In the aftermath of 8, an imitation of WA's Initiative 957?

[Athelwulf]

I posted a thread about this in GLBT, but it's not getting much attention. Maybe targeting a different audience would be more effective.

Initiative 957 was a measure that failed to get on Washington's ballot in 2007. It was a gay rights organization's response to the Washington Supreme Court ruling Andersen v. King County, that it was a legitimate state interest to limit marriage to opposite-sex couples to promote reproduction. This measure would have required married couples to bear a child within three years.

I'm sure the same old arguments were used by the Yes on 8 campaign. These arguments have logical conclusions that are widely seen as ridiculous. Well, I had the idea to get a measure on the California ballot that's similar to I-957. It would highlight the ridiculous conclusions you'd reach with the arguments the Yes on 8 groups used. It might not convince the idiots who were the loudest aye-sayers, but hopefully this would make just enough people realize that 8 was a mistake, such that a measure to repeal it would succeed.

So, is this a good idea? Be sure to read the other thread, because it has some discussion prompts. Please leave some feedback!

[Independent_Voice]

1. No, I think it would only cause resentment from "the straights"

While I agree with the spirit of your concept, I don't think it's productive to try to win understanding and support from heterosexuals by attempting to place some symbolic tit-for-tat (which won't pass in a million years, regardless) on the ballot.

I prefer my idea for a California ballot proposition:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=141x32495

which, predictably, has gotten very little reaction from people on this forum or in the LGBT forum (where I have it X-posted). Maybe I should X-post it again in the General Discussion Forum?

[Athelwulf]

2. I don't see how it could cause resentment.

Except from the ones who adamantly oppose our rights, I guess. But they're gonna resent us no matter what. I also certainly don't expect this kind of measure to pass, nor would I want it to. The idea is to show that, if you don't want to vote for these further restrictions on marriage, then why did you vote for Prop 8?

[Independent_Voice]

3. That doesn't make any sense to me

I don't see what the point is of putting a referendum on the ballot that's only going to get defeated by the masses? To make some symbolic point? To say "Fuck You!" to the heteros who get to keep their marriage rights regardless?

To me, it would be much more productive and beneficial for us to put a referendum on the ballot that's worded in such a way that it actually has a good chance of being approved by a majority of voting Californians. In my view, the best measure we could put on the ballot in the short-term would be a Proposition that "constitutionalizes" the basic rights of a civil union for all California couples, without mentioning the word "marriage" whatsoever.

As Californians become more accepting, then we can move to the next logical step: a Proposition that overturns Proposition 8 fully and entirely. In the meantime, the type of Proposition I've suggested will prevent the wingnuts from continuing to chip away at what few spousal rights we do have.

[annoyedtrader]

4. no sense