News
Gay Rights Referendum Leads in Washington Stateby Kilian MelloyThursday Nov 5, 2009 The final tally is not yet in, but--as reported in the Olympian via McClatchy, gay and lesbian families in Washington state are expected to hold onto legal privileges that give them all the same state-level rights and protections of marriage--though not under that name.
That level of protection has precedents: Other states--California and Oregon--already grant the same state-level protections and privileges of marriage to gay and lesbian families without actually offering legal wedlock to same-sex couples.
The friendlier side of the anti-marriage equality movement says that gays and lesbians should be able to live as they please as long as their unions are not called marriage. But Washington’s religious right argued that giving gay couples the same rights as married straight--even while avoiding the term or the legal status of marriage--was still going too far.
Washington lawmakers had scarcely approved the measure when religious groups gathered signatures to put the law up to a popular vote. The so-called "everything but marriage" law was attacked by anti-gay activists as a prelude to the advent of full-fledged marriage equality.
Local companies, including giants Microsoft, Boeing, and Starbuck’s, supported the equality side of the debate. They encouraged voters to say yes to Referendum 71 and affirm the pro-equality state law. So did mainstream religious leaders and unions, as the Olympian reported.
But the tide against gay and lesbian families is strong. Anti-gay referenda claim a strong record of success at the ballot box. As voters headed to polling places on Nov. 4, projections seemed to indicate that history would be repeated and Referendum 71 would be voted down, resulting in a repeal of civil unions rights.
Washingtonians watched anxiously as Maine--the sixth state to extend marriage equality, and the first to do so through the legislature--dealt a crushing blow to gay and lesbian families at the ballot box. Voters there echoed last year’s Proposition 8 outcome and repealed marriage rights for gays.
The result for the Washington vote is still not available as of Nov. 5. Indications are that, for the first time, voters might affirm the family rights of same-sex couples.
The only near-precedent for such a result would be an Arizona ballot initiative that sought to ban unmarried couples from receiving family benefits. There, unmarried straight families feared would cost them financially and voted it down. But a subsequent ballot measure in that state, reworked to target gay families only, subsequently passed.
Pro-equality leaders voiced optimism about Referendum 71. "We did a very good job . . . in making sure gay and lesbian families were at the forefront of the conversation and that people never lost sight of who we were talking about," said Josh Friedes, spokesperson for Approve 71/Washington Families Standing Together.
Critics of the campaign to preserve marriage equality in California had homed in on the failure of the pro-equality side to show voters the families that would be affected by Prop. 8’s victory.
The California battle was hugely expensive, with an estimated total cost of around $70 million. The pro-equality side ended up being outspent.
In the Washington campaign, supporters of Referendum 71 had four times as much money for their campaign. But money is not always a reliable indicator of political results, especially as regards gays and lesbians. Pro-marriage advocates in Maine had more than twice the funds of the anti-equality campaign, but were beaten by 3 percent of the vote.
Washington’s anti-gay leaders were already laying contingency plans in case of defeat. The anti-equality group Washington Values Alliance vowed that if voters supported Referendum 71, it would not be the last word on the subject.
"Whether or not SB 5688 becomes law today, and we pray it does not, R-71 has defined a diverse group of citizens willing to stand and risk, in defense of their deeply held core beliefs," the Washington Values Alliance said in a prepared statement. "Plans are under way for a new and greater resolve to be present during the 2010 session and future elections."
That statement referred to an ongoing, hot dispute about whether names of donors to the effort to vote down Referendum 71 should be revealed. The anti-gay marriage side claims that the names of donors should be shielded, despite state law requiring financial transparency.
They argue that the pro-equality side would threaten and intimidate those who had contributed to the fight to revoke gay family rights.
A Nov. 5 article in the Seattle Times noted that most of the state’s counties had rejected Referendum 71, and gay families’ equality with it. But the difference was geographical. The more populated and urban counties along Puget Sound more than counterbalanced those voters. The article said that the measure seemed to have drawn the support of 52 percent of the voters, with results still being tallied and the percentage expect to grow.
However, the article also noted that the campaign to rescind gay families’ rights had led to a more active and closer connection among the state’s anti-gay churches. In the future, that may end up giving anti-equality activists a basis for more activism against gay couples--if not in this election, then in the future.
Kilian Melloy reviews media, conducts interviews, and writes commentary for EDGEBoston, where he also serves as Assistant Arts Editor.
|
|
|
Email
Print
Share