At the risk of using the word rational in the same sentence as Christianist, the San Francisco Chronicle is reporting that the Christianist organizations backing the passage of Proposition 8 are acting in an unexpectedly rational manner and dropping the challenge to Attorney General Jerry Brown's revised ballot summary of Proposition 8. As I noted in previous posts, the Christianists were in a snit (to put it mildly) because the revised summary clearly shows the true impact of Proposition 8 and - God forbid - makes it crystal clear that the proposed amendment would deprive gay couples of what is now a civil legal right. These anti-gay bigots always prefer to use vague and/or euphemistic language that makes it easier to hide their bigotry and at the same time falsely market the proposed amendment to the uninformed and unwary. Hence their dismay over an accurate description of the initiative's impact if passed. Obviously, they fear a clear description of the consequences decreases the chances of Proposition 8 being approved. Here are some highlights from the SF Chronicle:*
13:15 PDT SAN FRANCISCO -- The state's official description of Proposition 8 on the November ballot will remain as is, a statement that the measure would eliminate same-sex couples' right to marry in California. Sponsors of the measure argued that the title and summary drafted by Attorney General Jerry Brown were argumentative and designed to encourage voters to oppose Prop. 8. But after two defeats in court last week, the Yes on 8 campaign said today it would not appeal to the state Supreme Court.
*
But after the state's high court ruled in May that gay and lesbian couples have the right to marry under the state Constitution, the attorney general changed the title, saying Prop. 8 would now eliminate rights that the court had established. The new title states the measure "eliminates (the) right of same-sex couples to marry."
*
[A] Sacramento Superior Court judge ruled Friday that Brown's reference to an elimination of rights was an accurate description of the purpose and effect of Prop. 8, and a state appeals court in Sacramento turned down an emergency appeal by the Yes on 8 campaign late Friday. Today is the deadline for court action on the wording of ballot summaries and arguments in the voter pamphlet, which are due at the state printer's office after the close of business this afternoon.
2 comments:
Considering that ProtectMarriage.com has decided NOT to appeal the ballot language, what chance do you really see for Prop 8 to pass? I just don't see a majority of Californians voting YES on a proposition titled ELIMINATES RIGHT OF SAME-SEX COUPLES TO MARRY.
Once the churches realize that Prop 8 is an almost guaranteed loser, are they going to do the right thing and let their members know?
If not, what happens after Prop 8 loses 40-60 (or worse), and then the members find out that the churches were privy all along to internal polling that predicted a crushing defeat? Do the members get their money back?
Or do they get stuck paying for ads that were run by a campaign that knew it was going to lose but ran them anyway!
Candidly, I suspect that these groups will continue to shake down the sheeple for as much money as possible and probably pocket large portions of it. Much of their agenda is one of power and money. Hysterically yelling about the threat of "The Gay Agenda" has been a huge money machine for these folks, and money is their first true love.
Post a Comment