Michelle Marzullo

San Diego Celebrates Prop 8 Defeat

Filed By Michelle Marzullo | August 06, 2010 8:30 AM | comments

Filed in: Marriage Equality, Politics
Tags: California, Jerry Sanders, Judge Vaughn Walker, marriage, Mormon, prop 8 decision, San Diego

The sunset rally celebrating the defeat of Proposition 8 at the San Diego LGBT Center, known simply as "The Center," was summer 2010 190.JPGimpressive. Hundreds showed up with banners and signs, wedding cake was dished out by the plateful, and though we all understand this may be temporary--it was a night for celebration!

The fight around Proposition 8, California's constitutional ban on marriage equality, which was voted into law in November 2008, has deep roots in San Diego.

"I Do" San Diego

The city is the second largest city in California behind Los Angeles with one of the highest populations of queer people in any US city, but it is also fiercely militaristic because of our large Naval and Marine bases. Add to that the fact that we have multiple mega churches in the area, not the least of which are several Mormon temples. Hence, it is quite conservative here and most conservatives like marriage as do many conservative queers. One person attending the rally chortled, "Us queers in San Diego, we come here to live our lives, to settle down, this is what we do here."

Thumbnail image for summer 2010 199.JPG

Knowing all this, it was not a surprise that the protest rally in San Diego after the passage of Proposition 8 in November 2008 was the largest in California with estimates topping out at 25,000 protesters. Indeed, many of the people around here vividly understood that its passage was absolutely possible, if not probable.

It was here in San Diego and what is referred to not so lovingly as "East County" (the dusty ex-burbs) that the Mormons and their very married minions were organizing to remove our rights to marry in California as captured in the newly released documentary "The Mormon Proposition." Though Mormons make up a mere 2% of Californians they funded 71% of the effort going towards the passage of Proposition 8, reports "The Mormon Proposition."

The birthplace of Prop. 8 was Southern California, so given this history it was as sweet as wedding-cake-icing to attend the celebration of Proposition 8 being struck down at the Center. Republican Mayor Jerry Sanders gave a touching speech just after sunset to the large crowd assembled at there.

Mayor Sanders was initially opposed to marriage equality when running for mayor. In an August 2008 press conference announcing that he would sign a San Diego City Council resolution in support of marriage equality, he explained his change of heart in a tearful speech. Indeed he has come a long way on the topic and remains one of our strongest political advocates. His speech given at what hopefully amounts to the sunset of Prop. 8 gave voice to the change that is occurring, person by person, around the country on this issue:

"I just wanted to talk just for a couple of seconds about what I think is important about tonight. Number one, it's about each of you and I want to congratulate each of you. And I want to thank you for your courage. I know it's not easy to come out. I know it's not easy to talk to your family. I know many of your families have turned their backs on you. It has been your courage that has gotten us to this point. It has been your courage that has lead me to this point.

"And I talked about it inside, that I was here for a debate in 2005 for the mayor's campaign. And I know I irritated a lot of people with my position, and as a young politician even though in an old body [laughter], I was trying to learn how to do the dance and for that I apologize because I made the wrong decision [cheering!].

And I want to thank each of you for helping me to make the right decision and there's been a lot of leaders in that and Delores Jacobs from The Center, and Toni Atkins and my wife Rana and my family have been tremendously helpful in helping me to understand that what I once thought was equal was literally discriminatory. And I want to thank Judge Walker today and I want to thank the San Francisco City Attorney's Office for allowing me to testify in the trial [cheers!] and for allowing me to be part of the history that we're all sharing today.

"Each generation has an opportunity. Each generation finds something that's been wrong for a long time. Each generation finds discrimination in one form or another. And all of us out here today, every single one of us, can say that we've been part of helping to solve that discrimination in the United States. And I just want to thank each of you for doing that [cheers!].

"And finally, as I look out there, not one of you threatens the marriage of my wife and I [laughter and cheers!]. My daughter being engaged to Meaghan doesn't threaten our marriage. And I don't see that any of you are threatening anybody else in the world.

"Everybody in the United States, everybody in the United States should have the same equal treatment that allows you to find somebody that you love, that allows you to marry that person, to grow old with them, and to create a family and that's what today's about. Congratulations."

Indeed, congratulations California! Though there is more work to be done, let us celebrate the success of our struggles today.

Ted Gideonse contributed to this story.


Recent Entries Filed under Politics:

Leave a comment

We want to know your opinion on this issue! While arguing about an opinion or idea is encouraged, personal attacks will not be tolerated. Please be respectful of others.

The editorial team will delete a comment that is off-topic, abusive, exceptionally incoherent, includes a slur or is soliciting and/or advertising. Repeated violations of the policy will result in revocation of your user account. Please keep in mind that this is our online home; ill-mannered house guests will be shown the door.


I wish I could have been there with you, Michelle. I can only imagine what that must have felt like.

Michelle Marzullo Michelle Marzullo | August 6, 2010 3:26 PM

i'll tel you that i felt John Stuart Mill in the air with his warning about guarding against the tyranny of the majority. this is exactly what our country's governmental system was created for--to protect the small, politically unpopular groups. it does provide some solace to know that it is working as it was meant to.

Mill believed that “the struggle between Liberty and Authority is the most conspicuous feature in the portions of history.” For him, liberty in antiquity was a “contest... between subjects, or some classes of subjects, and the government." Mill defined "social liberty" as protection from "the tyranny of political rulers." He introduces a number of different tyrannies, including social tyranny, and also the tyranny of the majority.

Social liberty for Mill was to put limits on the ruler’s power so that he would not be able to use his power on his own wishes and make every kind of decision which could harm society; in other words, people should have the right to have a say in the government’s decisions. He said that social liberty was “the nature and limits of the power which can be legitimately exercised by society over the individual”. It was attempted in two ways: first, by obtaining recognition of certain immunities, called political liberties or rights; second, by establishment of a system of "constitutional checks".

here's a summary of mill's ideas on the tyranny of the majority, which was expanded upon in the federalist papers:

However, limiting the power of government is not enough. "Society can and does execute its own mandates: and if it issues wrong mandates instead of right, or any mandates at all in things with which it ought not to meddle, it practices a social tyranny more formidable than many kinds of political oppression, since, though not usually upheld by such extreme penalties, it leaves fewer means of escape, penetrating much more deeply into the details of life, and enslaving the soul itself.” (find it here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Stuart_Mill)

Indeed, Prop. 8 supporters would like to do just that -- deaden our souls. The irony of course is that they love to look back and use the constitution and founder's philosophies to justify their own bigotry. of course, they ignore the fundamentals that don't go along with their neat and tidy story--but we will not forget. mob rule is not what America was based on. indeed, things like religious freedom are protected by our country under the exact philosophy that attempts to prevent the tyranny of the majority. it is exactly what the puritans were escaping--how easily they forget!

Well done, Michelle. A very touching report.

As for Mill, I have the feeling that if you scratch a libertarian, you find a conservative. Remember, it was Mill who said that despotism is permissible when the populace is backwards, and enslavement of a people could be morally justified. (He was a critic of slavery, but as a utilitarian. Libertarianism is a tricky thing.)

For anti-gay libertarians, it's all "tyranny of the majority" when a legislature passes a gay friendly law, but it's "judicial activism" when a court makes a gay friendly ruling.

I prefer to see Walker's ruling as a triumph of good government, rather than a "government out of our bedroom" victory.

Michelle Marzullo Michelle Marzullo | August 7, 2010 2:20 PM

Thanks for the background Dr. Weiss. I am definitely not a poly sci major and appreciate the broader history. I do love the idea of guarding against the tyrrany of the majority, while fully understanding that i don't know as much about the full context and implications. thank you for that. in solidarity, michelle

I see that Mexican flag there! Make sure Michelle Malkin doesn't get ahold of that. :)

Anita Wollman | August 9, 2010 5:35 AM

I live next door to Iowa, where Gay Marriage hs been legal. I am from Germany and it's been legal there for some time. It is about time that Cali (or at least parts) comes around to what is right. Although I am hetero, I believe that ALL people should have the right to be married. And it is discusting to me all those "cheating" homophobes who are afraid that the institution of marriage would be hurt. What exactly constitutes a marriage? To me it is 2 people who love each and are committed to one another. I am "still legally" married to a man who thought nothing of cheating, is "that" marriage? I hardly think so.
So, to those who FINALLY have the same right, my Congrats and lets not stop fighting till EVERYBODY has the same right.
Anita from South Dakota