Posted by Helen on: 11.06.2008 /
I’m surprised that Proposition 8 passed, banning same sex marriage in California. I didn’t think that many people would be that intent on banning same sex marriage. I’m not surprised opponents of the ban are upset.
I understand that Bible-believing Christians are against it but I assume that to pass, a lot of other people must have voted ‘yes’ also. A lot of money was spent by people on both sides of the issue. Maybe the arguments of the pro-ban groups were more persuasive. Maybe their methods were less offensive. Maybe people really do think same sex marriage is going to destroy society. Whatever the reasons evidently a lot of people wanted it banned enough to vote yes.
Comment by: Jason Horton
1It was 52% to 48% though which is very close. Proposition 4 failed though.
Comment by: David H
2There is some exit poll data regarding which groups voted for and against Prop 8 at Ballotopedia.
According to state polls, the support for the ballot measure really took off in October. Until that point, polling data suggested that the measure would be defeated and same-sex marriage would continue in the state.
Besides older, less educated, highly conservative and Protestant voters (Catholics marginally supported same-sex marriage even though the Catholic church provided funding to the National Organization for Marriage, the group that placed the anti-gay marriage initiative on the ballot), the other group overwhelmingly against gay marriage in the state were Black voters.
Comment by: Helen
3Jason, yes, it was close, but I’m still surprised it passed.
As you said Proposition 4 failed – I think all the anti-abortion propositions in various states failed (and all the same sex marriage propositions passed).
My daughter was delighted the California humane animal confinement proposition passed, guaranteeing penned animals have enough space to lie down, turn around and fully extend their limbs. At present not all of them do.
David thanks for the information.
Comment by: Peter Walker
4Amazing. I assume that even conservative Christians who are my age (25-35 genX) at least have the cultural sensitivities and sensibilities to comprehend the feelings behind the issue. I was wrong. A bunch of guys I know posted Facebook comments: “Wow, California DOES still have some Morals left.” “It’s good to see California holding onto truth.”
Really? Is that really the point? Is that the behavior Jesus is asking for?
I’m often disappointed in myself, so I don’t mind saying how disappointed I often am at my peers…
Comment by: no offense
5Peter, I had you pegged as a 60 year-old, tie-dyed, pony-tailed white guy; oops!
I am a little surprised at your age given your racial sensibilities. What part of the country are you from? I was talking with my wife just last night about the way my own experience with race seems to be so different from that of older Americans, but perhaps it isn’t a peculiarity to my age bracket, but merely to me?
Comment by: Helen
6no offense, if you click on Peter’s name you’ll see a photo of him on his blog.
Comment by: Peter Walker
7Ooh, I kind of like that 60s hippie impression. I may have to dig for a photo to create an alter-ego and hide my cursed boy-band mug.
I’m from the Pacific Northwest (some call us “a little slice of Post-Christendom Western Europe”). My background is conservative Pentecostal, but I’ve been surrounded by all sorts of interesting, lovely people who rocked my worldview with love and generosity.
I’ve come to believe strongly in racial reconciliation, and even reparations. There’s a biblical principle there: the sins of our fathers, passed down upon generation after generation. I believe there is shared guilt that doesn’t die or dissolve with time, but merely lies below the surface, sickening everyone until it’s brought to the forefront to be seen, acknowledged, grieved over, and finally reconciled and healed. I pray that’s beginning.
How about you?
Comment by: no offense
8I have traveled the country quite a bit. I have lived West Coast, East Coast, and Rockies.
Perhaps the ‘sins of our fathers’ is the very reason why I get so frustrated by racial politics. I grew up in a family where my parents didn’t talk about it much. I had friends of all stripes, and the only overt racism I saw was condemned by all of the authority figures in our community. (With the exception of minority racism against the majority, of course, but I assume that goes without saying, it’s so vogue!)
I am all for racial reconciliation, but lets be honest. Why should all white people feel a sense of shared guilt? Half of them didn’t even arrive in this country until well after slavery was over, and there simply hasn’t been a group of people who haven’t suffered oppression historically. Should we sue the Italian govt. for reparations for all of the British slaves they had?
Instead of talking about the sins of history, I would prefer to talk about today. There is enough problems that need to be reconciled now without figuring out who’s great-grand-pappy did what to whom, and how much we owe each other because of it.
And lets hold people accountable. I live in the city, I am surrounded by people in the system. Their lives are wrecked by our attempts to help them. These people need more help and less handouts! All they know how to do is stand in line at Social Services, yell at their kids, and shop for groceries at gas stations. And we taught them that! You wanna talk oppression…
Comment by: David H
9Many sociologist argue that is one of the ongoing effects of racism in the United States. One racism has existed long enough that it affects the perceptions of those with racial bias (perhaps only subconsciously) and those who are biased against (they may be angry, militant or merely believe there is nothing they can do for themselves).
Perhaps shared guilt isn’t the right way to feel about racism. Maybe it is shared responsibility. Not for the cause, mind you, but for the resolution.
We all have racial bias. Your statements above make some very apparent. The question is what should you, me and everyone else do about that? Do we maintain that is the only and right way to see things? Do we insist that we won’t change our views until the world changes around us?
You tell me.
I don’t think it is as simple as segregating help from handouts. I also don’t think governments are particularly good at this kind of reconciliation. What needs to change is personal attitudes. But I can’t change yours or that of anyone else (whether they hail from a racial majority or minority), I can only change mine.
But I won’t pretend that racism doesn’t exist in this country or pervade attitudes and actions on multiple levels in virtually every strata of US society. I see it every day at my inner-city workplace and white-bread suburban homestead. It isn’t just about who did what to whom in the past, it is about what we do to each other all the time today.
Comment by: Peter Walker
10No offense, that’s just the problem. YOU’RE more than ready to move forward, talk about the present, etc… and wouldn’t that be great if no one else had any baggage to work through?! The problem is, there are deep deep wounds, and folks can’t just “let it all go and move forward” as if the past didn’t happen.
I also get really nervous as soon as someone feels the need to defend themselves as “free from guilt” or responsibility. It may be benign, but I’ve found a lot of underlying denial and/or discrimination in individuals who can’t see shared responsibility for these old sins. That’s not an attack, but it might be a warning.
Blessings
Comment by: no offense
11Nobody said anything about free from responsibility, quite the opposite. It is just that I want to help everyone to become responsible citizens of humanity, not just you white people. And I am guilty of plenty, just not of holding slaves.
If we want to see racial reconciliation we need to talk about the way things are now. That means we need to understand the past, but only so we can see where we are and where we need to go. I have no problem talking about the past, or letting people deal with the baggage they have from the past. But the purpose has got to be future.
Bishop Tutu says (roughly), “true revolution is when the oppressed are free from being oppressed and the oppressors are freed from being oppressors.” Mandela spent 30 years in brutal incarceration and came out in favor of revolutionary reconciliation!
Evil must be confronted, named, and then those who committed it must be offered reconciliation. But this requires an honest discussion on both sides, and then an honest attempt at reconciliation by both sides.
White guilt in a young man who is not guilty is just as useless (and dangerous) as white pride in an old man who has done nothing to be proud of.
Comment by: Peter Walker
12Good points No Offense, and I’ll be the last person to argue with Tutu.
The concept of “oppressors freed from being oppressors” is interesting to think about. I can see how an over-guilted society might become trapped in a cycle of repentance and looking backward, rather than healing and moving forward.
But my argument is: American is hardly “over-guilted.” Most white Americans sleep just fine at night, without taking any responsibility for slavery (not to mention the current, real-world de facto slavery of sweat shops in the 3rd world, providing goods for our consumption).
So I’m all for moving forward, but there needs to be SOME acknowledgment and repentance by the general American population. That absolutely has not happened yet.
“The Debt: What America Owes to Blacks” by Randall Robinson is a book that has not-so-much shaped my feelings, but certainly validated them beyond my own little white perception.
And as far as the “danger of white guilt”…
I hardly think white guilt is “dangerous.” The fruit of such guilt is usually humility. And sometimes social action.
I guess a potential danger is developing a sense of superiority or self-justification (i.e. “I’m a pretty great person, for being so aware and compassionate…”). Thankfully, I still think I’m a real asshole.
White pride (or to a lesser degree, white self-satisfaction) is a far more insidious force in our world.
As an aside, No Offense, I appreciate this dialogue. It’s ben awhile since I’ve gotten pushback beyond “I ain’t never owned slaves.” Thanks for stretching me, and for the respectful disagreement!
Peter
Comment by: Eliza
13Two factors seem to have played a significant role in Prop 8 passing:
1) Significant pro-8 funding by mormons, see claim here from 11/8/2008 post-election analysis (at a site which helped encourage such donations) that 51% of the individual donations over $1000 for the passage of prop 8 were from Mormons (or “likely Mormons”), many/most from outside California.
2) High turnout by African-Americans, who (as a generalization) are less likely to support gay rights, apparently not seeing it as a civil rights issue, or nothing akin to rights of racial minorities. This view may be related to religious beliefs, e.g. teachings in/by African-American Christian churches. See this LA Times article from 11/8/2008
Comment by: no offense
14Peter, you and I probably agree on much.
Of course there have been, and continue to be racial tensions. I agree that there are still white people in our country who have not gotten over racist tendencies. This of course is true of all races, perhaps some more than others.
I simply don’t think talking about white guilt is very helpful. It is yet another hand holding the minority community under water. It causes white people (both honest, and dishonest) to get defensive, and it completely confuses the issues involved.
I would prefer to hold an individual responsible for her/his own actions. Does my German ancestry make me responsible for Hitler’s actions? Does my Italian ancestry make me responsible for the atrocities of Nero? Does my Cherokee ancestry make me responsible for the extermination of the Yuchi?
Or perhaps should I be held responsible for whatever racial views I have? However I treat people of other races? (Or just simply how I act in general!) Of course I would include being held responsible for partaking in unjust racial privilege or refusing to stand up against racial injustice on the list of things to address.
I have to say, however, that it is unjust to hold someone responsible for actions they did not themselves commit, knowingly gain from, give assent to, or refuse to stand up against. Don’t you think?
It is noble that you want to hold white people responsible for their actions. (Just make sure you aren’t holding them accountable for the actions of others) But don’t you think American minorities are just as guilty as American whites of ignoring the needs of third world peoples? Isn’t it just another form of patronization that you want to hold whites accountable, but don’t think the rest are capable of the responsibility?
Comment by: Helen
15no offense wrote:
People are powerfully moved by symbols and associations. This means that people who have been hurt tend to be angry at innocent members of a group which includes some that have hurt them. While innocent members should not be forced to carry guilt that isn’t theirs, on the other hand, it gives them the opportunity to be peacemakers, because conciliatory/restitutionary words and actions by them tend to be perceived as from the problem group and can bring healing. Even though they are individually innocent.
If individual innocence is all that matters why did Jesus say turn the other cheek? Why wouldn’t innocent people say “Hey, I’m innocent – I’m out of here – this isn’t my problem”?
I think equally wealthy people are equally responsible. The issue for me is resources, not race.
I wonder if perhaps Peter was speaking for his own group in talking about white people and not presuming to speak for another?
Comment by: no offense
16It takes a Brit to see that class is more of a factor than race.
Which is what I would like to see people doing (even Peter, I would prefer, should be talking about his own class not his own race), as opposed to making the issue something it clearly isn’t.
Of course race and ethnicity should be included in a discussion about the world we live in, after all race doesn’t disappear at Eschaton, but rather is given a place of prominence, it is rather class distinctions that are replaced by the Coming King!
I agree with what you say Helen (even with a lot of what Peter says) I just can’t stand the tone with which most racial conversations take place (neither the whining liberals nor the ignorant conservatives!)
So I find myself hoping for people to take responsibility for their own actions and lives, and then take responsibility for teaching others to do the same; instead of the whining for someone else to take responsibility for my life, or the blatant ignorance of the responsibility that I have to my fellow human. And it is exactly this that most talk about race seems to undercut.
Comment by: Doreen
17Yes, Californians gave rights to chickens (one of the propositions) and took them away from gays & lesbians. That is SO Californian! (As a native, I can say this.) I think the scary, “Your children are going to be forced to learn about gay marriage in 1st grade” ads were effective, sadly.
Comment by: Peter Walker
18I’m comfortable reframing the conversation in terms of class, vs. race. Sure, good point. Thanks for the perspective No Offense, and Helen!
Comment by: Eliza
19Getting back to same-sex marriage for a moment, two things:
1) Connecticut has now legalized same-sex marriage via decision of its state Supreme Court; the final hurdle was cleared on 11/12 & some marriages began right away!
2) Nationwide, protests for marriage equality (against Prop 8 & the like) will be held on Sat 11/15. See here to find cities in your state in which people will be gathering. I’m planning to attend the rally & march in Seattle, with gusto.
Comment by: Helen
20no offense, I’d also like to see people taking responsibility for their own lives and teaching others to. I appreciate schemes like microfinance which help people take responsibility rather than taking responsibility away from them.
Doreen, I heard that the first grade scare tactics were based on a parent organizing a field trip to go see a first grade teacher marry a same sex partner. Maybe that was unwise. But it wasn’t that the school was teaching first graders about gay marriage per se.
If people believed the Bible said chickens are supposed to be confined in cages too small for them to move their limbs, they probably would have campaigned hard against the bigger cages for chickens proposition and caused that to fail.
Eliza thanks for the information. If you’d like to post about your experiences with the rally next week, you’re welcome to (if you have time).