Richard de Give wrote:
> I think that's what bothered me most about the whole Yes-on-8 thing. 
> Here they are, supposedly motiviated by love of God, yet who named them 
> God? And the way truth was stretched in the radio ads? (Can't comment on 
> TV, I watch as little non-DVR'ed local TV as possible, and I've been 
> working a lot of night hours since the writer quit). But wrap it in 
> religion and it's ok ...

Yes, well ...

I'm not shocked that the California Marriage ban passed.

30 states have added defense of marriage amendments to their constitutions.

And, "Marriage" is defined as the union of one man and one woman in at 
least 42 states.

It's unlikely to be settled in any legally meaningful way until it's 
decided by the Supreme Court.

I don't think it's as big and important as most people working on 
campaigns think it is. (Yes, I witnessed it lose as an issue in South 
Dakota ... 51.82-48.18%)

My own experience in gay and/or AIDS/HIV activism over the last 18 years 
has been that it is impossible to make anyone else become as emotionally 
involved in GLBT issues as you yourself are. Most heterosexuals choose 
not to be involved, and most GLBT also choose not to either.

===
http://out.com/detail.asp?id=24005
Manhunt’s annual income from memberships alone is roughly the same as 
the total amount of individual contributions to this country’s two 
biggest gay political groups, the Human Rights Campaign and NGLTF. 
Foreman says, “If we could leverage their membership for activism, 
there’s no limit to what we could do.”
===

And that's people who PAY to use the free site. "Manhunt now has nearly 
1 million members, and the site receives more than 400,000 unique 
visitors per month."

Gay bars are successful, as are bathhouses. Gay events not involving 
alcohol or sex tend to be less successful.

The religious right raises and spends money better than the GLBT side 
does on ballot issues like this. They use psychology and strategy better 
than we do.

And even Gay.com has an interesting suggestion:
===
Though the liberal San Francisco crowd was overjoyed at the Obama win, 
there was definitely a pang of regret in the air. Some wondered if the 
Democrat’s victory came at the cost of marriage equality; as the pundits 
have noted, Obama brought African-Americans and Hispanics to the polling 
booth in huge numbers, and these communities have traditionally balked 
at same-sex marriage. Even the "Yes on 8" people noted that their strong 
draw among Democrats was thanks in large part to the grassroots efforts 
in these minority communities. “I’m happy Barack won, but it might have 
led to the downfall of marriage equality in California,” said San 
Francisco resident Crit Rowe. “But sometimes you have to lose a finger 
to save the whole hand.”


--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"World News Now Discussion List" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/wnndl?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to