After months of posturing and debate, three statewide polls show a majority of California residents support a ballot measure that would ensure the only legal marriages in that state are between "one man and one woman."
California voters will decide Tuesday on Proposition 22, designed to prevent formal sanction of same-sex marriages performed in other jurisdictions from gaining future legal recognition on par with traditional marriage.
Broad support for the measure has come from a variety of conservative religious groups, including Catholics, Evangelicals and The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, which asked its members in California months ago to help pass the initiative by volunteering their time and money.
Religious opposition has come largely from liberal congregations whose leaders have voiced support for gay clergy and the blessing of same-sex unions within their churches. Three Southern California bishops — Lutheran, Methodist and Episcopal — also issued a joint statement opposing the measure.
The polls, released earlier last week by the Los Angeles Times and San Francisco Examiner, and last month by the Public Policy Institute of California, all show that 55 to 57 percent of voters favor the measure, about 38 percent oppose it and 7 percent remain undecided. The figures mirror sentiment measured last fall and show Proposition 22, also known as the Protec-
tion of Marriage Act and the Knight Initiative, has majority support among voters in all demographic groups outside the San Francisco Bay area.
Results also reflect a larger national sentiment on the issue, according to a nationwide Harris poll released in early February, which shows 57 percent of 1,010 respondents opposed marriage between men and 55 percent opposed it between women.
Written by California Sen. Pete Knight, a Republican, the initiative states: "Only a marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized."
Thirty other states have enacted similar laws.
In some ways, the California debate has become a microcosm of a larger national discussion on tolerance by both sides and the right to voice one's views — religious or otherwise — regarding gays and public policy. While the debate plays out on TV, in offices, restaurants and anywhere people gather, nowhere has it been more talked about than in California churches.
Last summer, after a letter from the LDS Church's area presidency in California seeking support for the initiative was read from the pulpit to some 740,000 members, San Francisco Board of Supervisors member Mark Leno publicly questioned whether the church's tax-exempt status should be revoked.
Church officials maintained they had a constitutional right to speak out on moral issues and that their members were free to act and vote their own conscience.
Grass roots
Robert Glazier, spokesman for the "Yes on 22" campaign, said while religion has played a part in the debate, the grass roots nature of support for the measure has involved people "from every geographic region, socio-economic, ethnic, political and religious background."
Some 30,000 residents have donated money — "the average donation well under $100" — and volunteered "hundreds of thousands of hours" going door-to-door and manning phone banks to support the measure.
"We've had literally thousands of synagogues and churches endorsing it . . . from across the religious spectrum, and that support is very gratifying. It's not a religious campaign, but I think most everyone does recognize that the foundation for our society is the family unit, and that's why we see such broad support."
Advocates on both sides have taken to the airways, and supporters have placed thousands of bright blue "Protect Marriage: Yes on Prop. 22" signs in their yards and places of business.
Formal campaign arguments in support of the measure have focused on closing the legal loophole "that would let another state's laws decide the definition of marriage in California," rather than on the legitimacy of same-sex unions, Glazier said. "We recognize that in a state as diverse and tolerant as California, that people are free to live their lives in any way they choose, but that doesn't give them the right to redefine marriage."
Opponents initially rejected the measure as unnecessary because same-sex marriage is illegal in California. But Glazier said the "No on Knight" campaign has become "extremely negative" within past days. He panned one television ad featuring footage of an anti-gay protest by a fundamentalist Christian group at the funeral of murdered gay college student Matthew Shepherd. It says support for the Proposition 22 would fuel intolerance and hate crimes.
"It's a desperate tactic by a desperate campaign for those who find themselves behind in the polls. We believe we'll continue to maintain our lead and that Californians are responding to a positive and respectful campaign. We've conducted it that way, and we will continue to do so," Glazier said.
Tracey Conaty, press secretary for the "No on Knight" campaign, did not return a phone call seeking response to Glazier's comments, but a press release on the campaign's Web site said the new ad is designed to "strip away the veneer of moderation covering Prop 22." It accuses those who support the initiative of fostering "the very fear and ignorance and intolerance upon which hatred feeds. One way we can stop these (hate) crimes is by stopping hate initiatives."
'A matter of morality'
Religious leaders who support the measure say they are not fostering hate but are speaking out on a moral issue that affects their members and society at large.
Cardinal Roger Mahony, archbishop of Los Angeles, released a statement in December noting he and the California Catholic Conference endorse the measure "to assure that God's plan for marriage and family life . . . remains the bedrock upon which marriage is respected within our society."
He warned that "some will use this initiative to advance attitudes that foster ill-will against homosexual person, their parents and their families." He said those who do so, "act in a manner that is wholly inconsistent with Catholic Church teaching that affirms the inherent dignity of every human person."
Even before Mahony's stand, President Gordon B. Hinckley told LDS Church members during the church's last general conference in October that the faith has a moral obligation to take a stand.
Speaking of the California initiative, he said, "Latter-day Saints are working as part of a coalition to safeguard traditional marriage from forces in our society which are attempting to redefine that sacred institution. God-sanctioned marriage between a man and a woman has been the basis of civilization for thousands of years. There is no justification to redefine what marriage is. Such is not our right, and those who try will find themselves answerable to God.
"Some portray legalization of so-called same-sex marriage as a civil right. This is not a matter of civil rights; it is a matter of morality."
President Hinckley also cautioned that the church's stand "should never be interpreted as justification for hatred, intolerance, or abuse of those who profess homosexual tendencies, either individually or as a group."
The LDS Church has refrained from donating money to support the initiative, choosing to encourage its membership to support the proposal with time and money.