News Column
Story Tools

Del.icio! del.icio.us

Digg It! Digg It!

E-Mail! E-Mail to a Friend

Print! Printable Version

Discuss!

Discuss on Forum

Comment! Comments

Prop. 8 and the Hispanic Vote

Nov. 7, 2008

Jessica Haro--Assistant Editor, HispanicBusiness.com

prop 8, proposition 8, gay marriage, marriage ban, ballot measure, california politics

Proposition 8, the California initiative that prevented same-sex couples from getting married, made national headlines this week. Many see it as a look into the future of gay marriage throughout the United States. Californians approved the proposition 52 percent to 48 percent, thereby amending the state's constitution to define marriage as between a man and a woman.

Just as their votes were considered critical to winning the presidential election, Hispanics were considered a key group whose support was necessary in the Prop. 8 battle. Hispanics were courted by both the Yes and No campaigns via messages in both Spanish and English that by and large emphasized the importance of family.

The campaign in favor of Prop. 8 presented two Spanish versions of its English-language television ads, each of which warned that gay marriage would be taught in schools unless the proposition passed. In addition, the campaign used pre-recorded phone calls and a television commercial featuring telenovela star Eduardo Verastegui, in which he echoed the campaign's core messages, as well as the pride he feels for the Hispanic community and his belief that all children need both a mother and a father.

On the other side, the No on Prop. 8 campaign created two television ads -- one in Spanish and one in English -- in which Ugly Betty cast members America Ferrera, Tony Plana and Ana Ortiz asked viewers to preserve equal rights for their gay friends and family members. The campaign was also aided by an endorsement from La Opinion, a prominent Southern California Spanish-language newspaper. In its October 9 editorial, the paper reminded Hispanics that they once faced similar discrimination:

"That right was declared in May by the California Supreme Court, ruling that such a ban is discriminatory. To arrive at that decision, the judges based their opinion on a 1948 legal precedent that determined that it was illegal to prohibit marriage of couples of different races."

The story of Prop. 8 began in 2000, when 61% of California voters approved Proposition 22, another initiative banning gay marriage. On February 12, 2004, then newly-elected San Francisco mayor Gavin Newsom challenged this law by issuing marriage licenses to gay couples. This set in motion a rush of 4,000 couples to San Francisco City Hall, which was ended by a court order 29 days later. All the marriages were annulled.

In 2005 and 2007 the state legislature approved bills legalizing gay marriage, but both were vetoed by Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger. After the California Supreme Court agreed to hear the challenge to Prop. 22, supporters of the proposition began drafting what would become Prop. 8.

On May 15, 2008 the California Supreme Court ruled 4-3 that Proposition 22 was unconstitutional because it violated the California constitution's guarantee of equal rights. The suit had been filed the day after San Francisco was ordered to stop issuing marriage licenses to gay couples.

On June 17, after the California marriage license application was changed to be gender-neutral, the state began issuing marriage licenses to gay couples. More than 18,000 gay couples were married before Prop. 8 passed on November 4.

Opponents of Prop. 8 had prepared ahead of time to challenge the ban in court if it passed, and submitted the challenges the day after the election. The opponents argue that Prop. 8 is not just a constitutional amendment, but a dramatic revision of the state's constitution, which requires a vote by the California legislature before being placed on the ballot.

Hispanics have been both criticized and praised for their role in Prop. 8 passing. The Yes campaign thanked the turnout of Hispanics who were eager to vote for Barack Obama, but whose religious values would lead them to vote yes on Prop. 8. Hispanic supporters of gay marriage are quick to point out that the discrimination homosexuals face is similar to the discrimination Hispanics continue to face. Said Los Angeles Spanish-language radio personality Fernando Espuelas, "The irony of Latino support for Prop. 8 is sad. That a community that continues to struggle for basic rights would deny them to another is particularly baffling."

Of course, like every other demographic, not all Hispanics voted alike. The following is a look at how Hispanics and the total electorate voted on Prop. 8, based on an exit poll done by Edison Media Research.

As a whole:
53 percent of Hispanics voted yes; 52% of the electorate voted yes.

By gender:
54% of Hispanic males voted yes. 53% of males voted yes.
52% of both Hispanic women and women in general voted yes.

By age:
59% of Hispanics age 18-29 voted no; 61% of 18-29-year-olds voted no.
60% of Hispanics age 30-44 voted yes; 55% of 30-44-year-olds voted yes.
57% of Hispanics age 45-64 voted yes; 54% of 45-64-year-olds voted yes.
There was not enough data to compare Hispanics 65 and over to all voters 65 and over.

By religion (not specific to Hispanics):
64% of Catholics voted yes
65% of Protestants voted yes
90% of non-religious voted no.
84% weekly churchgoers voted yes
54% of occasional churchgoers voted no
83% of people who've never been to church voted no



Source: HispanicBusiness.com (c) 2008. All rights reserved.


Comments

Total Comments: 9 | Pending Comments: 0

jayunit09
11/21/2008 9:29:56 AM PST
I liked this article because it gave a good, detailed timeline of the events that led up to Prop 8's passage and the ensuing aftermath.


southwestguy
11/20/2008 1:50:14 PM PST
Seriously? Browngirl's comments have got to be the epitome of ignorance! What kinds of family values is she defending? Hatred? Ignorance? Fear? Some points for Browngirl to ponder...(1) Interracial marriage was once illegal and a MAJORITY of citizens back then did not want to change it (2) Schools were desegregated by a supreme court decision and not by a MAJORITY vote. (3) The MAJORITY of Americans approved internment camps for law-abiding, Japanese-Americans. Think about it Bgirl. Had it not been for the court's decisions, you and I would still be riding in the back of the bus. If not for the court, you would not be free to marry a man outside your so called "race." What if it were one of your children who came out to you? Would you love him/her any less? God help you.


browngirl
11/20/2008 12:04:38 PM PST
As a proud hispanic I am so thankful that my race knew the difference between a civl right and a chosen sexual preference. We as Hispanics along with any race cannot change our color while there are thousands and thousands of Ex-Homosexuals all over the world who have chosen to change their sexual preference, proof alone that it is a lifestyle choice. Not to mention the fact that there is no scientific proof to date that it is genetic. I am so happy that they did not let the liberal media or the politically correct intimidate them and we stood up for traditional family values and for our children which is why we continue to flourish regardless of any economical situation! Viva La Raza!


southwestguy
11/15/2008 6:18:22 PM PST
I can understand how Hispanics new to this country would cling to backwards ways of thinking. Most have little or no formal education. They continue to perpetuate misguided beliefs; lighter skin is better, curanderos really cure people and Jesus actually appears on tortillas. Sound familiar? Fortunately, most second-generation Hispanics are much better educated and thus not frightened by gay marriage. We have friendships that cross racial, gender and political lines and are more comfortable challenging old taboos. Still, we have much work ahead of us. The best thing we can do as second-generation Hispanics, gay and straight, is to continue working for a better future. To those of us without an education, God help you. To those of us who voted for Prop 8, shame on you.


happyjoe
11/15/2008 4:47:11 AM PST
In time as it has always been, people will look back and see that those who continue to figth for what is not a rigth to inpose ones value onto another, will not be change. The vote to recognize two individuals in the unity off one men and one women does not impose the values onto those who have chosen a very deferent live style and yet I can't help to understand why is it so important for them to be recognize as such.I know that it has alot to do with the same issues that couples go thru, the why,the who, the when, and last but not least--whats my rigth to what was/is to the other? Theres no deference in the trust level and no deference in what will go on in that type of relationship both parties don't trust each other, so to prove there devotion to each other, must be recognize a such.


Irish Eyes
11/12/2008 4:37:53 PM PST
Opponents to California’s Proposition 8 built their campaign on three lies: 1) “Marriage” between two people of the same sex was equivalent to that between a man and a woman; 2) the initiative would take away civil rights for same-sex couples – same-sex couples have not gained or lost any rights in this battle. Prop 8 restored parental rights taken away by an activist court; and 3) those in favor of Proposition 8 were hateful, anti-gay, and intolerant. Supporters of same-sex marriage cannot accept the fact that conscientious individuals who believe in traditional marriage are not homophobic, or hateful. They are now showing their hateful, intolerant behavior for free speech and religious freedom with their attacks on churches.


Diego
11/12/2008 3:06:08 PM PST
Marriage between a man and a woman normally results in children. All children deserve a mother and father because of the complementarity of the sexes. Only a small percentage of the U.S. population identifies as homosexual, less than 3%. We don't yet know the causes of same-sex attraction but someday we will. It is an objective disorder like blindness or deafness. Eyes were made to see and ears to hear, and when they don't function this way, we say something is wrong. Homosexuality is either the result of nurture, nature, or a combination of the two. In the not too distant future I believe we will discover its causes. We should not permit a radical altering of marriage, the family, or society because of the demands of a very small percentage of the population. Remember our kids.


frogman
11/11/2008 8:08:48 AM PST
"But think they should respect others religious beliefs and marriage comes from a religious ideology not a state created one." Then why have the state be part of it at all? If you want to keep marriage religious, let your church administer as it pleases and let the government contract of unions, whatever it's called, apply to everyone, not be an exclusive club for those that believe as you do.


Borincano
11/11/2008 6:27:01 AM PST
Marriage has always been between a man and woman and was founded thousands of years ago by god - not states. I take offense to trying to force change on a religious institution especially since the bible is against gay and lesbian acts. Why don't they just call it something else as not to offend a majority of others. I respect peoples choices and believe that they have the right to choose there lifes paths. But think they should respect others religous beliefs and marriage comes from a religous idealogy not a state created one.




Story Tools

Del.icio! del.icio.us

Digg It! Digg It!

E-Mail! E-Mail to a Friend

Print! Printable Version

Discuss!

Discuss on Forum

Comment! Comments