California | Gay Marriage | News | Proposition 8

Signature Drive Launched for 'Repeal Prop 8' 2010 Ballot Measure

Sign for Equality, an online drive to collect signatures to place an initiative on the 2010 California ballot that would repeal Proposition 8, was launched today by the group  Love Honor Cherish.

Repealprop8Said Executive Director of Love Honor Cherish John Henning: “We’re taking names. SignForEquality.com will make history by using custom social networking tools, as well as YouTube, Facebook and Twitter, to support an all-volunteer signature drive to repeal Prop 8. People throughout California can now help us win marriage back by the simple act of signing and collecting signatures.”

Sign for Equality "features a downloadable petition form and training videos for signature gatherers, and uses unique social networking technology to help gatherers set goals, build teams, and find signature gathering events," according to the organizers.

Sign for Equality [official site]

Feed This post's comment feed

Comments

  1. Seems some of us are gluttons for abuse. Sorry, but after Maine, I'm a 2012 guy.

    Posted by: Mike | Nov 16, 2009 12:51:35 PM


  2. After Maine, I no longer believe in the viability of any state-level equality campaign, because any gains made at the state level can then be removed - as we have seen - by the majority. minority rights can only be protected from the whim of the majority at the federal level.

    Posted by: ant | Nov 16, 2009 1:55:27 PM


  3. I think the time has come to call out No on 1 for being better than No on 8, but only incrementally better. The entire state was not covered, just like No on 8's campaign, and the ads were only incrementally better.

    The 2010 campaign in California, all grassroots, is not going to be run by the same folks, in the same organizational bubble, and will not be subject to the restrictions that large organizations have.

    I'd also like to remind all of you that the only LGBT ballot initiative that went our way in California, the defeat of 1978's Briggs initiative, was a grassroots campaign that beat a 20 point spread in the polls. This can be done.

    Posted by: Jeffrey Taylor | Nov 16, 2009 1:58:46 PM


  4. I hear ya Mike.

    Posted by: Tralfaz | Nov 16, 2009 2:01:44 PM


  5. Amazing!

    Still don't get it do you? Well go beg elsewhere because I will do what I can to thwart the efforts of any group or agency that still considers doing this state by state. It's tantamount to the strategy used by HRC a few years ago in securing rights for everyone... EXCEPT the transgenders. Go fuck yourselves and beg for someone to come up with a cure for your homosexuality because you have about as much chance of that coming to fruition as well.

    No one is free while others are oppressed.

    Shame on you people for being willing to compromise on equal rights for some but not for others.

    SHAME, SHAME, SHAME!

    You disgust me.

    Posted by: Marc C | Nov 16, 2009 2:19:01 PM


  6. Marc, I don't understand your claim that transgender people are no included in the California marriage equality effort. It is my understanding that a repeal of Proposition 8 is for ALL Californians, including transgender people, and trans people have been included and are part of the conversations we are having about strategy and the vision and mission of our group, Restore Equality 2010.

    Posted by: Jeffrey Taylor | Nov 16, 2009 2:28:21 PM


  7. Wow. First of, what's up with that Marc C? Get back on your meds, princess.

    THAT SAID...this story is hogwash. Love Honor Cherish are a board composed of seven white men--no one else--who only have enough resources to grab themselves some glory, but not enough to actually qualify this initiative.

    I don't know why they're still moving forward with this, but the *LAST* thing we need is another group of political neophytes being handed the keys to the big rig.

    At this time there may be no group that has shown the leadership to run California's repeal, but this group of self-appointed lily-white lawyers is not an appropriate vehicle for what needs to be a smart, efficient, broad-based, diverse, unified campaign.

    Posted by: SFdude | Nov 16, 2009 2:31:20 PM


  8. This makes no sense politically. You cannot mount a major campaign which relies primarily on education and outreach in less than a year.

    It is already clear that major donors don't want to touch this as they view it as a losing effort.

    Sorry, but it's a waste.


    Posted by: Josh G. | Nov 16, 2009 2:32:53 PM


  9. I think waiting till 2012 shows the other side that we are willing to wait for our rights. We need to keep at them and have talks with everyone we know about it. Everyone seems to know someone in CA. The problem last time was that many people did'nt go out and vote that were on our side. They thought it wouldn't pass, so at least 5 close friends of mine didn't do it. Now they will be helping me gather signatures:) WE CAN'T GIVE UP!

    Posted by: SnSD | Nov 16, 2009 2:45:30 PM


  10. SFDude: Lester Aponte, Peter Nguyen and MANY others are part of LHC, and are not "lily white".

    Posted by: Jeffrey Taylor | Nov 16, 2009 2:48:37 PM


  11. Jeffrey: I have to agree with you 100%. I have a lengthy polemic to write as to why we lost another one that we should have won due to a not-as-but-nevertheless-still closeted political campaign. At least they were talking about children and families, but failed totally in addressing issues of bigotry and freedom of religion.

    I knew they were going to fail when i saw the first ad, featuring a father talking about his gay son, his husband, and their kids. Again, gay people weren't speaking for themselves-- a straight person had to do it. The son wasn't explaining why marriage was important to him and his family.

    They also faied to capitalize on mutty's comment that they anti-gays were making the whole thing up about teaching homosexuality in the schools.

    We don't have to call anyone a bigot. their own owrds will convict the bigots. but we do have to start talking about bigotry.

    Posted by: Ben in oakland | Nov 16, 2009 2:52:19 PM


  12. the best shot we have is to get the anti-divorce initiative on the ballot in 2010 and then the repeal prop 8 initiative in 2012.
    The anti-divorce initiative will get A LOT of press, humor, and really bring out the crazies that would be in favor of it. Working off that buzz, we win in 2012 (when far, far more people will be going to the ballot box.)

    Posted by: stolidog | Nov 16, 2009 2:57:09 PM


  13. Thanks SFDUDE, but I'd have to be on some strong dope like haldol to think that the strategy of fighting for the right to marry state by state or be willing to settle for "Domestic Partnerships" in the fight for equality is a winning one.

    I'm just fed up with this failure and willing to speak out! I'm tired of pissing away my hard earned money and limited available time toward a strategy that is being controlled by those who want to maintain our oppression. Namely the conservative wrong. If you think that they aren't behind this strategy, take a closer look.

    And Jeffrey I'm not claiming that transgender people are not included in the California marriage equality effort. I'm claiming that the strategy of state by state effort to secure our rights is comparable to willingness by some in the fight to sacrifice transgenders a couple of years ago. Securing the right in California and sucking my money and sweat so that you can get married but I can't is an unjust ideal.

    As I said previously, "No one is free while others are oppressed!"

    Posted by: Marc C | Nov 16, 2009 3:55:09 PM


  14. We will go to the ballot (in whatever year) because, for taking something out of the state constitution, that's the option we have left. Sure we have the federal lawsuit, and I support that, but there isn't much individuals can do to move that forward.

    Posted by: Gianpiero | Nov 16, 2009 4:25:36 PM


  15. Marc, as someone has always stood for transgender people and their inclusion in our movement for equality, I respectfully disagree with you. We can do it all, and I am happy to be marching this Friday in SF on the transgender day of remembrance in complete solidarity. I am well aware that much work must be done to stop the astonishing 1 in 12 murder rate for transgender people, the horribly high unemployment rate and so much more.

    I have also opened my wallet for the Transgender Law Center and other efforts for transgender people – and I encourage others to do so as well. There's so much more we can accomplish together than we can apart, and you can count on me to fight for you in every venue.

    Posted by: Jeffrey Taylor | Nov 16, 2009 4:37:15 PM


  16. Yet another effort comprised of a board full of white guys?

    Really?

    I just came off of several months of fighting with Mr. Ego about diversity and the need for it anytime you try to get anything off the ground these days. I am shocked ,yet not all, that these groups just don't get it.

    Oh well, I'll get back on the horse and start screaming from the rooftops about diversity after the new year, right now, I'm tired and bored with the same old, same old.

    Posted by: Derek Washington | Nov 16, 2009 5:32:46 PM


  17. Read the Davis Plan, Derek. We're not going to make the same mistakes again. I'll post the link on your FB page, but here it is for everyone:

    http://www.restoreequality2010.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/090930ThePlan8b.pdf

    Posted by: Jeffrey Taylor | Nov 16, 2009 6:25:28 PM


  18. Just to be clear, this won't simply repeal Prop 8.

    It actually goes further than that, replacing it with a constitutional ban on polygamy.

    I'm not a fan of Mormons or Muslims, but I see no reason to attack them this way in the California constitution.

    Posted by: Randy | Nov 16, 2009 6:48:56 PM


  19. shouldn't we vote on this or something?? I mean vote on whether or not we want to have this on the 2010 ballot... I feel like it's waaaayyy too early especially considering Maine's prop 1 backfire. Let's wait till 2012, let some more old people die off then we'll more likely win.

    Posted by: Chdwckvnstrsslhm | Nov 16, 2009 7:27:17 PM


  20. Thanks Jeffrey!

    Posted by: Derek Washington | Nov 16, 2009 7:31:11 PM


  21. CHDWCKVNSTRSSLHM:

    EQCA polled their list: 67% for 2010

    Courage Campaign polled their list: 80% for 2010.

    Gay Inc. just isn't into this for self-preservation purposes. The grassroots are the only ones who can make this happen.

    Posted by: Jeffrey Taylor | Nov 16, 2009 7:44:15 PM


  22. Here's the executive committe of Love Honor Cherish: http://www.lovehonorcherish.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=category&layout=blog&id=60&Itemid=66

    I see seven white men. Even worse, they're mostly lawyers. Coalition fail from the outset. These guys are not the answer.

    Posted by: SFdude | Nov 16, 2009 7:51:05 PM


  23. Jeffrey,

    I appreciate your passion but the point that I am still trying to make wasn't about transgenders not being included. It's that if we settle for a piece at a time, state by state, all we'll be doing is shuffling cash and resources around in a never ending battle. Maybe you'll be there for Arizona where I now live if you win CA, maybe not. But can you guarantee anyone else will? How about Alabama? Ohio? A concerted NATIONAL effort for the entire country at the same time is what is needed. I shouldn't have to live in California for my husband to be recognized for benefits.

    Posted by: Marc C | Nov 17, 2009 1:54:54 AM


  24. You cannot remove the states from the national equation. Without some movement at the state level, the federal government simply will not act.

    Part of the reason why Pelosi, Reid, and Obama won't touch DOMA is because it is a loser for them. The voters who endorse same-sex marriage bans are the same ones who elect the Congress and the President. And I hate to tell you "national same-sex marriage now" folks this, but politicians like you more when you win.

    Right now LGBT activists might as well be the St. Louis Rams. Even if you count Referendum 71 in Washington State, that's a record of 1-31. Not exactly a playoff ready team. And you really shouldn't count Referendum 71 because it wasn't a vote on marriage itself.

    Posted by: John | Nov 17, 2009 2:23:05 AM


  25. The reason why I support the 2010 ballot is that it will continue to galvanize our LGBT community into action. The reality is that many of us are complacent with our lives and apathetic to wanting more because that involves doing some work. People are kidding themselves if they think that the average LGBT everyperson is going to dedicate his/her time towards phone banking and door to door canvassing in 2010 while we wait for a 2012 ballot measure. Also, many people are looking at this 2010 ballot effort as a "we must win" effort. I'm looking at this effort as part of a long-range plan. I am just as much if not more interested in the small victories that we will amass throughout 2010 in converting person after person towards marriage equality, because the LGBT community is awake instead of sleeping while we wait for 2012, and as long as our community is awake as long as it can be year after year, substantial gains will be realized. Going in 2010 also sends a message that we are done waiting for our rights, and we will push and pull our equality civil rights movement persistently and consistently until we are free people. We must never give in to near-sighted expectations and self-defeatist attitudes; we are in this for the long haul, and so are our brothers and sisters within our community, and above all we have faith and hope for our bright future that never caves in even during our most trying moments. I've gotten 101 signatures tonight, and I'm just getting started.

    Posted by: Sean Chapin | Nov 17, 2009 2:32:35 AM


  26. 1 2 »

Post a comment







Trending


« «Interview: 10-Year-Old Who Refuses to Say 'Pledge of Allegiance' Until Gays Have Full Equality« «