(Green showns towns supporting discrimination)Christianists and parasites like Maggie Gallagher who have been enriching themselves by stoking homophobia to defeat civil marriage equality have in the past been quick to trumpet that wherever gay marriage has been put on the ballot, voters have voted against it. Until now, that is. With the results from New Hampshire conclusively demonstrating that a majority of voters refused to even put same sex marriage up for a vote in a general election, the Christianists storyline has hit a serious pothole. Moreover, Gallagher apparently doesn't have an explanation for why her style of anti-gay bigotry did not prevail in New Hampshire. According to her, the people are always right, so this result is obviously a huge bitch slap to her cause. Worse yet from her perspective, it may threaten her future money making capabilities by pushing discrimination against other citizens. The good news is that now, maybe Maggie can spend more time with her Hindu husband that she always keeps invisible since his existence would lead to questions about her uber-Christian credentials. Box Turtle Bulletin has details on what I am sure was an unexpected loss. Here are highlights:
*
NOM was hoping that folks who were moderate or even supportive of marriage would agree that a “people’s vote” was needed. And once it was on the ballot, they would dump tens of millions of dollars (from undisclosed sources) to fund a campaign of bald-faced lies and seek to enshrine the doctrines of some religious organizations into civil law.
*
To put pressure on the legislature and create an impression of public support, anti-gay activists used a political mechanism that is peculiar to New England states: the town meeting, a gathering of the residents to determine town business. They sought to have the towns demand of the state that the residents be allowed to vote on marriage equality.
*
The best scenario for anti-gay activists would be for each town to endorse the “let us vote” effort by 2/3 of the residents. This could allow NOM to spin the results as evidence that a constitutional amendment would pass and that residents demand their rights. But success would be a majority of voters – or a majority of towns – which would allow Maggie and Brian to claim that they speak for “the people”.
*
Dean Barker at Blue Hampshire has compiled the votes to date, and here is what he found:
*
Traditional meetings:
*
28 towns supported the anti-gay effort
61 towns did not provide enough signatures
31 towns tabled the bill, refusing to even vote on it
33 towns voted “no” on the measure
1 town flipped the effort and voted to commend the state for supporting equality
*
SB2 Meetings:
*
31 towns supported the anti-gay effort
10 towns did not provide enough signatures
14 towns amended the language in the deliberative session, killing the petition
1 town flipped the effort but failed to vote to commend the state for supporting equality
*
There are 11 towns yet to decide. But of the 210 towns which could have supported the efforts of the anti-gay activists, only 59 chose to do so. Few of those were by a 2/3 vote. . . . And for some reason, Maggie’s chortling has turned to silence.
*
NOM was hoping that folks who were moderate or even supportive of marriage would agree that a “people’s vote” was needed. And once it was on the ballot, they would dump tens of millions of dollars (from undisclosed sources) to fund a campaign of bald-faced lies and seek to enshrine the doctrines of some religious organizations into civil law.
*
To put pressure on the legislature and create an impression of public support, anti-gay activists used a political mechanism that is peculiar to New England states: the town meeting, a gathering of the residents to determine town business. They sought to have the towns demand of the state that the residents be allowed to vote on marriage equality.
*
The best scenario for anti-gay activists would be for each town to endorse the “let us vote” effort by 2/3 of the residents. This could allow NOM to spin the results as evidence that a constitutional amendment would pass and that residents demand their rights. But success would be a majority of voters – or a majority of towns – which would allow Maggie and Brian to claim that they speak for “the people”.
*
Dean Barker at Blue Hampshire has compiled the votes to date, and here is what he found:
*
Traditional meetings:
*
28 towns supported the anti-gay effort
61 towns did not provide enough signatures
31 towns tabled the bill, refusing to even vote on it
33 towns voted “no” on the measure
1 town flipped the effort and voted to commend the state for supporting equality
*
SB2 Meetings:
*
31 towns supported the anti-gay effort
10 towns did not provide enough signatures
14 towns amended the language in the deliberative session, killing the petition
1 town flipped the effort but failed to vote to commend the state for supporting equality
*
There are 11 towns yet to decide. But of the 210 towns which could have supported the efforts of the anti-gay activists, only 59 chose to do so. Few of those were by a 2/3 vote. . . . And for some reason, Maggie’s chortling has turned to silence.
*
Needless to say, I am most pleased to see Maggie and her allies left looking like jackasses.
No comments:
Post a Comment