Posted by
Playful Walrus on Tuesday, November 04, 2008 5:51:14 PM
From Jessica Garrison's latest article on Prop 8 comes this:
Many argued, as former President Bill Clinton did in a taped call to millions of registered voters in the days before the election, that the measure was discriminatory because it would strip rights from gay couples and treat them differently from heterosexual couples.
"If I know one thing about California, I know that is not what you're about. That is not what America is about. Please vote "no" on 8. It's unfair and it's wrong," Clinton said.
If that is an accurate description, I would say Clinton is lying. Big surprise. But that’s okay, because this is "about sex", at least in their view, and that makes it okay to lie. Same-sex couples who are domestic partners are treated as spouses by the state.
But it is interesting that the man who signed the federal Defense of Marriage Act into law is doing this. What changed? Well, if there is anyone I don’t want to listen to when it comes to marriage, it is Bill Clinton.
Karin Klein mocks the genuine outrage that the Yes on 8 campaigners (and a lot of other people who are decent) have for the last-minute dishonest ad that depicts Mormon missionaries performing a home invasion at a lesbian’s couple’s home.
The ad, which debuted on YouTube and is going out on television today, is certainly the most attention-getting TV spot to criticize the proposition. Most of the ads against Proposition 8 have been extraordinarily tame, unlike the fear-mongering rumors spread by the Yes side.
Not that any of the folks at the Los Angeles Times - where a man who writes for the sports pages was recently given a platform to write about "becoming a woman", only to return to work back with his original masculine name after a short amount of time of "being a woman" – have a bias on this issue. (And, of course, everyone has to call the guy whatever he wants, or face sexual harassment and discrimination charges.)
Having viewed the ad, I can't see what the big deal is.
I wouldn’t either, if I didn’t know the difference between something public and that requires the consent of someone else - like state-issued marriage licenses - and private behavior that does not impose on anyone else. Opposing a court decision about state-issued licenses is in no way similar to invading someone's home or private life.
There is a reason the marriage neutering side waited until the last minute to release this ad. It would be exposed as a hateful, lying piece of propaganda if there was any more time for it to be exposed more widely. The ad is ridiculous. Prop 8 won’t give anyone, let alone the LDS church, the ability to prevent people from living together, committing to each other, making vows, exchanging and keeping rings, or considering themselves married.
The Yes on 8 side could put out a more truthful ad if they had one depicting a cross-dressing marriage neutering activist locking arms with a power-hungry judge and toppling over a voting booth with a Prop 22 supporter inside, taking away the voting rights of others. Voting is a long-established right. Getting a state-issued license for anything isn’t.
VOTE YES ON PROPOSITION 8. Don't let these hateful people who devalue masculinity and femininity, mothers and fathers, and bash religious people discourage your vote!