in their camera just in case California and its people choose to become the film's 28th test case.

space gay-comment gay-G-A-Y-post gay-email gay-writer-jeremy-hooper


Your thoughts

Yeah, sure, it's a good idea to "connect with the hearts and minds of Golden Staters."

But it's a better idea to help with the fight against this odious amendment. You don't have to be from California, you don't even have to be gay. All you need is a credit card and a quick hop to equalityforall.com (that's the umbrella group fighting against the amendment).

Give what you can, wherever you are.

Posted by: K | Jun 3, 2008 10:05:34 AM

K: It's a little offensive to tell a site that fights every single day against anti-gay bias to step up and fight the amendment by donating cash. We have and will continue to put some funds to the cause. But we will also continue fighting this and all odious proposals by changing the conversation.

Posted by: G-A-Y | Jun 3, 2008 10:11:35 AM

I like this conversation:

SAY NO to HATE

SAY NO to FEAR

SAY NO to Inequality and discriminaton

SAY NO to out-of state bigots (who are trying to buy your vote)


SAY YES to LOVE

SAY YES to HAPPINESS

SAY YES to ALL OUR FAMILIES

SAY YES to EQUALITY FOR ALL.

CALIFORNIANS ARE NICE PEOPLE, AND WE CAN PROVE IT.

SAY NO to the HATE AMENDMENT.


Working on it.

Posted by: LOrion | Jun 3, 2008 10:24:47 AM

LOrion, you're going to need something snappier in good old england we use "some people are gay, get over it."

I would use two young lesbians in wedding dresses holding hands, saying underneath:
"Because marriage should be for everyone. Vote No on ..."
because the message is for equality, and the visual is a very wedding based image - wedding dresses.
or
two same-sex teenagers sitting on a beach
"would you tell your children they could never get married ? "
because showing the humanity of allowing marriage equality is very, very easy - because its right, everyone at some point experiences love, and thats why people will vote against this, but its just getting them to the polls...

Posted by: Corvidae | Jun 3, 2008 12:26:07 PM

and also I wonder whether it should be same-sex marriage rather than gay marriage, which makes it sound like its for gays rather than for bi people, I know this seems like nit-picking, but one of my pet hates when discussing this with religious people is the following:

me: "What if I were to fall in love with a man, I couldn't get married?"
Religious Person: "You can get married, just go with a girl, like your supposed to."
Me:" but if I FELL IN LOVE I'd want to marry a man"
RP: "You can't marry the same sex, thats not marriage..."
Etc.
Then I hear people saying gay marriage, and it makes me sad, that after all this people will call me gay if I marry a man.

Posted by: Corvidae | Jun 3, 2008 1:02:02 PM

comments powered by Disqus

G-A-Y Comments Policy


 
Related Posts with Thumbnails