|
By Mike Bodine
Register Staff
11-11-2008 Local reactions to the passing of the highly controversial Prop. 8 were mixed, but overall did not reflect the views of voters state-wide.
Prop. 8 will amend the state constitution to read, “Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.”
The proposition narrowly passed on election day with 52 percent, however, the results of a poll taken Sunday in Bishop of random pedestrians, are that many of those people were in favor of gay marriage. There were also some that were for the amendment, and still many simply refused to comment, in fact, 10 of the 30 individuals that were interviewed refused to comment.
Despite of the cold, blustery conditions Sunday, many of those willing to comment expressed their support for gay marriage, but not all.
One Bishop woman, after taking a moment to consider the controversial proposition, said that she had “mixed emotions” on the amendment, and left it at that.
Another Bishop woman, after looking behind both her shoulders, said very quietly, “I voted against gay marriage, and that’s it.”
Most of the others who commented displayed their support for gay marriage, and said that they had voted against the proposition. This semantically confusing nature of voting against a proposition to be in favor of something else, was an issue many people commented on.
In the case of Prop. 8, a “yes” vote on the ballot equated to a “no” vote for gay marriage.
More than one of those polled said they were confused – and not for the first time – by the sometimes misleading language of California propositions.
“I don’t know whether I’m voting for it or against it,” some said.
Despite these grammatical complications, the majority of those in support of Prop. 8 had similar thoughts.
“I wish it wouldn’t have happened,“ said Karen Summers of Bishop, accompanied by her daughter Risa. She said she thought it was more of a civil rights issue than something that should be handled by legislation.
“People should have that right (to get married),” she said, “it’s a civil rights issue, and perhaps the moral piece of it needs to be addressed in a separate forum.
“I hope there’s demonstrations and lawsuits and I hope they can get the proposition overturned,” Summers said.
She added that it was also unfortunate that so much money goes into these propositions, and with this particular proposition, donations coming from another state, particularly Utah.
This was a sentiment shared by Liz Davies, visiting from Venice Beach.
Davies said she didn’t like the idea of Utah pumping so much money into the “yes” vote. She also said she believed strongly in the separation of church and state and was disappointed in the move by the Church of Latter Day Saints.
According to the Web site, www.mormonsfor8.com, Mormon leaders in Salt Lake City sent out letters calling for church members, including the 770,000 Mormons in California to, “work hard to pass Prop. 8.”
The Web site also has a spread sheet showing names of contributors to the campaign, and how much they’ve donated and whether they are affiliated with the Church of Latter Day Saints.
Of the $31,645,348.06 donated to support Prop. 8, nearly half, or $15,147,350.71 was donated from the Mormon church or its affiliates, many of them from Utah.
However, the Los Angeles Times “campaign money tracker” on it’s Web site reveals that $38,432,873 was raised to oppose the proposition, with about the same percentage coming from outside California. Prop. 8 also broke records by being the most expensive campaign for a proposition at over $70 million.
Davies also said she believed that California sets an important “standard” for the rest of the world and that, “While Prop. 8 has passed, it’s not the last step – it’ll be overturned and California can once again show by example that we support the rights of people, no matter the sexual orientation, and once again set the standard.”
One mother with her young son took some time to think before responding, “I voted no on Prop. 8. Everybody should have the opportunity to get married if they want to.” She added that the right to get married shouldn’t be based on sexual orientation.
She also said it seemed hard to believe in the sanctity of marriage, “with the divorce rate at what, 50 percent?”
She said, after a pause, “It’s hard to put into words.”
More reactions were short and to the point.
Lora Rischer of Bishop said, “Anybody should get married if they want to.”
“I feel it’s a person’s choice,” Sherman Brooks of Big Pine said, “It shouldn’t be up to society to say ‘yea’ or ‘nay.’”
“I voted so they could get married,” said Karen Rager of Bishop. But now that the amendment has been passed, “I’m not going to protest or anything. Who cares? Let them get married if they want to.”
“Who cares?” Trish Sisk said, and her mother Verna added, “Let’s just get over it already.”
Another “local,” said the real question is what do Inyo County residents think about having to help foot the bill with the first $9.9 billion of the $40 billion high-speed train with the passage of Prop. 1A.
The train, slated for completion by 2030, will, as reported, transport passengers from L.A. to San Francisco in under three hours.
|
