I have to admit that I have not been paying much attention to the upcoming election. The whole thing sickens me a bit, and I am turned off by the political melodrama, especially now that the economy appears to be tanking. Blech.
While I don't yet know if I will throw in my vote for presidential candidate A or B -- I am hard pressed to think it will matter very much either way -- I was recently reminded that my vote has the power to impact state politics more significantly.
In 2000, Proposition 22 was passed by 61% of voters. While California's constitution had been changed in 1977 to define marriage in California as a union between a man and a woman, Prop 22 went further and denied that same-sex marriages, performed legally in other jurisdictions, be held valid in California. Man. Woman. Period.
Maybe my view of the state is clouded by too many years living in San Francisco, but it is hard for me to believe that 61% of California's residents would agree that same-sex partners should be denied the rights of their legal commitment to one another. It seems clear that this proposition's passage was based largely on a certain demographic mobilizing and voting.
Over the last eight years, gay marriage has been embroiled in much political controversy. There have been lawsuits and appeals and legal and illegal marriages in San Francisco and elsewhere. Currently, because of an appeal to the State Supreme Court this year, gay marriage is legal in California. Proposition 8 aims to change the constitution to make it illegal again.
Proposition 8 will get me to the voting booth on November 4th. Here's my attempt at mobilizing a different group of voters than the ones that had their way in 2000. The economy may be scary. Gas prices may be too high, and home prices too low, but I am doubtful that any candidate chosen this November will change that. There is, however, a chance for us to make a difference locally. There's chance for us to minimize manipulation of our state's constitution. There's a chance for us to earn our reputation as "free-thinking," "liberty-minded" Californians. Why the hell should someone's sex organs determine whether he or she should be allowed to enter into a legal contract with another person? Why are some people so concerned with what other people do in their bedrooms and with whom they choose to build a family? Isn't it those same people who are running around crying about sex out of wedlock and unwed mothers? Wouldn't they rather children be raised inside a loving, two parent home? What's the big deal about "slot A or tab B"? I believe in equal rights, and I will vote accordingly.
