Nothing to see here but more Prop 8 hand-wringing

[muckefuck]

I'm a lot more bummed by the success of Proposition 8 than I expected to me. Even though I knew that the last ballot measure passed easily, that polls showed a clear win, that any time we allow a popular vote on queer rights we get shafted--even with all these things in mind, I still blithely expected it to fail.

Now that the expensive legislative battle is over, another expensive legal battle begins. It pains me to think of all those tens of millions down the drain simply because a scant majority of Californians can't accept that they live in a secular democracy, that civil marriage is not a sacrament and follows different rules. That's what makes this first and foremost a defeat for liberal humanism, and only secondarily for gay rights.

I'm trying to set my lights by cpratt, who's been very upbeat in his comments today despite being one of the thousands of individuals who's just seen his marriage go *poof*. (But, then, I guess it's a little easier the second time around; think you'll get your license fee refunded this time?) We've known for years now that getting same-sex marriage is mostly a waiting game, as resistance drops with every generation. Once today's over-65s are dead and gone, the yeas will have it--but that's awfully cold comfort to anyone who would like some additional legal protections in the meantime.

There are other illiberal measures that stick in my crawl from this election--particularly Missouri's Official English law and Arkansas' hateful and unjustified barring of gay couples from adoption and foster care--but I had already resigned myself to those. For some reason, I keep having higher expectations for California, despite all evidence to the contrary.

Comments

[muckefuck.livejournal.com]

There's nothing "magical" about it: Tolerance breeds openness, which in turn breeds more tolerance. There's nothing innate about prejudices against homosexuality; they are learned. If the previous generation doesn't teach them, there's no particular reason to believe that the next will come up with them on their own.

(Thanks for the press release, but I do wish there were access to details of the study, such as the methodology. Without those, there's no way to judge the trustworthiness of the reported data.)

[itchwoot.livejournal.com]

I disagree: Openness doesn't breed tolerance.

The term "tolerance" conveys that there's something objectionable that you merely endure for the sake of peace. If I find something like homosexuality objectionable, it's easier to tolerate when few gay people are around. But if more of them are visible, I'm more inclined to regard them as a menace.
The only way that openness can lead to more tolerance is through peer pressure, but that's fake tolerance that can backlash any moment.

I think we're not talking about tolerance here, though. A lack of prejudices rather leads towards indifference - now that's something to strive for! If only more people were indifferent towards homosexuals...

Prejudices in general are not always merely learned from previous generations. There has to be a point where they came into existence, right? Future generations are not exempt from projecting their own failures onto a convenient scapegoat. I can imagine hundreds of scenarios that could produce new prejudices.

[muckefuck.livejournal.com]

If you object to the word "tolerance", substitute "acceptance".

[itchwoot.livejournal.com]

Substitute "objectionable" with "different", then. Doesn't really matter, though.

Teaching the value of diversity in a society is going to influence people's sense of justice in matters like this. Sure, it's easier to teach that stuff when other people are more open about their being different. But you still have to tell them why it's a good thing. Waiting till their parents die won't do the job.