Marriage Equality: April 2008 Archives

The Arizona House of Representatives has recently passed a constitutional amendment proposal to limit marriage to exclude gay people in that state.  It now moves to the Senate for consideration.

Unfortunately, the media has thus far only been covering a piece of legislation, without exploring the real-life impacts such an amendment would have on gay and transgender citizens of the state.

The media has an obligation to talk to gay and transgender people in Arizona and to address this proposal in ways beyond the legislative mechanisms and vote tallies, but rather to address the day-to-day realities of those who will be affected by this type of legislation. 

Arizona media deserves credit where it is due for staying on top of this important election-year story affecting LGBT people.  However, so far reports have fallen short of distinguishing between LGBT issues being used as a divisive measure, and the real-life impact such divisiveness has on everyday Arizonans.

Paul Karr is the Director of Media Field Strategy 

An April 17^th article published in the Florida Sun-Sentinel provided a rather one-sided story on Florida marriage ban supporters' new campaign, Yes2Marriage, which is bussing seniors around the state to hold press events and speak with voters. The piece talks to a couple that is supportive of the ban, but provides no viewpoint from those who might lose basic rights if the amendment is passed. There are seniors in Florida who are deeply concerned that a constitutional amendment barring legal unions other than marriage between one man and one woman could jeopardize their domestic partnership. Many older couples enter into this type of union because they do want to remarry after the loss of their husband or wife. Unfortunately, their voices are silent in this article.

The only statement opposing the amendment is from a Florida Red and Blue spokesperson. It is certainly important that the other perspective is included, but again, it is not a quote from someone directly impacted by what’s being discussed in the story.

It is essential the media include the stories of those affected by amendments like the Florida ballot initiative. Readers need to hear about the real world consequences of anti-gay legislation, which can break up families and deny couples the right to raise children with love and responsibility.

Paul Karr is the Director of Media Field Strategy 

The Associated Press reported that anti-gay groups claim to have collected enough signatures to place a constitutional amendment banning marriage for gay and lesbian couples on California’s November ballot.

Proponents of the measure say they have exceeded the 1.1 million signatures needed to qualify for the ballot, however, they haven’t revealed the exact amount of signatures they’ve actually gathered. They are expected to deliver the petitions this week ahead of the April 28 deadline with the Secretary of State’s signature verification process to follow.

Oftentimes when the media covers anti-gay ballot campaigns, anti-gay extremists tend to dominate the coverage with their controversial, sensational positions. But in California the coverage seems more nuanced. Rather than simply allowing ballot measure proponents to claim their victory unchallenged, the story presents a more complicated picture.

And the story didn’t relegate LGBT advocacy groups to the standard one quote response. Instead, they were able to deliver powerful messages suggesting that despite the potentially successful signature drive, anti-gay groups are likely out of step with mainstream California voters. Hopefully if the ballot measure does, in fact, appear on the November ballot, the media will continue to provide a thorough analysis of where Californians stand on this issue and look at how the amendment would have an impact on LGBT families. 

The Associated Press is reporting that Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has vowed to oppose a proposed ballot initiative that would amend the state’s constitution to define marriage as between a man and a woman. The governor made the announcement Friday at the Log Cabin Republican convention in San Diego. Although he has twice vetoed legislation that would’ve legalized marriage, the governor said he believes the initiative is a waste of time, and he wants the courts to decide the matter.

Anti-gay groups must gather almost 1.1 million signatures by late April to qualify for the November election and have reportedly already collected more than 900,000. If the proposed measure qualifies and passes, the legislature would be prohibited from passing another pro-marriage bill in the future and current cases that might lead to marriage would be stopped or reversed.

Both the San Diego Union Tribune and the Sacramento Bee spoke to conservatives who criticize Schwarzenegger for inconsistency on the issue, but the media has also noted a significant shift in public opinion with opposition to marriage decreasing from 61 to 51 percent of California voters.

Media coverage of this hot-button issue shows just how complicated the social and political landscape remains in California, especially in such cities as San Diego where Republican mayor Jerry Sanders reversed his position and voiced support for marriage as did the City Council. As the political battle unfolds, it’ll be critical for the media to go beyond covering this issue as a partisan fight, especially considering that Republican leaders are bucking the conventional party stances.    

Paul Karr is the Director of Media Field Strategy 

Presidential hopeful John McCain might be seen by many as independent, but he’s actually conservative, the Associated Press (AP) wrote today. The story pointed out that though McCain does not support a federal ban on marriage for gay and lesbian couples, he is by no means an advocate for the gay community in large part because he does support statewide marriage bans. In a CNN interview last month, he said he was “proud to have led an effort in my home state to change our state constitution to protect the sanctity of marriage as between a man and a woman” and that as President, he “will continue to advocate for those fundamental principles.”

The AP story, which was picked up by dozens and dozens of papers across the country, goes out of its way to remind Americans that likely Republican presidential nominee McCain is not an independent at all, but that he falls in line with conservatives. It points out his support of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, his opposition to hate crimes legislation, and his opposition to protecting gay and transgender people from job discrimination.

The article grouped McCain’s anti-gay stances with his anti-abortion, pro-war, and gun control stances. The fact that the AP spent considerable time discussing McCain’s stances on gay issues right alongside other social issues places our community at the forefront of the election. The article’s use of the gay issues as one of four categories of controversial social issues may serve to again position the gay community as a wedge with voters. The media’s regular reporting on the candidates and the gay community may influence voters with opinions on gay issues (for better or for worse).

Paul Karr is the Director of Media Field Strategy