How big an impact will anti-gay bigotry have on the election?

[fujiyama]

I was wondering which states have anti gay marriage referendums and initiatives? I heard something about Oregon being one of them.

Will these have an impact on the election? Does this kind of thing rile up right wingers to vote (both for the proposals and Bush)? Will the left and those in the center be more motivated to fight this kind of bigotry?

Overall, how will these referendums and initiatives have an impact on turn out?

Hopefully, these proposals will go down in defeat as will Bush.

[bluestateguy]

1. Gays will vote 90% for Kerry

Al Gore won 70% in 2000.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

2. Arkansas has a marriage amendment on the ballot

But around here, I don't think there's a connection between that and Kerry, really. Haven't seen any ads trying to make the connection, either. What's really got folks mad here is the school reform issue, which most blame Huckabee (R), our governor, for messing up. If Kerry keeps pushing the soldiers/veteran's issues and the health care/Medicare issues, he'll do fine.

[DaveSZ]

3. Kerry can't openly support gay marriage or he will lose sadly

I don't know that Kerry even believes in gay marriage, but gay and lesbian Americans need to understand though that it's ultimately the courts that will work these issues out.

Kerry's judicial appointees will be much more fair than Bush's in this regard, because they will probably be more like SC Justice Souter (who refused to stop gay marriages in Mass).

Bush says his favorite justice (the type he would appoint to the US SC) is Scalia, and before the Lawrence vs. Texas decision, Scalia met with an anti-gay group.

That shows what Bush really thinks of gay people.



http://www.sodomylaws.org/lawrence/lwnews098.htm


Scalia’s Fitness Questioned after Ties to Anti-Gay Group Revealed
365Gay.com, March 9, 2004

By Doreen Brandt, 365Gay.com Newscenter, Washington Bureau

Washington, D.C.—Details are emerging about a controversial speech delivered by Justice Antonin Scalia to an anti-gay lobby group while the Supreme Court was deliberating in the Texas sodomy case that calls into question his impartiality on the bench.

The speech was delivered to the Urban Family Council in Philadelphia, a group that while not a party in the sodomy case was fighting that city’s ordinance allowing benefits for the partners of gay and lesbian municipal workers.

Details of the $150 a plate dinner were made public today by the Los Angeles Times.

William Devlin, who founded the council, is lead plaintiff in the Philadelphia lawsuit, which is pending before the Pennsylvania Supreme Court. Both sides say the case has a good chance of reaching Scalia’s court.

-more

[DaveSZ]

4. Kerry: 100% rating from the Human Rights Campaign

A Record of Working on Behalf of Gay and Lesbian Americans

With a 100% rating from the Human Rights Campaign since 1995, John Kerry is a powerful voice in the ongoing fight for civil rights for gay and lesbian Americans.


http://www.johnkerry.com/issues/glbt/?

[cosmicdot]

5. just enough impact in just the right places

... taken together with *'s other I'm-a-divider-not-a-uniter agenda + the Media's game in creating neck-and-neck drama for ratings (while maintaining a pro-GOP bias) ... resulting in too-close-to-call situations; ergo, enabling Diebold and other Black Box Voting's job easier to affect the results/outcome ...

the anti-Gay bigotry crosses most demographics ... the goal is to shave a percentage here and there from traditionally Democratic constituencies ...

despite the cultural non-issue divide the * team is creating to blur genuine domestic concerns (not to mention Iraq) ... the BBV 'problems' which surfaced in 2002 and this year foretell that issues may be second fiddle to election day voting glitches ... so widespread that a winner in many states may not be determined ('we don't know who won') ... even energy blackouts wouldn't surprise me (Ohio) ... "issues" may become meaningless in such situations, but helpful in creating the crises ...

one of the fear arguments in 2000, was that we didn't have time for Florida to re-vote ... we didn't have time to recount the votes ... we had to declare a winner before the electoral college met, etc. ... as far as democracy is concerned, we should have all the time in the world ...

if the election goes without a glitch - I'll be grateful, but surprised

a specific referendum or initiative doesn't necessarily need to be on a ballot ... the Falwells and Robertsons will be doing their part to make the election itself a referendum ...

we need close to a landslide to demonstrate the minority these people really are -- it would be nice to see such a vote taking down rightwing Senators and congress members in the wake ...

[Cocoa]

6. it will be big

a number of Bush's turnout will be people that are going to the polls just to express their hatred of "homos."

I'm expecting Bush to make this an issue, but hiding behind some front organization. Our country has progressed too far for him to do it openly.

[TexasSissy]

7. Well, that's a bigoted question in and of itself,isn't it?

People who are against gay marriage don't consider themselves bigots, and neither do I or a lot of others. They are, in fact, the majority of American citizens.

This is an issue about which reasonable people can differ in opinions. It doesn't make one side or the other necessarily bigots (although bigots may be on one or the other of the sides).

Having said the above, I think Republicans are going to push this issue hard. And they'll make some headway with it. I don't know how important it is, though, compared with Iraq, national security,and the economy.

[fujiyama]

9. What I asked wasn't bigoted

You seem to be ignoring the GOP tactic of playing on people's fears of minorities and gays. They have had a history of doing that.

The battle over gay marriage is once again part of this. Now I agree that opposing gay marriage doesn't automatically make one a bigot (John Kerry opposes gay marriage), however opposing civil unions of any sorts IS bigoted...and that's what many of these referendums and initiatives are trying to do -- ban any sort of union between gays and lesbians.

[LuminousX]

8. I think people are still trying to figure out

how two men or two women getting married actually negatively affects all other marriages that have or will occur.

I know I'm still trying to puzzle through it. All it takes is one or two commercials depicting a gay couple, one in the hospital, and the other denied visitation because s/he isn't family. Or another commercial regarding an elderly gay couple where one has passed on and the other is struggling with the complicated issues of the aftermath that are even more complicated because the fifty+ year union couldn't be certified by the state.

In fact a whole series of commercials of interviews with gay couples who have been together for 15+ years would be fascinating. Not that any couple who has been together that long need to be married, but one of the misconceptions in society at large is gay couples aren't stable.
Besides, seeing 50% of all marriages end in divorce, I think divorce lawyers would be thrilled at adding more potential clients.

[Lefty Pragmatist]

10. Not much effect

It won't change any votes. Those who would turn out and vote *solely* on the one issue are the kooks the GOP can depend upon carrying 99%-1% in every election. Those for whom it is just another of many issues won't, by definition, be turned just by it -- and the election will be decided by that mix of other issues.

I don't understand opposition to gay "marriage," however. If it's a code word for civil union then yes that smells like bigotry -- we have a right to equal protection under the law, and sexual orientation seems like about as "suspect" a category as the Supreme Court could ask for. That;s what Scalia meant when he said that if current SCOTUS doctrine holds there is no legal justification for banning gay civil unions. He was saying it to get the right's ire up but, in fact, he's absolutely right (with consequences that will hopefully come to pass).

If it's a matter of sacramental marriage then, frankly, other that your own congregation it's none of your business what other religious groups proscribe or allow. It is clearly not a matter for government regulation or even debate.

[GOPBasher]

11. Anti-gay bigot all vote anyway.

It's not going to get any more fundie voters to the polls, because they're all there already.

[Kipepeo]

12. Republicans are trying to delay votes on their

Gay Marriage Bans until November instead of earlier, in order to bring out the homophobes for Dubya. Missouri was one of these states, for example...although a court there recently ruled that they have to put it on the ballot in August instead of holding it until November:

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2004/06/04/missouri_sets_august_vote_for_gay_marriage_measure/

Louisiana is another one where the Repubs want to wait until November to put it onthe ballot: http://www.datalounge.com/datalounge/news/record.html?record=21364

edited to add:

My overall opinion is that these hate amendments will do very little in the end to help Bush, no matter when they happen, because Republicans are underestimating how many people he is *losing* because of his support for a Gay Marriage Ban.