Two years ago, after the U.S. Supreme Court overturned the right to abortion in Roe v. Wade, Justice Clarence Thomas wrote in a concurring opinion about possibly having the court review other precedents, like same-sex marriage. LGBTQ political leaders in California became alarmed and began working on a measure to excise from the state constitution the anti-same-sex marriage language in Proposition 8, which was passed by voters 16 years ago. That constitutional amendment is now here — Proposition 3 — and voters will decide on it November 5.
Back then, we editorialized about what same-sex marriage advocates needed to do should there be another ballot fight. After all, we lost the Proposition 8 initiative in 2008, which got us into this mess in the first place. Thankfully, the courts invalidated Prop 8, though the "zombie" language remains — and that is what Prop 3 will remove.
At the top of that list was the need for any future marriage equality campaign to center same-sex couples and LGBTQ people, which the Prop 8 opponents failed to do. So imagine our surprise when we visited the official Yes on Prop 3 website Tuesday morning and found a picture of an opposite-sex couple as the main image. It appears the new Prop 3 campaign had learned nothing from the mistakes of the old No on 8 campaign — and there were plenty of those, as many readers will recall. (The image was removed from the site about an hour after we called to inquire about it, then replaced with a slideshow of same-sex couples with the opposite-sex couple included.)
Campaign spokesperson Nathan Click initially told us that the image of the heterosexual-appearing interracial couple was meant to convey that Prop 3 is also about preserving the right to marry regardless of race. And that is true to an extent. But fundamentally, Prop 3 is about ridding the state constitution of the words "only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California."
The campaign website should have had prominent images of a smiling same-sex couple at the top to begin with; interracial ones would have been even better. It's as though we're being made invisible in our own campaign that LGBTQ leaders called for in the first place.
"We cannot emphasize enough that any campaign to repeal Prop 8 needs to center LGBTQ people and same-sex couples — and that means all kinds of queers and couples, not just white ones," we wrote in July 2022. "The need for allies to speak out in support is great — and necessary — but we need queer couples and families to be front and center in the TV ad blitz, which would be essential to victory."
Prop 3's main proponents — Equality California, Planned Parenthood Affiliates of California, and the American Civil Liberties Union of Northern California — need to highlight the necessity of the measure as it relates to same-sex marriage.
And Prop 3 proponents cannot sit around and think passage is assured. Yes, California is a deep blue state and, yes, it will vote for Kamala Harris for president. But all that was true in 2008 when Barack Obama was the presidential candidate — he won while same-sex marriage lost. A lot of things have changed in the Golden State since then, but even now, homophobes and transphobes are fighting Pride flags and gender-affirming care right here. The Bay Area itself is not immune. Just look at the recent recall of two Sunol school board members in the East Bay after they promoted anti-LGBTQ policies. (One is actually seeking election to his old seat in November.)
Speaking of Harris, the only reference she made to the LGBTQ community during her Democratic convention speech last week was an anodyne nod to same-sex marriage. "... The freedom to love who you love openly and with pride ...," she said. You would think with her history supporting marriage equality — including her decision not to defend Prop 8 when she was state attorney general and making her now-famous call to the Los Angeles County Clerk's office the day weddings resumed in 2013, telling staff "you must start marriages immediately" — that we would have rated a bit more in her remarks.
Click, the Yes on 3 spokesperson, formerly worked in Governor Gavin Newsom's office. He, of all people, should know the importance of the marriage equality fight. Newsom helped start it when he was San Francisco mayor and 20 years ago ushered in the "Winter of Love" ordering city officials to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples. Newsom himself was in San Francisco two months ago to kick off the Northern California campaign for Yes on 3. He said then that he would do "whatever I can do" to help the constitutional amendment pass. Click should take up his old boss on the offer, of course. But he also needs to start enlisting same-sex couples to be the public face of the campaign.
All of this is to say that the Yes on 3 campaign cannot take voters for granted. It cannot sit back and believe passage is in the bag. We wrote before about the need for a robust television ad campaign, and ideally that should start in September. The campaign received a $2 million donation from the Federated Indians of Graton Rancheria — Greg Sarris, a gay man, is the longtime tribal chairman — and has raised about $3.5 million so far, according to records. That's not much for a statewide campaign.
We're glad the Yes on 3 campaign moved quickly to highlight same-sex couples on its website, but they should have been there in the first place.
Never miss a story! Keep up to date on the latest news, arts, politics, entertainment, and nightlife.
Sign up for the Bay Area Reporter's free weekday email newsletter. You'll receive our newsletters and special offers from our community partners.
Support California's largest LGBTQ newsroom. Your one-time, monthly, or annual contribution advocates for LGBTQ communities. Amplify a trusted voice providing news, information, and cultural coverage to all members of our community, regardless of their ability to pay -- Donate today!