Strike Maine off the list of states that recognize same-sex marriage. Today, the political consultants that brought Proposition 8 to California (Schubert/Flint) had another success with Question 1 in Maine. Like its California counterpart, Question 1 overturned the previous rights of same-sex couples to marry.
Both initiatives were based on the premise that gay marriage is harmful to traditional marriage, with very similar websites highlighting the ill-effects that legal same-sex unions will have on this country’s children. Like the Protect Marriage site (California), the Stand for Marriage Maine site has a variety of video and calls-to-action focused on mobilizing supporters to rescue marriage from the calamitous harm that would befall society should homosexual unions be legally recognized.
One man, though, doesn’t think that Schubert/Flint is being effective enough. He too has a website with a variety of video and calls-to-action, all focused around protecting our country’s children and restoring traditional marriage.
That man is John Marcotte of Rescue Marriage, who was disappointed by Proposition 8 due to its inability to actually protect traditional marriage from anything but gay people. Marcotte notes that the true enemy of marriage is divorce, and therefore seeks to save the institution by outlawing divorce in the state of California.
Marcotte, of course, wasted no time in setting up a CafePress shop so that like-minded supporters can raise awareness of his worthy cause. In addition to the shop, Marcotte has also arranged a Wedding March on the Capitol, to be held in Sacramento on November 14, 2009.
Whether Marcotte will follow in the footsteps of Schubert/Flint and clone his pro-marriage initiative in Maine at some point is TBD.
Incidentally, the people of Maine did pass a medical marijuana bill along with Question 1. So if you’re gay and in Maine, you still can’t get married – but if this news sends you into uncontrollable depression, insomnia or premature glaucoma, you do have a new resource available to help numb the pain.
Such is the argument made by the folks over at Rescue Marriage, who have authored the 2010 California Marriage Protection Act. Inspired by the passage of California’s Proposition 8, which was promoted and funded by the Protect Marriage camp to “restore marriage and protect California children,” Rescue Marriage founder John Marcotte realized that truly protecting marriage meant going well beyond limiting its legal status to heterosexuals.
Marcotte sees the primary threat to marriage as the dissolution thereof, and therefore seeks to protect the sanctity of marriage by outlawing divorce in the state of California.
To help get the word out, Marcotte started the Rescue Marriage T-shirt shop so that supporters can show the world that they truly stand behind government-mandated marriage protection.
We spoke with Marcotte, and asked him whether or not he thought this bill would pass. His answer: “Proposition 8 passed on the grounds that it protects traditional marriage and our children, so I don’t see any reason that this bill – which truly protects marriage by preventing its demise – wouldn’t pass. I mean, if all the people who voted for Proposition 8 don’t vote for this, they’d be hypocrites. You don’t think that California voters are hypocrites, do you?”
The Rescue Marriage camp has organized a Wedding March on the Capitol to be held on November 14th, 2009. The march invites all of us to “Participate in democracy the American way: by shouting angrily, using inflammatory rhetoric and memorizing jingoistic slogans to chant or misspell on signs.”
Whether the people of California will take this next step in preserving traditional marriage has yet to be seen. Some residents have expressed that banning divorce infringes on their civil rights; to those people, Marcotte says, “Sometimes other people have to give up their rights in order to protect my idea of traditional marriage.”
UPDATE: Rescue Marriage has a new Public Service Announcement to explain the issue:
California’s Proposition 8 has been a controversial hot-button of gay marriage debate since it was originally introduced as an amendment to the California state constitution in the 2008 election. An answer to the Supreme Court of California overturning a previous ban on gay marriage as unconstitutional, Prop 8 added this language to the California constitution: “Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.”
In the wake of Prop 8’s slim but decisive victory, photographer Adam Bouska and his partner Jeff were moved to start a silent protest proving the notion that an image is worth 1,000 words.
And so began the NO H8 Campaign, which showcases ordinary people and celebrities alike who have stood up in silent but arresting protest of what they consider to be a violation of basic civil rights.
Given that the NO H8 Campaign centers around white T-shirts, it made sense to offer the simple but powerful message on such a canvas so that those averse to everyday face-painting and application of duct tape can opt to support the cause by sporting their support in NOH8 T-shirts and buttons.
The Court did not, however, invalidate the 18,000 same-sex marriages that took place in the window that occurred between the day that the Court overturned the gay marriage ban and the day that the voter-added ballot measure passed. So if you got married during that time period, no worries: you can keep your gifts and your spouse.
The Court’s ruling was specifically about whether or not California voters had a right to add Prop 8 to the November ballot in the first place. Prop 8 opponents argued that the ballot measure was a fundamental revision to the constitution. A constitutional revision, unlike an amendment, requires a 2/3 legislative vote and cannot be decided by popular vote.
On our end, the T-shirts swing heavily in favor of equal rights/gay marriage, and against Proposition 8. This has always been the trend, and usually the T-shirts are a good crystal ball when it comes to things like votes and popularity contests. However, because gay marriage is a touchy issue that has involved both politics and religion, it’s not a surprise that the T-shirt design collection swings heavily toward those activists who feel a sense of unjustness and outrage.
Which is to say that a ballot box is much more private than a T-shirt, and it’s to be expected that those in favor of Prop 8 might not want to advertise their position so publicly as those against it.
With Maine following closely in Iowa’s footsteps with a recent gay marriage provision, there are now 5 states and 7 countries (including Canada) in which same-sex couples can legally wed. Other states have ballot initiatives being debated and various protections already in place; New York governor David Patterson, for example, has called for the legal recognition of same-sex marriages that have occurred elsewhere.
As the gay marriage debate continues in California and elsewhere, we’ll expect to see some new and interesting T-shirts crop up. So remember: if you have something to say, don’t be afraid to say it with a T-shirt. And if you prefer a more private form of self-expression, hey – there’s always the thong.
Carrie Prejean first made headlines when Perez Hilton, celebrity blogger and Miss USA judge, asked her about her stance on gay marriage. Her response:
“I think it’s great that Americans are able to choose one or the other … same sex marriage or opposite marriage,” then noted, “I believe that marriage should be between a man and a woman … that’s how I was raised.”
Her comments infuriated the openly gay Hilton, which led to heated online critique of Prejean, which led to the anti-gay-marriage camp (or pro-opposite marriage, as the case may be) getting vocal and using Prejean’s remarks in advertising, which led to a C&D letter from the Miss Universe Organization, which led to an additional media flurry for both sides of the gay marriage/equal rights/opposite marriage/traditional marriage argument(s).
The answer: nope. Prejean will retain her tiara for the time being and, one might hope, her clothes.
Given that Miss California Co-Executive Director Shanna Moakler is a former Playboy playmate, perhaps it’s not so surprising that Donald Trump isn’t shocked or offended by the discovery of racy photos having been taken by an aspiring model. Moakler’s stance on gay marriage, however, is at diametric odds with Prejean’s; Moakler recently appeared in a “NOH8″ PSA to support the overturn of California’s Proposition 8, which passed in November.
With her tiara intact and an Urban Dictionary entry honoring her unexpected contribution to the American dialect, the future looks somewhat bedazzled for Prejean. And if she tires of the beauty queen circuit, at least one of our Shopkeepers has an idea for a future career (seen here at left).
Controversy aside, we too bestow an award to Carrie Prejean. She is the winner of a Fantasy T-Wearer award today, with the “sanctity of opposite marriage” T-shirt above. May she wear it with pride. And in lieu of documented toplessness.
UPDATE: Prejean has blamed the topless photos on Mother Nature, noting that the photographs were taken on a windy day which led to a wardrobe malfunction, and that she was “unaware” that the photos were taken. (You may judge for yourself how unaware she might have been and the wind’s alleged culpability from the photos themselves.)
And so we will award Prejean a second Fantasy T-Wearer Award. This time we regale her with a button, which can work wonders in keeping clothing from blowing open. (Caveat: said buttons only serve this purpose on clothing that would close in the first place.)
With Oprah on Twitter, it seemed that the novelty of 140-character limited messaging had truly hit the big-time. Sure, Ashton Kutcher and other celebs have been playing around with it for awhile, but when Oprah became a member of the Twitterati last week it was a sign that even someone who owns multiple media outlets finds a value in character-limited public texting.
Today, Gavin Newsom proved that making an impression via micro-blogging isn’t just for Oprah. Newsom used Twitter to announce his bid for the California Governor’s seat, apparently taking a cue from the Obama campaign’s successful use of social networking sites to attract younger voters.
While the California Supreme Court put the kabash on legal same-sex weddings for 4 years due to them having been banned in 2000 by popular vote, Newsom was on-hand to perform the first legal California same-sex wedding in May of 2008 when the California Supreme Court then overturned the gay marriage ban as unconstitutional. Gay marriage was legal in California until November 2008, when Proposition 8 passed by popular vote with a 5% margin. The headlines haven’t stopped there, however: Iowa and Vermont are the latest to protect same-sex marriage, with their rulings quoting liberally from the California Supreme Court’s 2008 ruling. While gay marriage is most certainly not the only issue of import to California residents, given Newsom’s history it’s sure to hit the spotlight again as the gubernatorial race progresses.
With the California budget crisis making national headlines this year, the Governor’s job is going to be a big one. California has been in so much financial trouble that former Governor (and current Attorney General) Jerry Brown – known in the 70’s as Governor Moonbeam – is thinking about running. Other names for the Democratic party include current Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, as well as veteran Senator Dianne Feinstein. At 41, Newsom is 30 years younger than Feinstein and Brown, and 15 years younger than Villaraigosa; with his use of social networking sites and other Internet outlets, it seems that Mayor Newsom plans to use his youth as a competitive advantage rather than downplay it.
It’s worth noting that Feinstein (also in San Francisco) is leading the polls despite not having announced that she’s going to run. Newsom has said that he’ll drop out of the race and support Feinstein if she decides to shelve the Senate floor for the Governor’s mansion.
As mentioned in Part I of our 2008 retrospective series, this was a year of ups and downs for America. From politics to the economy, the sudden changes engendered a virtual case of whiplash as tides turned on a dime and fortunes were reversed on Main Street, Wall Street, and at seemingly unlikely location of the local gas pump.
Gay Marriage / Prop 8
In May of 2008, the California Supreme Court overturned the gay marriage ban, noting that the fundamental “right to marry” extended to same-sex couples equally. While gay couples around the country celebrated a stride in the name of equal rights, opponents of gay marriage scrambled to introduce an initiative to the November ballot in order to alter the California State Constitution, thus deeming same-sex marriage unconstitutional.
Thousands of gay couples, many of whom had waited years to have their unions legalized, rushed out between May and November to tie the knot under the law of California. All in all, over 10,000 couples were married in the three months following the May ruling – more than were married in the first four years after Massachusetts legalized gay marriage.
The battle over Prop 8 was touch-and-go down to the wire. The measure passed by a margin of 4%, leading gay marriage and equal rights proponents to a series of post-election protests. Supporters of a repeal will argue about the Proposition being unconstitutional, and that it violates the separation of Church and State; those who passed the measure will argue that the will of the people is the final word. This argument is of course far from over; on November 19th, the California Supreme Court accepted three lawsuits challenging Proposition 8.
Since the May ruling and the subsequent November election, we saw a flurry of gay marriage, equal rights and Prop 8 t-shirts be created and bought as folks decided to voice their opinions in a more public manner than the ballot box. Of course, California wasn’t the only state to have anti-gay marriage initiatives on their November ballots; Florida and Arizona passed similar laws, and Arkansas passed a measure to prevent gay couples from adopting children.
What the future holds for gay couples and their rights is uncertain, and at this point it seems that it’ll take a lot of time, lawyers and money to determine it. One thing’s for sure: when religion and civil rights clash as a political issue, there is never an easy solution.
Wall Street Bailout(s)
Early in 2008, we saw a troubled mortgage industry lead way to some bank failures and dramatic government bailouts. Bear Stearns was the first to make headlines, but it most certainly wasn’t the last. By early September, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were taken over by the government. By mid-September the government bailed out AIG, which showed its gratitude by treating executives to a $440,000 corporate retreat a week later.
Around the time that AIG executives were golfing and hitting the sauna, Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson announced his plan for a taxpayer-funded bailout of Wall Street so that We the People could foot the bill for AIG’s $25K in spa treatments. The plan allowed him to spend $700 billion in taxpayer money without any oversight, and was met with raised eyebrows by much of the American public and political leaders.
While political pundits had managed to avoid head-on discussion of the financial crisis for previous 6 months by arguing back and forth on semantics as to whether or not this kind of action (i.e. the Bear Stearns rescue) was a “bailout,” those days were over. It was bailout time, and Paulson warned that the time was now.
Well, all of those things added up were and are a recipe for the aforementioned collective sigh on behalf of the American people. As well as a whole lotta t-shirts.
The original bailout plan was rejected. It’s worth noting that the CEO’s didn’t do themselves any favors by using private jets for their trip to D.C.. Likewise, when Ford CEO Alan Mullaly was asked whether he’d accept $1 for a salary (down from his $666,667 salary – yes, that’s the real number, so it’s a good thing he wasn’t asked to subtract $1), his smarmy “I think I’m fine where I’m at” response didn’t exactly endear him or his cause to the members of Congress or to the American taxpayers.
So the CEO’s went back to the drawing board (read: Detroit), and returned again a few weeks later in hybrid vehicles to ask for their money again. Despite 2 of them putting the corporate jets on the auction block, this time they wanted $34 billion. But they weren’t asking for a “bailout.” No, no. They just wanted a “bridge loan.”
The Big 3 have made a lot of promises, including a focus on more fuel-efficient vehicles. And that leads us to our last topic…
Gas Prices
Until very recently, gas prices were a major sticking point with American drivers throughout 2008. As prices continued to climb, Americans watched in disbelief with hope that the worst would be over soon. With President Bush apparently asleep at the wheel and without a roadmap to put an end to the seemingly non-stop price hike, drivers were left with 2 choices: grin and bear it, or find alternate solutions.
During the summer travel season gas was up to $4.00/gallon and up – which is to say that gas prices had moved beyond an annoying inconvenience and into a travel barrier. Some folks, looking for productive ways to deal with the gas price crunch, channelled their frustration into creativity.
While gas prices have dropped since the election brought in a new President who’s already assembled the key players in his energy team, the robust collection of gas price t-shirts will forever serve as a reminder of a time when beer by the keg was cheaper than gas in some places.
The 2008 election wasn’t only a big deal at the federal level; several states had important ballot initiatives that were being closely watched at the National level.
One such state was California, which had Proposition 8 on the ballot. This initiative amended the state Constitution to define marriage as being between a man and a woman, thus rendering gay marriage illegal. Prop 8 was a response to the California Supreme Court’s May ruling that overturned a previous gay marriage ban.
With such controversy over the issue, it was no surprise to see so many people making their voices heard via Prop 8 t-shirts and other merchandise. On November 15th, a series of anti-Prop 8 rallies took place throughout California. So we went out to the San Francisco rally in search of folks making their voices heard not just with their chants, but with their shirts, signs and other accessories as well.
While the main focus of tomorrow’s election is the showdown between Obama and McCain, we’ve seen 2 major issues surface ’round these parts. Both are California Propostions: one is Prop 8 (amending the Constitution to outlaw same-sex marriage), and the other is Prop 2.
Proposition 2 “Requires that calves raised for veal, egg-laying hens and pregnant pigs be confined only in ways that allow these animals to lie down, stand up, fully extend their limbs and turn around freely.”
Basically, Prop 2 is an animal welfare bill meant to encourage the humane treatment of, most notably, animals being raised as/providing food.
The stated opposition for this bill is the assertion that animals allowed to roam freely will catch a disease, thus endangering the people who eat them. More specifically, the opponents of the bill claim that allowing birds to roam freely might give them Bird Flu. A compromise of providing galoshes and scarves for the birds before they go outside is not on the ballot, though Big Bird has served as a role model in the past when it comes to dressing appropriately for the weather.
The Yes on Prop 2 supporters claim that the talk of bird flu is a myth meant to scare people into voting against the humane treatment of animals; the No on Prop 2 people claim that passing this law will eliminate safe, salmonella-free eggs and lead to the import of Mexican eggs.
There’s been no weigh in from the Happy Cows of California, who are always seen roaming free in green pastures without so much as a sniffle. And although I personally see a lot of these cows roaming around in dairy country, I must admit I’ve never stopped to inquire as to whether any of them feel a cold coming on and would rather be confined indoors. (Ditto for the wild turkeys, who have consistently flown away from me and my dogs on hiking trails before I could get a statement.)
While the law is meant to protect all livestock, given the breakdown of California’s agribusiness the measure is, in point of fact, for the birds.
Whether the measure will fly and what it’ll mean for farming as a whole is up to California’s voters. Stay tuned.
With the election growing closer and the recent news of Connecticut legalizing gay marriage making National headlines, the focus on California’s November ballot initiative to deem same-sex marriage unconstitutional is growing sharper, and the debates surrounding the Proposition are growing more heated.
Proposition 8seeks to ban gay marriage by amending the state Constitution with this clause:“Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.” This Proposition was put on the ballot in response to the California Supreme Court’s May ruling that all people have a fundamental and equal right to legally marry the person of their choosing.
Gay marriage has been a hotbed of controversy in California since the 2004 election, and this season we’re seeing a lot of new designs crop up about the issue as well as about Proposition 8 itself. Some are off-the cuff, some are funny, some are serious – and all are trying to make a point. While the protectmarriage.com and No on H8 camps have official gear up on the issue, the vast majority of the designs are simply the voice of a single person with an opinion on the matter.
With designs being an indication of the public discourse, from our end the No on 8/pro equal rights/pro gay marriage folks are far more vocal. Searches for Prop 8, Proposition 8 and gay marriage merchandise lead to results that sway heavily in favor of not discriminating against gay marriage. Which is against Proposition 8. Which is somewhat confusing.
So if you live in California, just remember that on November 4th, Yes = No on gay marriage and No = Yes on gay marriage.
Strike Maine off the list of states that recognize same-sex marriage. Today, the political consultants that brought Proposition 8 to California (Schubert/Flint) had another success with Question 1 in Maine. Like its California counterpart, Question 1 overturned the previous rights of same-sex couples to marry.
That man is John Marcotte of Rescue Marriage, who was disappointed by Proposition 8 due to its inability to actually protect traditional marriage from anything but gay people. Marcotte notes that the true enemy of marriage is divorce, and therefore seeks to save the institution by outlawing divorce in the state of California.
Whether Marcotte will follow in the footsteps of Schubert/Flint and clone his pro-marriage initiative in Maine at some point is TBD.
