On Friday afternoon something special happened: Gov. Schwarzenegger’s administration filed a brief arguing that no stay should be imposed on Judge Walker’s decision overturning Prop 8 and that gay and lesbian Californians should be permitted to start getting married immediately. Immediately! In droves! Imagine it, lines around the corner, not a tiara left at Claire’s! Get your rice-throwin’ arms warmed up, because it’s about to get NUPTUAL, right?
This action inspired Joe.My.God to say “WOW. The governator has totally done the unexpected!” However, it’s worth noting that throughout his time in office Governor Schwarzenegger has always opposed Proposition 8, going so far as to refuse to defend it in court in the very trial that led to its recent dismantling. But it’s still a Republican Governor expressing a viewpoint contrary to the views of his own party. (Unlike some elected officials who can’t even seem to do anything despite Democratic affiliations.) (HAPPY BELATED BIRTHDAY.)
So what does this mean? As wounded idealists, we’re reluctant to count our chickens regardless of hatching status, but is it possible that actual change is happening, even beyond the courts? Since the ruling, all kinds of people are having all kinds of feelings so, let’s process:
Both American and international GLBT communities and allies responded to G.H.W. Bush-appointed California District Court Judge Vaughn Walker’s ruling by saying “RIGHT ON” and high-fiving each other. But some people hate love/joy/justice, and these people have been granted a stay. They were given until Friday to file arguments for or against the stay, and it’s possible Judge Walker will extend that stay for even longer. Or, he might decide to let the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals order (or not order) a stay, at the behest of the Mean People Who Lost and Will Lose in the Long Run Anyway. But why wait, right? Girlfriends have to make it to the church on time!
Making California Governor/actor/fitness enthusiast Arnold Schwarzenegger’s similar sense of urgency even more interesting, Republican gubernatorial candidate Meg Whitman — an early favorite for Arnold’s upcoming job replacement — issued a statement following Wednesday’s verdict saying that she believes that marriage should be between a man and a woman (psst – even with gay marriage, it still can be! I know right?). Basically Meg Whitman is against gay people, which is much like being against “money” or “Tuesday.”
Whitman is certainly no Fred Phelps — she’s expressed support for civil unions throughout her campaign. But at this point, is that enough to count as “not being against gay people”? If Gov. Schwarzenegger can say “let the gays get married now,” then certainly we can raise the bar a little. It’s not a big deal to let disenfranchised citizens on the bus if they’ve still gotta sit in the back (although the back is the best place to sit if you want to make out on the Greyhound FYI).
Whether or not the Prop 8 ruling and Whitman’s stance on it will have any impact on her campaign is hard to say, but she’s certainly not making any gay friends (which, in California, is like really easy to do), and it’s possible that she could even alienate Republicans who are tired of being assholes.
Representing Incendiary Language Bolstering the Fundamentally Irrational, Whitman’s fans at Focus on the Family are also freaking out about this ruling because now children will learn in school that gay couples are normal! In an email to supporters following Walker’s ruling, Focus on the Family stated that “[t]he Prop 8 verdict . . . is exactly why Christians need to be actively involved in elections at every opportunity” and urged their flock to make their voices heard in the November elections, lest millions of defenseless children everywhere be “deprived of the best chance to have both a mom and a dad”!
Meanwhile, every gay person’s bestbestfriend Fox News conducted a poll asking viewers what they thought about the Prop 8 ruling, and get this: 71% of respondents said that they agree with Walker’s decision. The Huffington Post asks, “Is it possible that even the center-right tilting viewing audience of Fox news programs is also open to significant upgrades of gay civil rights?” Well? Is it? The HuffPo seems unaware of the gay media’s mobilization around the Fox poll, but even if the poll was swayed by large numbers of flamey gays momentarily discarding their fruity drinks to vote, does that matter to Fox’s partially blind wingnut viewers? Maybe they’ll just see the poll results and be like “oh all my friends like gay people now, so i should too.”
And isn’t that what real change is about? [Tricking the viewers of Fox News’s website? YEAH!] Someone should maybe email someone in the Oval Office and fill them in on what’s happening here. They might want to get in on this.
What do you think? Does Schwarzenegger’s statement mean that things might actually be getting better for gay people in this country? Or does nobody care and he should worry about finding Sarah Connors or something? Leave your best Kindergarten Cop puns (and thoughtful feedback) in the comments!
i once had a dream about arnold schwarzenegger. he was in this science lab and had all these kindergarteners in cages, so now i can’t look at him without thinking about that. this new stance of his might soothe my fears, BUT the skeptical side in me thats been bullied by republicans and the religious right thinks that this may all be for political reasons.
BTW, what the eff obama? his stance on the gays is throwing me for a loop, and i feel the same way i did when i was in the middle of a relationship and just realized that it was going downhill.i just- I HAVE TOO MANY FEELINGS RIGHT NOW, ARGH!
I really REALLY wish that Gov. Schwartzenagger had released a statement that said. “I urge Judge Walker to deny the requested stay of legalization of marriage for gay couples in California because…IT IS NOT A TUMAH!”
…I apologize to the Governator for butchering his name there…Oops.
i think it’s essentially unconstitutional to require anyone to learn how to spell his name.
I totally voted in that FOX News poll. Possibly more than once. I can’t recall at the moment. Also, nice job Arnold.
One more thing, at the top this page my eyes are accosted with a Sarah Palin endorsed ad. Just wanted to put that out there.
While I am truly sorry for your eyes, I do enjoy that. A Palin ad on every website! Sounds like a good way to make sure Palin and Friends thoroughly waste their money.
STFU Conservatives looked at it early on and it was like 25% “maybe the Constitution does matter” and 75% “REMOVE THE GAYS FROM MY SIGHT”. I went over when it was mentioned over here and the “yes the decision was great” was up to 61%. And apparently it hit 75% by the end. *steeples fingers* THE POWER! MWAHAHAAA
They’ll probs consider our internet polling power to be considered actually political power and argue that as a reason to overturn Judge Walker.
Clearly they’ve been right this whole time.
Schwarzeneggerrrrrr! Well done young man. Cupcakes all round.
Also wasn’t it George H. W. Bush who appointed Judge Walker? I think it was?
wait, you mean he might have done something right? don’t admit that!
also, I highly approve of your avatar. I want to give it a rice krispie treat ;)
:D It is uncovering a secret community of [tos]sers on here, how happy am I? And, I am actually in the video for that song on youtube! But in the interests of anonymity I shall not say where. *dons trenchcoat and dark glasses*
Cassandra, I’m in it too! I’ve lost weight since then, so when I see it now I’m like gah! old me! But how cool was it to be a part of that? I love those nerds.
thumbs up on the rice krispie treat (ya know, cause we all can’t be red velvet cake)!
I’d like to take the time to say how much that song could actually work with Prop 8. Allow me?
“And they try to push them aside
Say that they are too strange to compete
And sure, most of the judges award the red velvet
But one picks the rice-krispie treats
Let our (Prop 8 ruling) be the rice-krispie treat…
(Jump ahead a verse or two)
Those nine people will tell nine people
Then we’ll have eighteen people loving (Prop 8 ruling)
Then eighteen people could grow into
Five-hundred and twenty-five-thousand, six-hundred people
Loving (Prop 8 ruling)”
I admit, the line Prop 8 ruling could be more catchy, but come on!
ew, you’re song’s derivative ;)
UNRELATED TO EVERYTHING: When I see Danny Devito now, all I can think of is “you gotta pay the troll toll…”
IASIP fans fill in the rest!
Isn’t this the same guy who said “I think that gay marriage should be between a man and a woman”? I’m glad he’s starting to get it right.
have to give props to the governator’s stance….but part of me thinks california’s economy is also in need of a shot to the arm ASAP. gay weddings = millions and millions of dollars in new tax revenue & of course happy gay consumers. i’m not saying the decision is entirely motivated by money but – hey – it never hurts.
Pingback: California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger asks judge to allow same sex marriage …
Democratic gubernatorial candidate Jerry Brown, who was also named in the Prop 8 suit as Attorney General of CA, refused to defend it too.
We Californians are still going to have an election, right? Screw Meg Whitman. I’m voting for Jerry Brown.
Schwarzenegger’s time as Governor is coming to a close due to the term limit and he can’t run for President. So, he doesn’t have much on the line politically.
It works in our favor if Obama maintains that he’s against gay marriage. I mean, not socially, but for the court case when it gets to the Supreme Court.
If you mean the last part, it has to do with suspect classification. Maybe same-sex marriage bans being irrational and stupid is enough to overturn them, but if the Supreme Court decided sexual orientation is a suspect class the flood gates of gay rights would open beyond just marriage.
Ah. Thank you!
Well my general sentiment is too little too late. Schwarzy vetoed same sex marriage legislation TWICE and supported the idea that the people should vote on it. BARF.
Here is the text from his 2007 veto, starts out ok, descends into BARF:
To the Members of the California State Assembly:
I am returning Assembly Bill 43 without my signature.
As I stated in vetoing similar legislation in 2005, I am proud California is a leader in recognizing and respecting domestic partnerships. I believe that all Californians are entitled to full protection under the law and should not be discriminated against based upon their sexual orientation. I support current domestic partnership rights and will continue to vigorously defend and enforce these rights.
In 2000, the voters approved Proposition 22, a challenge to which is currently pending before the California Supreme Court. I maintain my position that the appropriate resolution to this issue is to allow the Court to rule on Proposition 22. The people of California should then determine what, if any, statutory changes are needed in response to the Court’s ruling.
“Basically Meg Whitman is against gay people, which is much like being against “money” or “Tuesday.” ”
Ahahaha I love this so much<333
Thanks for brightening my sunday :D
just signed up to tell you that “Basically Meg Whitman is against gay people, which is much like being against “money” or “Tuesday.”” is going to be shown to all of my friends, forever.
best line on the internets.
This exact article made me come out to my 71 year old grandmother. She saw the headline and said, “You talk a lot about gay stuff. Is it because you feel you are gay?” I said yes. She said that she thought that it was good that I knew, and asked if I had a girlfriend, and then she asked if I was hungry because then she’d make some dinner.
Best coming out ever! Almost at least.
that’s adorable and awesome. :)
someone should probably email Focus on the Family and tell them that the “best” chance for a kid to have a mother and a father is to be CONCEIVED. after that, if the kid’s got love waiting when she shows up, then she’s better off than a lot of kids out there already.