California's Proposition 8, which would write into the state constitution a provision saying, "only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California," is trailing in the latest poll (PDF) 55% to 38%. In the months since the proposition made the ballot, it's support has never gone above 42% and opposition has ranged from 51% to 55%.
In July, Mark DiCamillo, director of the Field Poll, told the San Diego Union-Tribune, "Starting out behind is usually an ominous sign for a proposition. Over 90 percent of propositions that start out behind get taken down." So far, defeat seems a safe bet for the ballot measure that would strip same-sex couples of their newly won right to marry in the state of California.
Social conservatives pushed to put Proposition 8 on the ballot after the California Supreme Court ruled in May that the state constitution's guarantees of rights invalidated an earlier ban on same-sex marriage. That court decision put California alongside Massachusetts as states that grant full legal recognition, equal to that for heterosexual relationships, to same-sex relationships.
Other states, including Connecticut, the District of Columbia, Hawaii, Maine, New Jersey, New Hampshire, Oregon, Vermont and Washington offer differing levels of legal recognition to same-sex relationships without calling them "marriages."
You know, it wasn't that long ago that people could be arrested for homosexual conduct. I was in college when Bowers v. Hardwick was handed down, allowing Georgia's law against "consensual sodomy" to stand. I was four years old when the Stonewall Riots broke out in New York City's Greenwich Village in response to routine police raids on bars frequented by gay men.
Now we're debating whether gay and lesbian couples should be able to get married or should have to settle for some sort of "civil union."
That's progress.