Harsh attacks characterize the Prop. 8 debate

John Wildermuth, Chronicle Staff Writer

Saturday, November 1, 2008

(10-31) 17:53 PDT SAN FRANCISCO -- "Extremists." "Indoctrination." "Liars." "Destroy America." "Blackmail."

Fiery words and harsh attacks are punctuating the campaigns surrounding Proposition 8, which would ban same-sex marriage in California.

In Bakersfield, supporters and opponents of Prop. 8 scuffle on a street corner. In the Los Angeles suburb of Torrance, a 23-year-old is charged with a felony hate crime for attacking a gay man with a "Yes on Prop. 8" lawn sign. On the Internet, terms like "homophobe" and "religious zealot" are fired back and forth on blogs and Web sites.

"I've been doing campaigns for years, but I wasn't prepared for the level of vitriol and hatred I've seen," said Frank Schubert, political consultant for the "Yes on Prop. 8" campaign. "In general, 'No on 8' supporters have just been vicious toward people who, with a good heart, disagree with them."

Harsh characterizations show up everywhere. In a fund-raising message sent out last week, San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom fired up supporters by suggesting that donors to Prop. 8 were "right-wing extremists" who were pouring millions into California to ban same-sex marriage.

Vitriol from both camps

But the attacks haven't been limited to one side.

At a "Yes on 8" rally on the steps of the state Capitol this week, Rev. Phillip Goudeaux, pastor at Calvary Christian Center in Sacramento, said that Christians should not let same-sex marriage supporters "take California from us. We're not going to let them destroy America."

At the same rally, Brad Dacus of the conservative Pacific Justice Institute likened the fight for Prop. 8 to the battle against Hitler and urged the crowd not to stand quietly and accept what happened as the Germans did.

More than $65 million total raised by both sides makes Prop. 8 the most expensive social issue campaign in the nation's history. And with almost all those dollars coming from committed individuals rather than faceless corporations, there's plenty of intensity to go around.

"There's real passion in the campaign on both sides," said Steve Smith, campaign consultant for the "No on Prop. 8" effort. " The fundamentalists feel strongly and the gay community feels strongly.

"We've had to tell people that some of the things being done aren't helpful. We don't want eggs thrown at people who still may be sitting on the fence in this election."

Not every Prop. 8 opponent has gotten the message - or paid attention to it.
Schubert complained that thousands of "Yes on 8" signs across the state have been defaced or stolen and at least one supporter of the measure, a Modesto man, was assaulted while putting out signs.

A San Diego group, Californians Against Hate, has called for a boycott of groups donating money to the "Yes on Prop. 8" effort, and the progressive Courage Campaign has begun a full-scale attack against the Mormon church, which has urged its members to contribute to the fight to ban same-sex marriage.

Letter to Mormons

In a letter signed by nearly 17,000 people, Courage Campaign called on Mormon leaders to end all support for Prop. 8 and to stop imposing their religious beliefs on the rest of society. The letter acknowledges the right of religious freedom, but it said, "Your freedoms do not include the ability to take away rights from anyone."

"This is something we thought about pretty carefully," said Rick Jacobs, founder of Courage Campaign. "But when religions involve themselves in politics, it's problematic."

Organizers of the campaign for Prop. 8 also have tried to keep supporters on message, making an early political decision that attacks on gay rights and civil unions would not help their cause.

"The Prop. 8 campaign has been clear that this is not an attack on anyone and not an attack on the gay lifestyle," said Chip White, a campaign spokesman. "Our ads are about the definition of marriage and the importance of traditional marriage."

But to many of its supporters, the campaign remains more than that. Many of them are longtime opponents of gay rights. Some Prop. 8 backers originally supported plans for a harsher state initiative that not only would have banned same-sex marriage, but also would have eliminated domestic partner and civil union rights that currently exist in California.

Leaders of the Tupelo, Miss.-based American Family Association, which has given $500,000 to support Prop. 8, talk ominously about "the homosexual agenda" and have organized boycotts against Disney, McDonalds, Ford and others for actively seeking gay business or for advertising in publications focusing on a lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender readership.

Another anti-gay activist, Randy Thomasson of the Campaign for Children and Families, called for a boycott of Google after the company and its co-founders came out in opposition to Prop. 8.

The question of same-sex marriage "is an emotional issue; people feel strongly," said White, the "Yes on Prop. 8" spokesman. "People feel strongly about not having their children exposed to gay marriage in elementary school."

With both sides saying the Prop. 8 race is tight and getting tighter, the contest isn't likely to calm down in the final days before Nov. 4. Still, the campaigns want to keep things from getting out of hand.

"Our latest ads feature (state Superintendent of Public Instruction) Jack O'Connell and (Sen.) Dianne Feinstein," said Smith, head of the "No on Prop. 8" effort. "They're not real fire breathers."

A look at truth behind attacks in Prop. 8 debate

With charges flying on both sides of the Proposition 8 debate, here's a look at the truth behind some of the claims, attacks and political statements in some of the television spots.

Charge Why it's right Why it's wrong

"Our schools aren't required to teach anything about marriage."
John O'Connell, state superintendent of public instruction, in a "No on Prop. 8" TV ad.

Well, yes, California schools aren't exactly required to teach about marriage.

About 96 percent of state schools elect to teach comprehensive sex education. If they do, then the state requires them to teach "respect for marriage and committed relationships." And marriage in California would include same-sex marriage if Prop. 8 doesn't pass.

If Prop. 8 fails, "churches could lose their tax exemption."
TV ad for "Yes on Prop. 8."

Anyone with money for the filing fee can sue for anything, so someone could ostensibly sue a church that refuses to perform a same-sex marriage ceremony.

The Roman Catholic Church isn't going to lose its tax exemption because priests won't perform same-sex marriages at St. Mary's Cathedral. The lone case cited by Prop. 8 supporters involved a New Jersey Methodist group that lost a part of its property tax exemption when it refused to allow a lesbian couple's civil commitment ceremony on a piece of oceanfront property - not a church - it had long opened for public use.

Prop. 8 "is pushed by out-of-state special interests."

California Nurses Association in a "No on Prop. 8" TV ad. Prop. 8 has received millions of dollars from out-of-state groups and contributors.

Prop. 8 supporters say that about 95 percent of their better than 76,000 donors and 80 percent of their $31 million in contributions come from California. About 12 percent of the "Yes on Prop. 8" contributions of $25,000 or more come from out of state, compared with about 17 percent of similar high-dollar contributions made to the "No on Prop. 8" side.

"A leading Prop. 8 opponent has warned that parents cannot remove children from (same-sex marriage) instruction."

TV ad for "Yes on Prop. 8." The National Center for Lesbian Rights did produce a legal issues guide saying that schools are not legally required to allow parents to pull their children from instruction on "gender, sexual orientation or family life."

According to a spokeswoman for the state Department of Education, the state education code gives parents a virtually unlimited right to pull their children from any class they object to, whether it's sex education or spelling.

E-mail John Wildermuth at jwildermuth@sfchronicle.com.
This article appeared on page A - 7 of the San Francisco Chronicle