California legislature kills gay marriage

I know what you're thinking, "you've got that wrong!, they approved it." You're right of course, the California legislature today passed a bill defining marriage as a "social contract", in language that would allow gays to be included. This is the first time a state has passed such a law without being forced by the courts.

The reason I say they have killed it is that this act will almost certainly guarantee a constitutional amendment in the state reasserting that marriage in California is a union between a man and a woman (one of each, in fact. In California one needs to be especially clear about such things.)

For the life of me I don't understand the political strategy at work here. It looks to me like a variant on Osama's strategy, ignite a total war, and expect a miracle.

Gay couples in California are commonplace and they openly participate in the community life. Elected officials campaign with their partners, there are gay couples in church, a gay teacher at our elementary school brings his partner to school functions, its just not a big deal around here any more. I strenuously assert that this is not an "anti-gay" state. The voters have been very clear, however, that they would like to reserve the term "marriage" to refer to a traditional, heterosexual union, and that they want that distinction maintained. The distinction may be entirely irrelevant, gay couples can be given all the benefits of married heterosexual couples, but the distinction is important to the large majority of voters.

The lawmakers in Sacramento were put in a very difficult position. Californians are not, as I said, anti-gay and don't want to appear that way, and the supporters of this bill were very clear that they were willing to make this a "test-case" on civil rights. They were willing and ready to wage total war on anyone who failed to vote for their bill. There were, as you might expect, people who were equally extreme in their positions on the other side. The great mass of voters are not nearly so extreme not so ready to make this the single-issue of California politics, but they are jealous of their rights to self-govern, and this is a slap right back at the people for the passage of prop. 22.

In California we amend our constitution at the drop of a hat. The current constitution is only 130 years old (more or less) and has been amended over 500 times. Some sort of "defense of marriage" amendment will be passed without any trouble at all, not because people hate gays, but because they don't like being ignored.

Based on the local radio talk and blogs, I expect that people are getting angry...not at gays in general, but at the gay activists and leadership. They have forced this issue onto the public and demanded that it become the single-issue for the state, and in truth we have other things to think about out here. This "scorched earth" approach is not winning them support. I know too many gay people and gay couples to believe that they are a terribly oppressed people in this area. To assert that is an insult to genuinely oppressed people.

Late word in the news is that the Governor will veto. I would expect it to be upheld. The gay activists will go after him (they will have to get in line, Arnold is a popular target these days) and we'll see how the people respond. He'll defend his action the as he has in the past, that he supports gay rights but recognizes that the people have a right to see their elections respected.

Again, I'll say that I do not understand the reasoning behind this strategy, it seems suicidal. Gays have got momentum moving their way, and opinions are shifting their way rather quickly. This seems like an effort to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.

(More on the "political fallout" here.)