What's at stake
Oct. 28th, 2008 11:25 amBloggers take a video arguing for Proposition 8 and replace every instance of "same-sex marriage" with "interracial marriage".
This is chillingly effective for a lot of reasons, but the thing that struck me immediately is that, had the California electorate been in the habit of voting on constitutional amendments in 1948, when the CA Supreme Court struck down the state's law against interracial marriage, not only could the opposition have made an ad exactly like this, they probably would have.
I said before that the fight for marriage equality is personal for me. This is the other reason why. Sixty years ago, within my parents' lifetime, people used this exact same rhetoric against my marriage. In some parts of the country, they still do. It's frightening and it's maddening and it's wrong. So I stand against it, and will continue to do so.
This is chillingly effective for a lot of reasons, but the thing that struck me immediately is that, had the California electorate been in the habit of voting on constitutional amendments in 1948, when the CA Supreme Court struck down the state's law against interracial marriage, not only could the opposition have made an ad exactly like this, they probably would have.
I said before that the fight for marriage equality is personal for me. This is the other reason why. Sixty years ago, within my parents' lifetime, people used this exact same rhetoric against my marriage. In some parts of the country, they still do. It's frightening and it's maddening and it's wrong. So I stand against it, and will continue to do so.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}