EQCA's Field Plan to Win Marriage Back

Marc Solomon lays out the field plan for EQCA's new grassroots campaign Win Marriage Back: Make it Real!

We need your help:
http://www.eqca.org/donate/YouTube

Category:

Nonprofits & Activism

Tags:

• Win Marriage Back
• Make it Real
• LGBT
• lesbian
• gay
• bisexual
• transgender
• Prop 8
• Proposition 8
• NO on 8
• NO on Prop 8
• California Supreme Court
• gay marriage
• same-sex marriage
• freedom to marry
• marriage equality
• grassroots
• Equality California
• EQCA

[Vainailla]

UNEQUAL IS UNAMERICAN.

[IssuesAndJustice]

"there is equality of human beings or there is not and the voters should not get to decide such things because they're rooted in morality"

So you want to force your morality on me?

[amperro]

"The best way to move voters is...to have conversations with them person to person at their doors in their neighborhoods..."

This tactic is an imposition on someone's time and an invasion of personal privacy. Maybe even trespassing.

Don't put someone in an awkward position. Maybe you have the right to marry, but you sure as hell don't have the right to drag someone else into the fight.

Don't come to my property unless you are an invited guest, EMT, cop, or postal carrier.

[want2bakid]

@ronpartain By your reasoning, I can discriminate based on religion and pass a law so that it is illegal for any christian to be married (as Jewish marriage has been around long than Christian marriage we have to agree to default to that as the definition of marriage).

[JoeyBoya]

Make it happen california! Show america what california is really about.... EQUALITY FOR ALL

[mysweetgb]

i don't believe in moral relativism. i think that whatever we can derive of morality together, it's discoverable presently. therefore, it would not be a case of forcing morality on someone unless it were an arbitrary source of morality, such as a religion. i should clarify also: by voters not being able to decide, i mean it in the same way that slavery should not be put to the ballot box; we can decide these things by disregarding dogma, idiocy, and terrorism.

[mysweetgb]

you're absolutely right. i don't think anyone's argument can possibly be about what the people want. to me, there is equality of human beings or there is not and the voters should not get to decide such things because they're rooted in morality. the law is arbitrary on this point necessarily, which is why the terrorists of california can take away people's rights by the flick of a prop 8.

[ethanstjoe]

Courts all over this country have ruled that the 14th amendment's does NOT just apply to ethnic and gender issues. It has also ruled that separate is inherently unequal. So regardless of what the people of California have voted, carving out an exception to equal protection is wrong on both counts. It's not equal protection, and the fact that it's separate suggests that it's unequal. People of CA be damned, their vote still has to pass muster w/ the US Constitution.

[ronpartain]

The minority you are referring to is ethnic/gender, not sexual orientation. The law states that marriage is between a man and a woman... the people voted that way, TWICE, the court has upheld it, TWICE, as constitutional but YOU don't like it and want it changed.

[ronpartain]

Moreover, what you want to do is change the law using voters to do it. If the majority voted in your favor, you would you that as leverage to strive influencing the courts to come down on your side since its what the "people" voted for. You cant have it both ways.