Less than eight hours after the California supreme court ruled 4–3 Thursday that gay men and lesbians are entitled to marry, the Equality for All campaign, aimed at defeating a likely ballot initiative that would amend the state's constitution to ban same-sex marriage, had already received tens of thousands of dollars in donations, according to Lorri Jean, CEO of the Los Angeles Gay and Lesbian Center and president of the campaign.
But that's far from the $20 million she estimates the campaign will need to defeat the measure if it goes before voters in November. "We're not starting at zero, but we have the vast majority of the $20 million to raise," Jean told The Advocate. The campaign raised close to $1 million earlier this year to fund its Decline to Sign effort to dissuade Californians from signing the ballot petition, she says, and she estimates that cash on hand is in the ballpark of several hundred thousand dollars.
The campaign and its allies will be facing well-financed foes in the Family Research Council and VoteYesMarriage.com, the two groups spearheading the ballot initiative. They say they raised $2 million to subsidize the signature drive alone, which they claim yielded more than 1.1 million signatures -- well above the 763,790 required to put the measure on the ballot. The California secretary of state is expected to do that formally by the end of June, barring any unexpected signature forgeries and the like. In post-ruling statements, both Family Research Council and VoteYesMarriage.com said they planned to raise at least $10 million to ensure the initiative passes.
"We will need to match them dollar for dollar," said Geoffrey Kors, executive director of Equality California.
According to Kors and Jean, the fight will be waged primarily with television and radio advertising, which will present personal stories of gay and lesbian Californians. "The more people understand that this is about families and loving couples -- not about some sort of obscure, esoteric law -- and the more we put this personal face on it, the more we get people to take a moment to think about it and to have some empathy," said Kors. "Even the ruling talks about how this is about people, not the law."
Of course, as inspiring as the ruling Thursday is, Jean concedes it's a bit double-edged. On the one hand, she says, "it's causing people to rally around a right they now have and can lose, as opposed to something abstract." On the other hand, the ruling might just "fire up some of the more extreme members of our state." If the ballot initiative wins, the consequences will be grave. To have the right to marry and then have it taken away, said Jean, "could stall efforts for equality for generations."
To donate, visit equalityforall.com. (William Henderson, The Advocate)
These comments are reproduced as written by visitors to this Web site. They have not been edited for content, grammar, or spelling. The viewpoints appearing here are those of the writer, and do not necessarily reflect the opinion or views of advocate.com, The Advocate, or its affiliates.
If you would like to submit a comment for posting, please fill out the form above.
All comments submitted via this form are subject to posting or publication. (To send a private letter to an Advocate editor or writer, please use the e-mail button at the top of the page, or use snail mail.) If you would like your comment considered for publication in The Advocate magazine, please include your full name, your city of residence, and a phone number where you can be reached during business hours so that we can confirm your identity. Your e-mail address and telephone number are strictly confidential and will not be shared or used for any purpose other than to contact you about your comment.
Comments that do not concern specific articles in The Advocate or on Advocate.com will not be posted or published. See the Contact page for sending comments for reasons other than responding to Advocate editorial and news stories.
Please note that comments sent by fax or snail mail are unlikely to be posted, although they will be considered for publication along with all letters received via e-mail or via this Web page. Comments that chiefly concern Advocate.com content will be considered for posting only on the Web site. The Advocate reserves the right to edit submitted comments for grammar, spelling, obscenities, or libel; we will, however, do our best to preserve the original comment's style and intent. Comments considered for publication in The Advocate magazine may also be edited for length.
Home | Contact | Current Issue | LGBT Community Partners | Staff
Advertise With Us | Jobs | Help
Subscribe: Print Edition Digital Edition | Subscriber Services: Print Edition Digital Edition
Visit our Websites
Out.com | OutTraveler.com | HIVPlusMag.com | Alyson.com | Gay.com | PlanetOut.com
Privacy Policy | User Agreement | Community Guidelines | Legal Notice
Advocate.com © 2008 PlanetOut Inc. All Rights Reserved.
