Tuesday, May 26, 2009

Boycott Straight Marraige in California

California's Legal Process is Dangerously Flawed
As you probably know, the California State Supreme Court upheld Prop 8 today. This was really not surprising if you listened to the hearings. The real lesson here isn't that the Supreme Court is anti-gay. The lesson is that California's Constitution and initiate process are so fundamentally flawed that a simple majority of voters can, legally, take away the rights of a minority. I did not get the sense from this statement from the ruling:

In a sense, petitioners' and the attorney general's complaint is that it is just too easy to amend the California Constitution through the initiative process. But it is not a proper function of this court to curtail that process; we are constitutionally bound to uphold it.

that they like Prop 8 anymore than the rest of us, but there was nothing they could do. I just hope that the fundamental constitutional crisis this reveals does not get lost in the same sex marriage issue. Even if you're against same-sex marriage, this gigantic flaw in our constitutional process should terrify you.

Boycott Straight Marriage in California
I am a believer in same-sex marriage rights. I propose that all straight couples who support same-sex marriage rights should boycott marriage in the state of California until this gets fixed. Don't get married or get married out of state.

I can't find a solid statistic on this, but after a little internet research I can estimate about 120,000 marriages are performed every year in California. Assuming they are representative of the electorate and 48% of them support same-sex marriage, that would be about 58,000 marriages. Multiplied by the minimum $45 license fee (the fee varies from county to county, in SF it's $93) that's $2,592,000 in lost revenue for the government. Minimum. That doesn't even include revenue lost by wedding halls, caterers, florists, etc which, considering the average cost of a wedding in the US is $20k, is over $1 billion dollars in lost revenue.

Revenue lost in the middle of a recession, when it's badly needed. Instead, take that money to Iowa or Massachusetts. Reward a state knows how to treat its citizens.

Boycott straight marriage in California and just see how quickly same-sex marriage is legalized.


  1. Except that you'd be hurting the BUSINESSES that support the wedding industry in California more than you'd be hurting the state itself. And in all likelyhood, those business owners were anti-prop 8. And the SOONEST the amendment could be stricken would be November of 2010, so that's a year and a half of more businesses shutting down in California, some of whom probably don't deserve it.

    Now, if we could get a list of wedding vendors who donated money to the prop 8 fund (like that guy who threatened all the anti-prop 8 donors) then we can TOTALLY boycot them.

  2. Yes, but what are those businesses doing now to fight Prop 8? If they were losing money you bet they'd be doing more, and businesses that were on the fence or passively anti-prop 8 would be motivated to join the cause.

    And, wedding business started to fail and deepen the recesion, you bet the governement would do more.

  3. I say come to Iowa.

  4. The state does know how to treat its residents- It was the state legislature that decided to allow the same sex marriages in the first place. It was placed on the ballot for "the people" to decide, and that REMOVED the right already granted. Don't forget that.


Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.

In 1789, the governor of Australia granted land and some animals to James Ruse in an experiment to see how long it would take him to support himself. Within 15 months he had become self sufficient. The area is still known as Experiment Farm. This is my Experiment Farm to see how long it will take me to support myself by writing.