Signature Drive Launched For 'Repeal Prop 8' 2010 Ballot Measure

[FreeState]

I am leaning towards 2012 - however, if it gets enough signatures to get on the ballot I will support it 110%. Its doable but its going to take a lot of work - and a lot of help from non-GLBT equality supporters.

http://www.towleroad.com/2009/11/signature-drive-launched-for-repeal-prop-8-2010-ballot-measure.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+towleroad%2Ffeed+%28-Towleroad+News-+%5B%23gay%5D%29

SIGNATURE DRIVE LAUNCHED FOR 'REPEAL PROP 8' 2010 BALLOT MEASURE

Sign for Equality, an online drive to collect signatures to place an initiative on the 2010 California ballot that would repeal Proposition 8, was launched today by the group Love Honor Cherish.

Said Executive Director of Love Honor Cherish John Henning: “We’re taking names. SignForEquality.com will make history by using custom social networking tools, as well as YouTube, Facebook and Twitter, to support an all-volunteer signature drive to repeal Prop 8. People throughout California can now help us win marriage back by the simple act of signing and collecting signatures.”

Sign for Equality "features a downloadable petition form and training videos for signature gatherers, and uses unique social networking technology to help gatherers set goals, build teams, and find signature gathering events," according to the organizers.


Sign for Equality (official site)

[nadinbrzezinski]

1. I am there!

[stiplic]

2. YES! Great!

[FreeState]

3. Be sure to check out the website - its very well done

http://www.signforequality.com/

training videos, forms etc. This is how you do a grassroots campaign IMO.

[Initech]

4. Where do I sign?

[Jim Lane]

5. This approach is much smarter than the attempt to set aside the previous referendum in court. (n/t)

[ShadowLiberal]

7. I disagree, we stand more of a chance in the courts then we do in 2010 on the ballot

Maine in 2009 has shown us that we can't count on ballot initiatives for legalizing gay marriage, especially in off years when the turnout will be less favorable for us, the bigots will just be more motivated then us to turn out and vote after their false scare tactic ads air.

At least in the courts we have a legitimate argument on equal protections, with little to lose if they uphold the current law.

[Jim Lane]

8. The advantages of the ballot

First, you and I disagree about the comparative chances of success. The 2008 vote in California was close. The trend is certainly in favor of marriage equality. That's partly because the pre-Baby Boom voters, who are more likely to oppose it, comprise an ever-shrinking percentage of the electorate. Among the new voters who've registered since 2008, I'm sure there's a clear preponderance of support for marriage equality. Another factor is that, even when the same voters show up again, some minds are changing. A vote in 2010 will follow two more years in which Massachusetts and other states haven't degenerated into chaos, sex with dogs in public, or whatever lunatic fantasies Rick Santorum and his ilk are spinning. It's two more years in which people may discover that someone they know and like is LGBTQ. These factors should be enough to change the narrow defeat of 2008 into, at least, a narrow victory.

I'm not sure the turnout will be less favorable next year. The California ballot will feature hot races for Governor and Senator, so while you're right that it's an off year, it's a fairly "on" off year. With Obama not on the ballot, young voters will be less likely to turn out, which does indeed hurt, but black voters will also be less likely to turn out, which probably helps. (IIRC, Prop 8 had support from a majority of white voters but had an even higher percentage of support among black voters.)

Succeeding in court is dubious. The earlier California court win, like court cases that have succeeded elsewhere, held the ban on same-sex marriage to be a violation of the state constitution. Prop 8 was an amendment to the state constitution. As a general rule, an amendment to the constitution can't be set aside for unconstitutionality. Here there's some argument to the contrary, given California's unusual two-tier structure for constitutional amendments, but it's still a tough argument to make.

Beyond that, I think it's better for the long run that the change come by popular vote rather than by court order. Some opponents of marriage equality will be reconciled to it over time if the people vote it in, but will continue to nurse grievances if a handful of judges overturn a popular vote.

[Nikki Stone1]

6. Damn! Too late to rec!

:fistbump: