• Menu
  • Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

Before Header

  • About Us
  • Lexicon
  • Contact Us
  • Our Store
  • ↑
  • ↓
  • ←
  • →

Balloon Juice

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

Relentless negativity is not a sign that you are more realistic.

The Giant Orange Man Baby is having a bad day.

They traffic in fear. it is their only currency. if we are fearful, they are winning.

Jesus watching the most hateful people claiming to be his followers

Second rate reporter says what?

If you tweet it in all caps, that makes it true!

But frankly mr. cole, I’ll be happier when you get back to telling us to go fuck ourselves.

I’d hate to be the candidate who lost to this guy.

The fight for our country is always worth it. ~Kamala Harris

My right to basic bodily autonomy is not on the table. that’s the new deal.

The low info voters probably won’t even notice or remember by their next lap around the goldfish bowl.

GOP baffled that ‘we don’t care if you die’ is not a winning slogan.

The snowflake in chief appeared visibly frustrated when questioned by a reporter about egg prices.

Hey Washington Post, “Democracy Dies in Darkness” was supposed to be a warning, not a mission statement.

Never entrust democracy to any process that requires republicans to act in good faith.

Our job is not to persuade republicans but to defeat them.

When I was faster i was always behind.

Our messy unity will be our strength.

American history and black history cannot be separated.

People really shouldn’t expect the government to help after they watched the GOP drown it in a bathtub.

Jesus, Mary, & Joseph how is that election even close?

Is it negotiation when the other party actually wants to shoot the hostage?

Putin must be throwing ketchup at the walls.

Damn right I heard that as a threat.

Mobile Menu

  • Seattle Meet-up Post
  • 2025 Activism
  • Targeted Political Fundraising
  • Donate with Venmo, Zelle & PayPal
  • Site Feedback
  • War in Ukraine
  • Submit Photos to On the Road
  • Politics
  • On The Road
  • Open Threads
  • Topics
  • COVID-19
  • Authors
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Lexicon
  • Our Store
  • Politics
  • Open Threads
  • 2025 Activism
  • Garden Chats
  • On The Road
  • Targeted Fundraising!
You are here: Home / Politics / Domestic Politics / Itzhak Perlman

Itzhak Perlman

by Michael D.|  October 24, 20089:46 pm| 66 Comments

This post is in: Domestic Politics

FacebookTweetEmail

No on 8.

Sorry if I am being too personal on this. It’s just important to me.

P.S.: Just as an FYI, I know almost all of you support No on 8, I just think that this is a great ad – one that my parents would make if thy had the influence. I appreciate the support all of you give. You can donate here. I know you all don’t have a lot of money, but $5 or $10 would be great!

FacebookTweetEmail
Previous Post: « Once Again, My Chief Flaw Is Insufficient Cynicism
Next Post: One More. No On 8 »

Reader Interactions

66Comments

  1. 1.

    Jon H

    October 24, 2008 at 9:52 pm

    I gave $200 the other day.

    OT: We need a betting pool on the number of media reported Halloween incidents of people wearing racist blackface "Obama" costumes. You *know* it’s gonna happen.

  2. 2.

    Michael D.

    October 24, 2008 at 9:55 pm

    Thank you!

  3. 3.

    Xanthippas

    October 24, 2008 at 9:58 pm

    Ithaz Perleman is the greatest violinist of our age and we’re lucky that he chose our country to call home. If he has a gay daughter and says vote no on 8, then people should fucking well vote against that stupid proposition.

  4. 4.

    Scribble

    October 24, 2008 at 9:59 pm

    I really hope enough people on the coast and in Sacramento vote NO to outweigh the right-wing nutters out here.

  5. 5.

    Smudgemo

    October 24, 2008 at 10:06 pm

    My household is delivering three votes for No, and my coworkers all seem to be in agreement. Okay, it’s Oakland/Berkeley, but it counts.

    Jesse Ventura may be a lot of things, but when he pointed out that this an issue of civil rights, he was correct. The religious pricks that keep bringing this up are really pissing me off.

  6. 6.

    Charity

    October 24, 2008 at 10:11 pm

    This was lovely. How can you listen to Mr. Perlman and not be moved to do the right thing? NO on Prop 8. I’m just sorry I’m in NJ and can’t help vote.

  7. 7.

    Michael D.

    October 24, 2008 at 10:15 pm

    @Charity: You can’t vote, but you can donate!

  8. 8.

    Michael D.

    October 24, 2008 at 10:18 pm

    @Smudgemo: Your family = Awesome. Thank you!!

  9. 9.

    Jon H

    October 24, 2008 at 10:19 pm

    Apple has given $100k and come out against 8.

  10. 10.

    Laertes

    October 24, 2008 at 10:24 pm

    I know some people who plan to vote for prop 8. The thing that swayed them was the argument that even if 8 passes, same-sex couples will still have precisely the same rights as opposite-sex couples, except that it’ll be called "domestic partnership" instead of marriage.

    For whatever reason, the argument that calling the same institution by a different name is just a shameful and degrading "separate but equal" doesn’t move them.

    The SecState’s voter guide doesn’t help much on that front. The nearest it gets to addressing the point:

    DOMESTIC PARTNERSHIPS ARE NOT MARRIAGE. When you’re married and your spouse is sick or hurt, there is no confusion; you get into the ambulance or hospital room with no questions asked. IN EVERYDAY LIFE, AND ESPECIALLY IN EMERGENCY SITUATIONS, DOMESTIC PARTNERSHIPS ARE SIMPLY NOT ENOUGH. Only marriage provides the certainty and the security that people know they can count on in their times of greatest need.

    (caps in original)

    That’s on point, if a bit vague. From the rebuttal: "Under California law gay and lesbian domestic partnerships are treated equally; they already have the same rights as married couples. Proposition 8 does not change that…Prop. 8 will NOT take away any other rights or benefits of gay couples."

    Okay, a bare assertion that the argument against is wrong. And, sadly, the no-on-8 forces don’t get to answer the rebuttal, so let’s instead look at their rebuttal to the case for 8:

    DOMESTIC PARTNERSHIPS and MARRIAGE AREN’T THE SAME. CALIFORNIA STATUES CLEARLY IDENTIFY NINE REAL DIFFERENCES BETWEEN MARRIAGE AND DOMESTIC PARTNERSHIPS. Only marriage provides the security that spouses provide one another–it’s why people get maried in the first place! Think about it. Maried couples depend on spouses when they’re sick, hurt, or aging. They accompany them into ambulances or hospital rooms, and help make life-and-death decisions, with no questions asked. ONLY MARRIAGE ENDS THE CONFUSION AND GUARANTEES THE CERTAINTY COUPLES CAN COUNT ON IN TIMES OF GREATEST NEED.

    (again, caps in original.)

    Well, great. Nine concrete differences. What are they? This stuff about "confusion" and "certainty" is pretty weak tea. I’m trying to convince people here, and the no-on-8 guys are giving me not a whole hell of a lot to work with. It reads like a lot of hand-waving that’s intended to obscure the fact that it really IS mostly just about nomenclature. That’s more than enough for me, but it’s not enough for the people I’m working on.

    Anyone help me out here?

  11. 11.

    gbear

    October 24, 2008 at 10:29 pm

    Sully was featuring some worthwhile Prop 8 ads too.

    My friends in SF that were married last month were asking friends to donate to No on 8 as a wedding present. I couldn’t afford much but that’s what I did for them.

  12. 12.

    ninerdave

    October 24, 2008 at 10:37 pm

    Sorry have to disagree about that ad. It sucks.

    1. I’d bet a good majority of people don’t know who Itzhak Perlman is. I didn’t. I had to look him up. When I did I found out:

    2. He lives in NY. It’s a good bet that Homophobes are also Xenophobes. Hearing from a New Yorker tell them to vote one way or another in CA isn’t going to wash. In fact as someone who is pretty liberal, lives in the Bay Area of CA, I absolutely resent outsiders using our proposition system to influence our state. It happens every election cycle; see T Boone Pickens and Prop 10 this year in CA. I voted no.

    3. That ad does not measure up to this. THAT is a good ad. Extremely effective, and HAS been flipping votes.

    See this ad also

    While, I voted No on 8 (of course), the yes folk have been extremely effective in scaring the shit out of fence sitters, which is why you see it getting closer. I haven’t seen the No folks on TV or mailings or really anywhere outside of a few lawn signs. It seems they are hoping that the good liberals of CA will carry them through. Hell, I drove through the Laurel district in Oakland the other night and saw a few people with Yes on 8 signs on a corner.

    Note to the world outside of CA, while we have San Francisco and LA, we also have a bunch of dumb rednecks in between.

  13. 13.

    cain

    October 24, 2008 at 10:51 pm

    I gave 25 bucks a week ago. I don’t know any LGBT people.. well I do but not very well. But I can’t stand injustice. If some money helps I will gladly give.

    cain

  14. 14.

    gbear

    October 24, 2008 at 10:58 pm

    Note to the world outside of CA, while we have San Francisco and LA, we also have a bunch of dumb rednecks in between.

    A lot of those dumb rednecks have kids, brothers, sisters and cousins that are gay (and maybe living in SF or LA). It’s an issue that can touch any family – you can’t build a gated community that will keep teh gay out.

    Those shitty hate ads do make people think, but some of those rednecks may be thinking that people in their family are going to get fucked over.

    I don’t know any LGBT people

    You know more of them than you think you do.

  15. 15.

    Bill H

    October 24, 2008 at 11:01 pm

    Perlman speaks as movingly as he plays. I have donated enough elsewhere toward "No on 8" that I don’t feel the need to donate here, but only because my funds are not unlimited.

    3. That ad does not measure up to this. THAT is a good ad.

    That’s a good ad if you are a sick fuck.

  16. 16.

    ninerdave

    October 24, 2008 at 11:10 pm

    @gbear:

    Those shitty hate ads do make people think, but some of those rednecks may be thinking that people in their family are going to get fucked over.

    The simple fact is since those ads have been airing the polling has gone in the direction of yes. They are stupid, and shitty, but they are working and I have yet to see any No ads as effective.

    How about feature Phyllis Lyon talking about how she was able to be married to Del Martin for at least a few months before Del passed. Their relationship lasted 55 years.

  17. 17.

    Comrade Kevin

    October 24, 2008 at 11:11 pm

    @cain:

    I don’t know any LGBT people.

    Bullshit.

  18. 18.

    Comrade Kevin

    October 24, 2008 at 11:13 pm

    @ninerdave:

    How about feature Phyllis Lyon talking about how she was able to be married to Del Martin for at least a few months before Del passed. Their relationship lasted 55 years.

    That is something they should do, an excellent idea.

  19. 19.

    Unrepentent Dennis - SGMM

    October 24, 2008 at 11:25 pm

    The Yes on 8 campaign has been one of the most duplicitous I’ve ever seen. In the world of California Ballot Propositions, that’s saying a hell of a lot. The yard signs are all in nice bright Easter Egg colors and they symbolically show a happy family. The televised ads imply all sorts of sinister outcomes if Prop. 8 fails without even striking a glancing blow at the facts. Nonetheless, it’s a coin toss as to whether the thing will pass.
    I’ve concluded that, on some issues, Californians aren’t very far removed from the yahoos screaming "Terrorist" at the Palin rallies.

  20. 20.

    expatoz

    October 24, 2008 at 11:26 pm

    I’ve donated $600….US expat and have never lived in California but this one is too important to ignore. I’ve already cast my absentee ballot for Obama and have a big sign hanging outside my house in Oz for him. Let’s get all of this done.

  21. 21.

    Comrade Kevin

    October 24, 2008 at 11:28 pm

    @Unrepentent Dennis – SGMM:

    The ads really are repulsive. Some of them stop just barely short of saying "the fags are taking over!!!!"

  22. 22.

    ninerdave

    October 24, 2008 at 11:29 pm

    @Unrepentent Dennis – SGMM:

    I’ve concluded that, on some issues, Californians aren’t very far removed from the yahoos screaming "Terrorist" at the Palin rallies.

    While California has it’s share of wingnuttia, think Orange County, Contra Costa County (the Mini-OC), and well hell the Freeps’ website is published out of Fresno. The plain and simple fact is the Yes folks are out campaigning the No folks. Period.

  23. 23.

    DrDave

    October 24, 2008 at 11:48 pm

    Too bad Dick Cheney doesn’t have the character to stand up for his daugher like that.

    We are going to see Perlman perform on Tuesday night at our friends’ synagogue. I will make a point of thanking him for making this ad.

  24. 24.

    Graeme

    October 24, 2008 at 11:49 pm

    Just so you know, my wife and I have donated to the ‘No’ campaign, and we both cannot wait to vote no on 8.

    I say that as someone who voted for W. in 2000, who skipped 2004, then finally voted against the GOP in 2004.

    Not that I’ve ever had anything against gay people. Even in KY I knew some good guys @ my Catholic high school who were gay. It’s a civil rights issue – you guys pay tax and serve (now seemingly openly) in the military, so you should have full rights.

    Really, it was crazy to invite my friends Zack and Jeff to our wedding in March, given they’d been together longer than Megan and I had known one another.

    I’m rambling, and I’m not in the mood to proof this. Anyway – I can’t wait to cast the ballot.

  25. 25.

    Jon H

    October 24, 2008 at 11:50 pm

    @Kevin

    "Bullshit."

    cain had an ellipsis, not a period. If you read it correctly, he said he didn’t know any *well*.

    And, hell, he said he donated.

  26. 26.

    Unrepentent Dennis - SGMM

    October 24, 2008 at 11:50 pm

    @ninerdave:
    They are. What’s sad is that it’s making a difference in this of all states. I learned years ago that California is only marginally a Blue state: we elect plenty of Republicans. I was still surprised to see how many people here were swayed by the Yes on 8 campaign. The Perlman ad, though well intentioned, is a dud. People on this blog know who Perlman is for the same reasons that they know what The Establishment Clause is. Most of the public; not so much.
    In 1880, California prohibited the issuance of licenses for marriage between a white person and "a Negro, mulatto, or Mongolian." The prohibition was codified in 1942 by California Assembly Bill SB 321 which was signed into law by then Governor Earl Warren. SB 321 was repealed in 1948. Here’s hoping that if 8 passes it won’t take us 68 years to strike it down.

  27. 27.

    ninerdave

    October 24, 2008 at 11:59 pm

    @Unrepentent Dennis – SGMM:

    Here’s hoping that if 8 passes it won’t take us 68 years to strike it down.

    Cheers to that. Only thing that can dampen my spirits on Nov 4th (assuming all goes well, knock on wood, salt over the shoulder, etc) is Prop 8 passing. Last I saw Field has it down by 4; one point out of the margin of error.

  28. 28.

    Unrepentent Dennis - SGMM

    October 25, 2008 at 12:10 am

    Last I saw Field has it down by 4; one point out of the margin of error.

    Too close but, this is the same California that elected Ronald Reagan our governor for two terms. We’ve also elected such exemplars of pure reason as Dana Rohrbacher, "B-1 Bob" Dornan, and the execrable Rep. Jerry Lewis. My own representative is David Dreier.

  29. 29.

    ninerdave

    October 25, 2008 at 12:25 am

    @Unrepentent Dennis – SGMM:

    Too close but, this is the same California that elected Ronald Reagan our governor for two terms. We’ve also elected such exemplars of pure reason as Dana Rohrbacher, "B-1 Bob" Dornan, and the execrable Rep. Jerry Lewis. My own representative is David Dreier.

    Yeah, we’re such a bastion of liberalism.

    /snark

  30. 30.

    Zuzu's Petals

    October 25, 2008 at 12:30 am

    So where the hell is Arnold?????

    LA Times

  31. 31.

    bootlegger

    October 25, 2008 at 12:35 am

    First. No need to apologize. Remind us about this every day from now until election day.

    Second. Prop 8 is an existential threat to our republic. The premise of democracy is undermined by the tyranny of the majority. This is the expressed function of our Bill of Rights. It guarantees, among other things, that All are equal before the law. No spin about "family values" changes the fact that Prop 8 is a question of whether or not 2-person relationships are equal before the law.

    Third. Its true that most of the other states have already run over this Stop sign and changed their constitutions to make an exception for this tyranny of the majority. It needs to stop. Now.

    Fourth. The brave citizens of Vermont, Massachusetts, and even Arizona drew the line against marriage discrimination. I expect the people of California will have the courage to do the same.

    Fifth. Donate to a good cause.

    Good luck fellow Americans.

  32. 32.

    Rudi

    October 25, 2008 at 12:39 am

    mmmmm

  33. 33.

    ninerdave

    October 25, 2008 at 1:03 am

    @Zuzu’s Petals:

    So where the hell is Arnold?????

    Well I think the Op-Ed makes it clear…he’s going to be running for the Senate. He’ll need the wingnuts to beat Boxer. Now, I’ll admit, I think he’s done a decent job as Governor. I don’t agree with him on a lot of issues, but he’s been a smart balance against the idiots in the state legislature. While I will for sure vote for Boxer, if he ran against Feinstein, he’d probably get my vote. She’s been absolutely horrible.

    In fact I’d vote for McCain, Bush or Rove before I vote for her again.

  34. 34.

    MobiusKlein

    October 25, 2008 at 1:17 am

    @ninerdave: Feinstein should go. in 2006, she couldn’t commit to voting against the "it’s OK to torture a little" act – had to think about it before making a stand. The bill passed on my kids’ 5th birthday, for fucks sake.

    Ditch her big time.

    Arnold, we’ll have a different argument about later…

  35. 35.

    Scribble

    October 25, 2008 at 1:26 am

    @ninerdave

    Note to the world outside of CA, while we have San Francisco and LA, we also have a bunch of dumb rednecks in between.

    Oi! Be a little more fair! Some parts of the great In-Between are getting better.
    I live out in the most atrociously redneck bit of the state (outside of the Klan towns anyway [and yes, they do still exist out here, mostly in the mountains]) and I’m seeing a few more NO signs than I would have expected outside of our version of the Castro district.
    Also, as gbear said, we DO have relatives who aren’t straight (a cousin, in my case) who would/could be hurt by this. Even if I weren’t already planning to vote no on principle, I’d vote NO on this damn thing for her sake.

    @Unrepentent Dennis – SGMM, that would apply most to the interior of the state where the conservatives, among other things, live. It’s rural out here, and the bits that aren’t are filled with suburbanites fresh off the farm.

  36. 36.

    ninerdave

    October 25, 2008 at 1:40 am

    @Scribble:

    Oi! Be a little more fair! Some parts of the great In-Between are getting better.
    I live out in the most atrociously redneck bit of the state

    In my defense, I said "a bunch", implying not all y’all ;)

  37. 37.

    joe the gay plumber

    October 25, 2008 at 1:41 am

    joe the plumber is gay porno.

    http://nifty.nisusnet.com/nifty/gay/adult-friends/joe-the-plumber

  38. 38.

    Zuzu's Petals

    October 25, 2008 at 1:42 am

    @ninerdave:

    These ads look pretty good to me. I don’t know how many are running on TV, though.

  39. 39.

    ninerdave

    October 25, 2008 at 1:45 am

    @MobiusKlein:

    Ditch her big time.

    Yup. Agreed. I’m hoping that a true Dem runs against her. However, I’ll vote for any serious contender that runs against her. I don’t care their politics, affiliation, whatever. Dobson? Sure, you’ve got my vote. Doesn’t matter. Whoever that person is will be one out of 100 and can’t be worse than Feinstein. Six years later we can put in a true progressive. The six year lag is IMHO worth it.

    I hear rumblings that she might not run next term, I can only hope so.

  40. 40.

    Neil H

    October 25, 2008 at 1:46 am

    I know some people who plan to vote for prop 8. The thing that swayed them was the argument that even if 8 passes, same-sex couples will still have precisely the same rights as opposite-sex couples, except that it’ll be called "domestic partnership" instead of marriage.

    Ask them if they’d be willing to forego calling their own dedicated, opposite-sex relationship a "marriage" if they still got the same government benefits and responsibilities under the name "domestic partnership". If they say no, ask them why they think "domestic partnerships" are good enough for gay people but not good enough for straight people.

    If they say yes (which happens fairly often when you’re asking people who aren’t married), sorry, can’t help.

  41. 41.

    Jeff

    October 25, 2008 at 1:47 am

    We figured Obama has enough and donated to the no’s last night. What pisses me off, besides the yes signs with blatant lies, is that it took until October for some of the big money folks to put their money where their mouths are. I hope better late, than never.

  42. 42.

    Darkrose

    October 25, 2008 at 1:52 am

    Just wanted to add my thanks to all of you who donated. The support from the lefty blogosphere has been really awesome.

  43. 43.

    ninerdave

    October 25, 2008 at 1:53 am

    @Zuzu’s Petals:

    These ads look pretty good to me. I don’t know how many are running on TV, though.

    Now THAT’s an ad that works!!! Throws the bullshit back into their face. I have not seen that ad on TV though. Was the exact same argument I heard on Ronn Owens show on KGO when he had pro and con 8 people on. The Pro people talked about how "damaging" this would be to kids, the con said bullshit it has nothing to do with kids and is all about rights. The Pro people ended up looking like the bigots they are.

  44. 44.

    Darkrose

    October 25, 2008 at 1:53 am

    Also…this may be a crazy idea, but there seem to be a lot of BJers in Northern and Central CA, and I’m wondering if there’s any interest in doing a meetup kind of thing? Or are we too much a bunch of antisocial geeks for that?

  45. 45.

    ninerdave

    October 25, 2008 at 2:07 am

    @Darkrose:

    Also…this may be a crazy idea, but there seem to be a lot of BJers in Northern and Central CA, and I’m wondering if there’s any interest in doing a meetup kind of thing? Or are we too much a bunch of antisocial geeks for that?

    I’d be up for it. I also personally know another person who posts here. I might be able to talk him into it.

  46. 46.

    Jeff

    October 25, 2008 at 2:12 am

    @ninerdave: Problem is most people just see the signs on the side of the road and say, "Oh yeah, I’m for parental rights and religious freedom, so I’ll vote yes."

    What gets me is my religious "leaders" in the Conservative Jewish movement have said Rabbis can perform gay marriages. So they are actually impinging on my faith’s religious freedom by saying Conservative Rabbis should not be able to perform legal marriages in the state of California.

  47. 47.

    ThymeZoneThePlumber

    October 25, 2008 at 2:22 am

    Ask them if they’d be willing to forego calling their own dedicated, opposite-sex relationship a "marriage" if they still got the same government benefits and responsibilities under the name "domestic partnership".

    The whole thing is symbolic. You could call it "hixinilly" and it would be the same thing. That’s the whole point, the m-word is just a word. The rights don’t belong to it, or shouldn’t. The rights should belong to the people to employ as they see fit. But churches and societies have attached a totally false set of assumptions around the m-word that mean nothing and have no real value. The fact is that the law improperly and in a dysfunctional fashion binds those things to the word.

    The problem is that LGBT doesn’t get this. They want it to be about rights, and then insist on the word. The word comes with its defenders, and by making this stupid mistake, you invite those defenders to oppose you, which gains them, and you, nothing but a fight.

    It’s totally stupid, and avoidable. But both sides seem happy with the endless fighting and posturing over it, and it serves all their purposes, so you are stuck with the way it is.

    It’s not unlike the abortion "fight." The fight serves purposes, otherwise, it would be possible to seek agreement and move on. When LGBT finds out that agreeing works better than fighting, they can have their rights without much problem. Even the real gay-o-phobes don’t really care much about the rights themselves. They just like to rig the fight to let them use it as a political tool, and the other side plays along. Totally stupid.

    Imagine if you will a bunch of people sat down and said, we want and need these rights. Now, what is the ONE THING WE CAN CALL THIS to make sure that we get the most resistance? Yeah, that’s how stupid it is.

  48. 48.

    Jeff

    October 25, 2008 at 2:28 am

    That whole separate but equal line did not fly in the 50s, so why should it now. You may say it is just a word, but laws are made up of words. There will always be some asshat judge or politician who will say they are different if you use a different name and that could have consequences.

  49. 49.

    ThymeZoneThePlumber

    October 25, 2008 at 2:33 am

    You may say it is just a word, but laws are made up of words.

    Yeah, I don’t know what that means, and I don’t think you do either. Laws are words? Of course. So are cereal box advertisements.

    What is made of words is useless fights.

    If LGBT came to the rest of the population and said, can we please have these rights? Call it anything you want … I think the answer would be, sure, whatever, live and let live.

    But then LGBT says, but we want the WORD. We want it called marriage. Population says, not so fast, now we have a fight.

    If you think choosing the fights over the rights is really worth having the precious word, then you have staked your claim on the ownership of that word, and you are in for a long and ugly struggle over nothing of value. And for doing that, you lose my support. I claim to be the most socially liberal person on this blog, and with that attitude you get no help from me. Yes, I’d vote NO on the thing in CA, and I will vote NO on a DOMA initiative here in ten days. But that’s it. Beyond that, don’t ask me to support the fight. The fight is ridiculous.

    Blogs are for long fights over words. Long may they wave. But laws should be about what’s important. The ownership of the m-word is not really important. It means shit when the rights are what really matters. Take the rights, end the fights. Or, not, I don’t care.

  50. 50.

    Jeff W

    October 25, 2008 at 2:34 am

    With regard to the false point that California domestic partnerships are substantially "the same" as marriages: California domestic partnerships are not recognized as marriages by the state of New York but California marriages—all of them—are recognized by New York as marriages. Proposition 8 undeniably takes away the rights of those California same-sex couples who, if married, would have their marriages recognized in other jurisdictions, whether they are vacationing or changing residence.

    Laertes (#10), ask your friends why it’s OK that California opposite-sex married couples can visit New York State and not give a moment’s thought as to whether, if one spouse falls ill, the other spouse may visit in the emergency room, but, if Proposition 8 passes, same-sex domestic partners might face anxiety and heartache in a hospital under a similar scenario?

    The nine differences referred to in the Voter Guide may be found in the California Supreme Court decision (at footnote 24 of the decision here [PDF]) saying that California statutes limiting marriage to opposite-sex couples are unconstitutional. Many of those differences, while real, are fairly technical. I think the idea that marriage, unlike domestic partnership, affords a portable packet of rights that is instantly recognized in other jurisdictions, such as the State of New York (New Mexico, Canada, etc.), is much easier to grasp.

  51. 51.

    ThymeZoneThePlumber

    October 25, 2008 at 2:36 am

    There will always be some asshat judge or politician

    Yes, but when you stop the tug of war over the m-word, those politicians lose their power to demagogue this. That’s the whole point.

  52. 52.

    ThymeZoneThePlumber

    October 25, 2008 at 2:39 am

    Argghh. Why would anyone put themselves in the position of letting politicans decide who can visit you in an ER?

    ER rights to visit should belong to whoever the patient says can visit. Period.

    Why wrangle over "marriage" to settle an issue like that?

    If I want someone to be my proxy for health decisions if I am incapacitated, and visit in the ER, I should be able to declare that and have it printed on my driver’s license and no demagogue or politician should have any say about it.

    Isn’t that what we really want? Or do we want to argue over what "marriage" means? What’s the real important issue here?

  53. 53.

    Jeff

    October 25, 2008 at 2:44 am

    Yes that is the real issue. But there are many of those real issues. Should we argue each one by one as some part of the population is affected or do we get it over with in one fell swoop.

  54. 54.

    Comrade Nikolita

    October 25, 2008 at 3:08 am

    @bootlegger:

    Very well put. I couldn’t have said it better. :) Thank you for your comment.

    I have family in CA and am considering asking my mom (who lives in BC, Canada like me) if they’re going to vote, and if so, which way.

    Quick question – can people outside of CA (and the US) donate?

    @ThymeZoneThePlumber:

    If there wasn’t such a stigma associated to words like "civil union" and "domestic partnership", I’d agree with you. But while I agree the fight may seem arduous and pointless at times, I still think LBGT people deserve to be able to use the word "marriage" like any heterosexual couple.

    Imagine if heterosexuality wasn’t the norm, and "marriage" was the word heterosexual couples had to settle for. Would they not be upset too?

    It should just be "marriage" for everyone, gay or straight. Sexual orientation shouldn’t make a difference.

  55. 55.

    bago

    October 25, 2008 at 4:16 am

    A co-worker brought up the Apple donation today. I just held up my iphone and said "Of course they did". Nuff said.

  56. 56.

    Zuzu's Petals

    October 25, 2008 at 4:33 am

    @Comrade Nikolita:

    People outside the state can certainly donate. I assume rules against non- US citizens donating also apply here.

  57. 57.

    Zuzu's Petals

    October 25, 2008 at 4:36 am

    @ninerdave:

    Me too.

  58. 58.

    Comrade Grand Panjandrum

    October 25, 2008 at 4:43 am

    The only limitation government should be allowed to place on marriage is the age at which one is able to legally consent to such an arrangement. Period. Isn’t this what the Right used to call social engineering? Good grief, with all the hate and violence in the world I can find no fault or indecency in people loving one another and wanting to make the legal commitment that marriage offers.

    Civil Union laws is Jim Crow for gay people and it is a disgrace. Everyone should be allowed to pick a spouse and have the government recognize that spouse in exactly the same way as all of those partnerships are recognized.

    I hope CA does the right thing.

  59. 59.

    Unrepentent Dennis - SGMM

    October 25, 2008 at 6:36 am

    @Unrepentent Dennis – SGMM, that would apply most to the interior of the state where the conservatives, among other things, live.

    Try the San Gabriel Valley. It’s full of little bedroom communities where the McCain/Palin signs and the Yes on 8 signs flourish. I live in a snug, smug, little bedroom community at the end of the SGV, twenty-nine miles East of the LA city limit. The people who live here in the well-kept houses along the tree-lined streets are polite, friendly, churchgoing (There are six churches within a four block radius of where I sit.) and 90% Republican.
    You’re correct in observing that the interior of the state is (sometimes scarily) conservative but, there are plenty of places here that are conservative and they’re closer to the beach than they are to the farm. They’re just more subtle about it.

  60. 60.

    Laertes

    October 25, 2008 at 10:24 am

    With regard to the false point that California domestic partnerships are substantially "the same" as marriages: California domestic partnerships are not recognized as marriages by the state of New York but California marriages—all of them—are recognized by New York as marriages.

    Thanks, Jeff. That’s very useful. I bet I’ll be able to make at least one no-on-8 vote out of that.

  61. 61.

    ThymeZoneThePlumber

    October 25, 2008 at 10:25 am

    I

    f there wasn’t such a stigma associated to words like "civil union" and "domestic partnership

    Im sorry, I don’t understand that position. Where is the stigma?

    First, I’m hopelessly straight, and because I was pretty when I was young, I was the target of frequent and often rather pushy homosexual advances from age ten to about age thirty. And these scared the hell out of me and pissed me off. It’s my opinion that homophobia is learned and not genetic. I learned it, and so I was able to unlearn it.

    Result? Today I am about as liberal a social liberal as you will find, totally in favor of all rights, marriages and any other damned thing that LGBTs want. I just reached a point where I said, you know, I don’t have enough understanding of human sexuality to judge other people’s understanding of it, and it’s none of my business. Treat everyone the same, stop the bigotry.

    Okay? Second, I don’t find any stigma at all attached to those terms. If there is any, it is in the heads of the bigots and the haters … and who gives a fig about them? Let them have their bigotry and hatred, you can’t change them and they aren’t going away.

    So, I conclude that the win game here is to just go around them. They have the political advantage right now, so let them have it. Take the rights, end the fights. The m-word might be doable in future, but it’s a small thing.

    Thoughts?

  62. 62.

    Polish the Guillotines

    October 25, 2008 at 11:49 am

    @ninerdave:

    I’d be up for it. I also personally know another person who posts here. I might be able to talk him into it.

    If you’re talking about me, I’d be interested.

    If you’re not, then eff u.

    Also, on topic, I managed to pony up some $$ to No on 8 when they were doing matching funds thing. Frankly, I’m pissed beyond belief that the LDS church in Utah is trying to undermine the constitution of MY state. Damn it, that just infuriates me.

  63. 63.

    Comrade Nikolita

    October 25, 2008 at 1:05 pm

    @Zuzu’s Petals:

    Awesome, thank you very much. :)

  64. 64.

    Marshall

    October 25, 2008 at 1:09 pm

    @ThymeZoneThePlumber:

    There is a strong symbolic component to marriage. It makes a public statement about your commitment to your partner. I am not religious, but the symbolic aspects of my marriage are very important to me. A civil union just doesn’t carry the same weight in the eyes of society.

    I’m straight, but my mother-in-law is gay. She has been in a committed relationship for over 22 years. Several years ago she and her partner moved to Canada. One of the reasons was the ability to get married there. They wanted that symbolic affirmation of their mutual commitment.

    We are symbol-using creatures. It’s deep in our nature. When you deny the LGBT community access to one of our most important symbols, it does send an important message. It says, "You are different. Your committed relationships are not the same as ours. They are not quite on the same level." Is that the message we want to send?

  65. 65.

    qi4all

    October 25, 2008 at 1:15 pm

    There is also an amendment 2 on the ballot here in FL to constitutionally define marriage as between a man and a woman only. Thankfully, after the fiasco of the pigs amendment the good citizens of FL voted to require 60% voter approval to pass constitutional amendments so it is likely to go down in flames for the piece of crap that it is.

Comments are closed.

Trackbacks

  1. Update Prop 8 Commercials « Indistinct Union says:
    October 25, 2008 at 11:42 am

    […] Prop 8 side the other day, credit where credit is due–these two are very good ads.  Here and here via Michael D. at […]

Primary Sidebar

On The Road - Albatrossity - Serengeti Day 2, Round 3 9
Image by Albatrossity (6/12/25)

PA Supreme Court At Risk

We did it!

We raised the 25,000 for The Civics Center, and with the external matches, that gives them $60,000 for this Spring effort!

You guys rock!

Recent Comments

  • Odie Hugh Manatee on Well, This is Fucking Horrifying (Jun 13, 2025 @ 3:04am)
  • Bruce K in ATH-GR on Well, This is Fucking Horrifying (Jun 13, 2025 @ 2:59am)
  • prostratedragon on Well, This is Fucking Horrifying (Jun 13, 2025 @ 2:24am)
  • No One of Consequence on Well, This is Fucking Horrifying (Jun 13, 2025 @ 2:20am)
  • columbusqueen on Thursday Night Open Thread (Jun 13, 2025 @ 2:00am)

Balloon Juice Posts

View by Topic
View by Author
View by Month & Year
View by Past Author

Featuring

Medium Cool
Artists in Our Midst
Authors in Our Midst
War in Ukraine
Donate to Razom for Ukraine

🎈Keep Balloon Juice Ad Free

Become a Balloon Juice Patreon
Donate with Venmo, Zelle or PayPal

Calling All Jackals

Site Feedback
Nominate a Rotating Tag
Submit Photos to On the Road
Balloon Juice Anniversary (All Links)
Balloon Juice Anniversary (All Posts)
Fix Nyms with Apostrophes

Social Media

Balloon Juice
WaterGirl
TaMara
John Cole
DougJ (aka NYT Pitchbot)
Betty Cracker
Tom Levenson
David Anderson
Major Major Major Major
DougJ NYT Pitchbot
mistermix

Keeping Track

Legal Challenges (Lawfare)
Republicans Fleeing Town Halls (TPM)
21 Letters (to Borrow or Steal)
Search Donations from a Brand

Site Footer

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

  • Facebook
  • RSS
  • Twitter
  • YouTube
  • Comment Policy
  • Our Authors
  • Blogroll
  • Our Artists
  • Privacy Policy

Copyright © 2025 Dev Balloon Juice · All Rights Reserved · Powered by BizBudding Inc

Share this ArticleLike this article? Email it to a friend!

Email sent!