Home > California, Gay Marriage, Wordpress Political Blogs > Let’s Be Fair: It Was the Catholics and the Mormons

Let’s Be Fair: It Was the Catholics and the Mormons

I just came across this piece in the San Francisco Chronicle that details how the Catholic Archbishop of San Francisco, George Niederauer, called on the Mormons for help to pass Proposition 8.  So the gay community needs to direct its ire toward the Catholic Church as well.

Here is the Chronicle piece:

Catholics, Mormons allied to pass Prop. 8

Matthai Kuruvila, Chronicle Religion Writer

Monday, November 10, 2008

Months before the first ads would run on Proposition 8, San Francisco Catholic Archbishop George Niederauer reached out to a group he knew well, Mormons.

Niederauer had made critical inroads into improving Catholic-Mormon relations while he was Bishop of Salt Lake City for 11 years. And now he asked them for help on Prop. 8, the ballot measure that sought to ban same-sex marriages in California.

The June letter from Niederauer drew in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and proved to be a critical move in building a multi-religious coalition – the backbone of the fundraising, organizing and voting support for the successful ballot measure. By bringing together Mormons and Catholics, Niederauer would align the two most powerful religious institutions in the Prop. 8 battle.

Ironically, it made San Francisco, center of the nation’s gay community, a nexus in the fight against the recently gained gay right to marry.

This Catholic-Mormon alliance was part of a broad pattern that underscored a critical difference between the rival campaigns: Yes on 8 sought to marshal support among many religions, while the No on 8 campaign often put religion on the sidelines.

“People of faith, really of every faith, believed that marriage was between man and a woman,” said Frank Schubert, political consultant to the Yes on 8 campaign. “They formed the core of our volunteer operation. They were largely responsible for the 70,000 contributions we got.”

Some clergy within the No on 8 campaign believed not enough respect was paid to religion.

“Their focus really wasn’t upon communities of faith,” said the Rev. Roland Stringfellow, who works with the Center for Gay and Lesbian Studies at the Pacific School of Religion in Berkeley and was an active organizer in the No on 8 campaign. Stringfellow said No on 8’s relative neglect of religion had a particularly profound effect on Latinos and African Americans, who hold strong religious views. “I really didn’t note particular outreaches to communities of color.”

Exit polls data

Exit polls show that religious views had a profound effect on the result, spanning racial lines:

  • 84 percent of those who attend church weekly voted yes.
  • 81 percent of white evangelicals voted yes.
  • 65 percent of white Protestants voted yes.
  • 64 percent of Catholics voted yes. Catholics accounted for 30 percent of all voters.

A late push by many churches to win over their congregations played a decisive role in increasing turnout and swaying opinion, said Mark DiCamillo, director of the Field Poll, who analyzed the figures.

The last Field Poll, conducted a week before the election, showed that weekly churchgoers increased their support in the final week from 72 percent to 84 percent. Catholic support increased from 44 percent to 64 percent – a jump that accounted for 6 percent of the total California electorate and equivalent to the state’s entire African American population combined.

The shift in Catholics alone more than accounted for Prop. 8’s 5 percent margin of victory.

“The Sunday before the election is just a very influential time for churchgoers,” said DiCamillo. For religious conservatives, “there was a lot of interest and attention and concern on this whole issue, but they brought it to a big conclusion on the final weekend.”

Stringfellow, who organized No on 8 religious events in the East Bay and San Francisco, said the No on 8 campaign’s talking points initially didn’t have language to address religious groups. In addition, he said, No on 8 campaigners were told by strategists not to discuss children, an issue that has particular significance for family-oriented religious groups.

Missed opportunities

Stringfellow believes the campaign was afraid it would get smeared by allegations tying homosexuality to pedophilia. But he believes it was wrong to avoid the subject of children because gays and lesbians are just as capable as straight people of being good parents. “When the Yes on 8 folks talked about children, we really didn’t have anywhere to go with it,” he said.

Stringfellow said the No on 8 campaign was wrong to downplay lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender couples in advertisements. “It’s not going to be normalized if you hide over here in the corner,” he said. “There’s nothing wrong with talking about love between two individuals.”

The future for the religious coalition that supported Prop. 8 is unclear.

“I don’t know if it could be assembled again,” said Schubert, the Yes on 8 consultant. “It came together because of the unique nature of marriage, and how it carries across every ideological and theological boundary.”

Mormon church members undertook a perhaps unprecedented mobilization, contributing an estimated 40 percent of the individual donations made to the Yes on 8’s $30 million-plus campaign. Yet the Salt Lake City church, which did not contribute to the campaign, sees its involvement in politics as unusual.

“I don’t think there’s any sense in the church that this coalition has more life beyond this one issue,” said Mike Otterson, a church spokesman. “We haven’t created a permanent alliance of churches here. What we did here was we came together to protect traditional marriage.”

So I think it’s clear: Religion as a whole mobilized to pass Proposition 8.  The Mormons as a group donated more than any other group, that’s also quite clear. 

So let’s be honest about this.  Religion has this backlash coming.  What religion (and I’m speaking collectively, not singling anyone out) doesn’t understand is that gay families feel as if they were attacked.  You don’t get to tell 18,000 couples that their marriage is no longer valid (if that’s how the courts rule) or create a pocket of married same-sex couples and then deny those rights and responsibilities to others.  You don’t get to do those things and not have gay families feel as if they’re under siege.

For people to now say that what gays are doing — protesting religious institutions — is despicable misses the point and tries to further marginalize a group of people who aren’t going to be marginalized any longer.  I’m sure that gay people as a whole respect religion, despite being told they were anathema repeatedly, despite religion’s role in keeping some in the closet.  But what people should have learned from Stonewall, for example, is that gays will fight back if they’re pushed hard enough.  That’s happened here.  Gay people are not going away.  This is the civil rights fight of our time.

deanna-sig

  1. Jim
    November 10, 2008 at 3:13 pm | #1

    As long as it’s peaceful protests, I don’t see anything wrong with it. I had to put up with Yes on 8 people will megaphones at street intersections here for weeks prior to the election. If that form of protest/assembly is valid, then marching/assembling after the vote should be valid as well.

    It’s unfortunate that the protesters didn’t assemble before the election. This show of support could have only helped their cause, but it seems like they are a few days/weeks late.

    I agree with you on the fact that this will be the civil rights fight of our generation. The previous generations had their fights and this will likely go on for at least another 10 or so years. However, I do believe that due to Internet and other advances, this fight will be shorter than the previous civil rights fights.

    With the new exit polling, you can also see that younger and more educated people (PHD, masters, post-grad, etc.) tended to vote no. So eventually as the populace becomes better educated, then we can hope that their fight becomes understood by more and supported by more.

  2. November 10, 2008 at 3:19 pm | #2

    You’re right — it should be peaceful. I think also that there may have been a bit of complacency within the gay community and the protest/mobilization didn’t occur before. It would have been helpful if it had materialized before the election.

    You may be right that this fight may be shorter. Hopefully it will come with less pain, too.

  3. November 10, 2008 at 7:06 pm | #3

    I know you saw this, but I’m posting it on my blog for people to sign. Rick is kick-ass and is very well connected.

    http://thebruceblog.wordpress.com/2008/11/10/please-sign-the-courage-campaigns-petition-to-repeal-californias-prop-8-which-took-away-the-right-of-same-sex-marriage/

  4. November 10, 2008 at 7:11 pm | #4

    By the way, I was working a job this summer in which I was caught (blindsided) as it ended up being a meeting of Catholic Republicans who were organizing to pass Prop 8. I somehow sensed at that moment it may be tough for our civil rights when the big money religious groups were behind 8 and lobbying their church populations.

    I’m spiritual but not religion. Religion as a whole does not practice unconditional love and acceptance. It’s all about power and control of others.

  5. November 11, 2008 at 7:53 am | #5

    I’m glad you posted the link, Bruce. I sent it out to a bunch of people, too.

  6. November 11, 2008 at 1:34 pm | #6

    Deanna – Here in Florida we had Prop 8 on our ballot. I’m not sure that’s what it was called but it was there.

    The ONLY reason I knew to vote NO was because of your many posts telling us to vote no.

    I have great comprehension skills but the way it was worded was confusing like hell in FL. Many people may have voted yes by mistake.

    I did not see not even ONE ad encouraging people to vote NO on the telly in Florida. I think that was a mistake – there should have been advertising telling people to vote against Prop 8.

    I don’t know if there were television ads in California but there was a mis-step somewhere.

    I’m not pointing fingers but I think this entire ridiculous situation that is taking away an entire community’s freedom could have been prevented.

    The asses in the Mormon Church should use their money for the greater good of mankind not for political reasons.

    How did Prop 8 get on the Ballot anyway? This should have been defeated before even getting to the Ballot. Ridiculous.

    I hope writing tone is not misinterpreted. I am pissed that Prop 8 was overturned – it’s incredulous. But I’m also pissed that it was even on the Ballot. And I’m even more pissed that more wasn’t done (in Florida anyway) to make sure it was not completely annihilated on Election Day.

  7. Jim
    November 11, 2008 at 3:52 pm | #7

    There were many television ads in California for Yes and No on Prop 8. There were even famous celebrity voices and appearances in the ads. There were signs and people standing on corners and at nearly every farmer’s market that I went to for months prior to the election. I read somewhere that about +70% voting knew what Prop 8 was before the election. So I don’t think there was a lack of information about here (in CA) about it.

    Actually, Prop 8 wasn’t overturned. It’s a bit confusing, but in CA this year, the courts ruled that the state constitution didn’t specifically forbid same-sex marriages which made same-sex marriages legal from May until Nov 5.

    Prop 8 was put on the ballot shorter after May to request a state constitutional amendment to add in that marriage can only be between a man and woman. So Yes was to make the amendment and No was to leave it as it was (which allowed same-sex marriages).

    Now, there’s an argument saying that the ballot measure isn’t really an amendment but a revision and a revision needs 2/3 vote to pass, which the measure only got like 52%. I don’t think that argument is a good one, but it sounds like the best chance to stop it.

    There’s been 2 other attempts here in CA over the last several elections that tried to create new laws banning same-sex marriages, but they were overturned after they passed saying that it needed to be a constitutional change since you can’t make laws that go against the state constitution and that’s what lead to where we are at now.

    Anything can get added as a ballot measure as long as it gets enough write-in voter signatures on the petition. The measures can’t be decided on in court until after they pass.

  1. No trackbacks yet.