Elton John is enlisted as an unlikely ally for pro-Proposition 8 fundraising efforts

Protests and vandalism mounted by advocates of same-sex marriage are being used by promoters of Proposition 8 as a fundraising tool.

Jeff Flint, manager of the Yes-on-8 campaign, the proposition that banned gay marriage, also is using an unlikely ally -- Sir Elton John.

Flint sent out an e-mail solicitation decrying the tactics by some foes of the initiative and citing a USA Today article that quotes the performer as describing he and his partner are in a civil partnership, not marriage, and how he prefers it that way.

Prominent on the e-mail is a large red button that says: Donate.

“We want our supporters to know that we’re not going to stand by while they are harassed and intimidated when we asked them to support us,” Flint said today.

There have been numerous protests and some vandalism since voters approved the measure by a margin of 52.25% to 47.8% on Nov 4.

“It shows the so-called forces of tolerance are the most intolerant force in politics,” Flint said. “I can’t believe politically it is helping them.”

Money raised by the measure will be used in the coming court battle over Proposition 8. More than 40 Democratic legislators have filed a friend-of-the-court brief urging that the California Supreme Court overturn the initiative. Arnold Schwarzenegger also has called on the court to intervene.

-- Dan Morain

To receive automatic cellphone updates on each new Ticket item go here and register.

Photo: Schalk van Zuydam /Associated Press

Comments

[Micheal]

The WILL of the many must NEVER over-ride the RIGHTS of the few.

I am one of the rare people that is for Gay marriage but was pleased to see Prop 8 pass. Now it becomes a strictly constitutional at the federal level.

Prop 8 will not hold up federally essentially making gay marriage legal in all 50 states.

Homophobes and those who seek to limit the right of some American's think they won the battle but in fact, history will show that they lost the war.

[Anne]

At one time I had compassion for the homosexuals and their concerns on this issue. But, I am shocked to see the hatred, rioting, vandalism and powder mailings that they are demonstrating because of the way people voted! Hello! This is America. People have the RIGHT to vote for something you don't agree with. You don't get to choose how someone votes. They do. And you don't harrass them for how they voted or their religious beliefs. That is the definition of a "hate crime" and you are not the only ones who have protections from such things.

[Andrew]

Lois Willias: Obama believes in the traditional definition of marriage between a man and a woman--but he also came out against Prop 8: http://tinyurl.com/54hopn

He was rather quiet about it, of course.

And just to throw my two cents in: I'm one of those guys you've seen walking in marches and protesting, and I'm appalled by some of the stories I'm reading about fellow NO8 supporters. I think straights and gays *should* be voicing their anger at what I view as legal enforcement of religious beliefs. On that point, there are many posting here who would disagree with me.

But I would hope we could find common ground in asserting that there is NO excuse for ever turning to violence, or even the slur-throwing and name-calling that has been involved in some of these protests (that goes for either side). While I'm straight, I sympathize with gays who have been beaten, spit upon and even murdered in our past for being born the way they are. That said, there is no excuse to turn to the kind of ignorant animosity that simply fosters more hate.

In short: Be loud, keep marching, but bring a cool head with you.

[Nate]

I don't understand how it can be deemed unconstitutional when Prop 8 has become an amendment to the California Constitution. The State Supreme Court judges struck down the voice of the people with the DOMA, the people rose up, voted, made their voices heard, and bound the judges with a Constitutional amendment. The Court can no longer say that it is unconstitutional for marriage to be only between a man and a woman because there is now a constitutional amendment proclaiming it as such. If anyone needs a civics lesson, it is the people trying to declare the amendment as unconstitutional through the state court.

[Eric]

To all of you who think that specfic religious beliefs can trump Constitutionally-protected equal rights, maybe you would be better off living in Saudi Arabia or Iran. And the men there can offer you a lot of "traditional" bases for supporting the opression of women and minority religious sects and anyone else who is not like them. A civil society is supposed to be civil for everyone, so if you don't like that you can feel free to move somewhere else and be amongst your own kind, and as the "majority" you can feel free to bestow or take away rights from others as you see fit.

[Sam]

Elton John is despicable. After years of being in the closet, he is obviously still fighting his own internal homophobia. What a coward.

[Hwddj]

The protests you are seeing are the initial response to the outcome of the elections across this nation (CA, AZ, FL, AR). Many in the gay community have protested peacefully as a means of expressing their feelings over the anger, disappointment and frustration they feel as a result of the outcome. Because this community is as diverse as the rest of the population (i.e., we come from all backgrounds), there is just as much diversity in our opinions and the way we express ourselves. Of course, the media reports on the most sensationalistic of those expressions. I'm certain many in the community do not condone the use of violence or vandalism in these protests and realize that really gathers us no respect. Nevertheless, this outcome appears to have polarized the community to ban together and hopefully work toward gaining more equal protection under the law. Civil unions as they exist now simply do not provide all of the same protections as do 'traditional marriages'.

Regardless of how you may feel on the particular issue of whether it will be called ‘marriage’, ‘civil unions’, or (fill in the blank), realize that there are people out there who genuinely want the equal benefits and protections that marriage as it exists under the law provides. Regardless of how you feel about same-sex relationships, they will continue to occur with or without marriage. Many such relationships have already endured for many years. Some of them already had children from prior marriage, some have children whom they have adopted, and some have even created children on their own - some will choose to be united for other reasons entirely. No vote will change that. What I truly believe these couples/families want is the opportunity to have their unions equally protected under the law - we are not there yet.

I for one do not believe every one who voted in favor of Prop 8 did so with hate or malice in their hearts (this based on those I spoke with before the election who gave their reasoning for their decision). I also know that those who worked hard to have Prop 8 defeated are examining the mistakes made in this campaign, and are poised to move forward with the next steps necessary to gain the equal protection being sought after. Campaigns notoriously are played dirty. The anger present, in my opinion, comes from the misrepresentation of facts by those who ran the campaign to pass Proposition 8, and the misleading statements that were made in order to gain more votes.

Here is a suggestion...take this opportunity to educate yourself on what you might think you know about those on the opposing sides of this issue (this goes both ways). Perhaps with a little discussion and enlightenment, we will be able to move forward with a better understanding of where both sides are coming from, and will thereby be able to gain that which we seek, a solution.

[Cameron]

Yes smile, what are gay people thinking opposing discrimination against them? It would be like if african americans opposed the klan. Doesn't the klan have the right to their opinion? geez.

In response to the article, who cares? Since when does elton john represent all gay people? Do brad pitt and angelina jolie represent all straight people? Clearly not.

[Cameron]

Do any of these people actually research the history of marriage before making claims. It originally DID include same sex partners. Homosexuality is not a new thing nor has it always been as "taboo" as it is today. If anyone is "stealing" a term, it's straight people by claiming that they can suddenly define something that has changed a million times, that STILL takes different forms depending culture.

[Tom]

The tyranny of the majority cannot over rule the rights of a minority. Mob rule cannot over-ride the rights of a minority.

EVERYONE in California is a minority of some sort. How would Straight White Men react, if the voters of California decided that they no longer were allowed to re-marry if they had previously been divorced. Don't think the ultra right wing religious don't have that goal in their sights.

If you discriminate against one minority group, ipso facto you can discriminate against another. The ignorant voters of California have unleashed a firestorm that the Mormons, Catholics, et al will use to usher in their version of Sharia law. Unless the Supreme Court rules against Prop H8, be prepared to become the most oppressed state in the nation. Once you pit minority group against minority group, the only road is down, down, down.

[Greg]

Elton John doesn't even live here and he doesn't understand the history of separate and unequal in this country. He is rich anyway and doesn't have to worry about all the protections marriage provides.

[Stuart]

Being gay is not a choice. I 'knew' when I was not even a teenager...so, I chose to be gay at age, oh, 10?
Riiiiight.
I love that folks say it's a choice. Who would choose to be gay knowing that you'd face discrimination and hatred by bigots all across this great land? So, nope, not a choice. Happy to be gay though.

Next - every one of those hateful amendments voted on by hateful bigots in the past 8 Rove-ian years needs to be overturned as pure discrimination.
I don't care what religious folks do in their lives; they need to not care as well about what others do. Of course, they won't, but, one can dream.

It's such a non-issue that's become a massive issue.
I was saddened when Prop 8 passed. Now, I'm galvanized as are plenty of gay AND straight folks with 1/2 a brain. It's appalling that people can vote on other people. Just appalling.

[Roger]

Before there were Christians, Jews or Muslims, there were little gay children growing up. In cultures like ancient Greece, the birthplace of democracy, some of those gay kids grew up to be great leaders, philosophers and poets. And when the last believer in the Bible finally dies... there will be more little gay children growing up to do great things in this world. This fact gives me great comfort!

[Tim Tobish]

Abortion centers have been bombed and doctors have been killed as protest by the right-to-life side...and yet the same people that support limiting abortions are appalled by some petty vandalism.

In the late 60s, entire neighborhoods were burned down in riots over the denial of civil rights to blacks. Yet the Yes on 8 vote was 70% of the black community.

Some religious organizations came out against Proposition 8. However, on the flip side, the Catholic Knights of Columbus and the LDS funded nearly 80% of the Yes on 8 campaign.

People are angry that civil rights are being denied, and there have been some isolated incidents. It's not just gay people that are protesting; it's an issue that strikes the hearts of many, including but not limited to people with gay brothers, uncles, cousins, children, mothers and fathers.

The Yes on 8 contingent would like to bask in their victory, yet they must realize that their win on the ballot proposition has exploded a bomb that will polarize many against their 'pro family' agenda. They're upset because "the gays" aren't meekly saying "Yes sir, can I have another" and slinking off to their rooms without dinner. They didn't realize that the stereotypically passive and effeminate homosexuals aren't really either, and will now be a formidable opponent, thanks to their misguided efforts to impose their religious beliefs on an entire nation.

These are the same people that complained that Christians were persecuted in America during a time when the religious right had money, power, and political access greater than virtually any other interest group in the country.

My heart bleeds. James Dobson, the CWFA, tthe "Family" Research Council, and the rest of their ilk better lay low, because the gloves are off now, and yet they still don't want to accept the consequences of denying civil rights to a minority. Whether it be 10% or 1%, minorities still have constitutionally protected rights in this country, and 52% of the vote doesn't exactly qualify as a mandate.

This ain't over, and I don't think they're going to like the way it plays out.

[Observer10]

While Elton John does have a point - who needs marriage - it's not as if straight people respect the institution! But, I doubt that was the reason most people voted Yes on Prop 8 - it was a hate fest - no more no less. Please provide me with evidence that the same sex marriages performd in CA had any impact whatsoever on anyone who voted Yes on Prop 8. And, the problem is that if it is let to stand minority rights will never again be protected in this country and even elsewhere in the world if they can be so easily be taken away by the majority. The role of the court as final arbiter will have been changed forever and that is the sad result of Prop 8. Religious groups should see through their hate and realize that they may be the ones that need the court to protect their rights in the future.

[Vince]

Is this supposed to be significant? There were also slaves that didn't want to escape to freedom in fear that they might catch the wrath of their masters if caught. Well Mr. John, you can stay behind if you want to. Oh wait, I forgot, he's not even an American. That makes him especially irrelevant in this debate.

And homosexuals aren't trying to push anything on anyone except equality, which already existed, thanks to the California Supreme Court, until this proposition came along and gave heterosexuals exclusive marriage rights. Oppression at its finest. The Yes on 8 campaign did a terrific job of disguising the heart of the issue. No one is waging any wars on religion. This is about equality and nothing more.

[Genetics will mute this faux debate]

Genetic disorders will not be cured by law but by science
We need to harness the best research minds in the field
of genetics so that parents and society will be freed from
the burden of having a homosexual child and having to
bastardize the dictionary and the civil code. Certain
values and institutions must remain unshakable as they
represent the anchors of morality and civilisation.

[Vanessa]

At this point, it is worth asking ourselves in demanding marriage for same sex couples are we fighting for acceptance or are we fighting for equal rights?

If we are fighting for equal rights then let's fight for equal rights not a term.

If we are fighting for acceptance, I’m afraid that may take some time, as much as a century. I mean look at black people in this country. Yeah, Barack Obama, gorgeous mulatto genius is the President but it took the Emancipation Proclamation, Reconstruction, Civil Rights, Harvard and pop culture to make that a reality. And even now, who are we kidding to think that every single American truly accepts the equality of black people? I worked the phone banks for West VA and Indiana, it ain't pretty out there.

My point being, who really cares if they accept us or not? That's not what we're fighting for...right?

[Religious?]

Why does this have to be a religious issue? It is clear that the best place for a child to grow up is in a functional home with both a mother and a father. Gender is an important human characteristic. It should not be denied. Of course there is divorce and there are single parents, and all manner of family configurations, including gay families. However, we should strive for what is best for society, which is a strong family unit with a mother and a father. If we can't quite make the mark, we should not compromise what is best by demanding everyone else change their standards to match ours. We should just continue trying to do the best with what we've got, whether we're straight or gay.

[gay christian]

Take away the rights of others in the name of Jesus and then "play victim"?!

Please beloved Jesus, save your gay child from your other so called "followers" who crucify us.

[Bernard]

It has been so interesting to see the open arrogance of some white gay folks condemning and singling out the black community in this debate. Their "you went through it too, now support my civil rights.." is beyond arrogance. Especially when they hop in their mercedes and auto lock the doors after... for some white gays; it is imperative you become accountable for your racism. In fact, if you had been more accountable for your racism before the election, and spent time reaching out to the black community in neighborhoods other than silverlake and laguna beach, you might've had more support. Again, auto locks...
Oh, and how about that Michigan Womyn's Music Festival? Another shining example of civil rights? Not if you are the letter T in the acronym. Puhleeeze....
I only wish that the conformity worshiping marriage activists within the gay community would spend as much energy, time, and effort lending a helping hand to the thousands of young gay youth who are homeless runaways, the trans people murdered, the black lesbians discriminated against in the workplace, as they spend on trying to conform to the flawed institution of marriage, and getting even more priveledge in the straight world in the form of tax breaks, ect...
So, in closing... If you are white, drive a benz, live in WEHO or the Castro district, ect... please be very careful when you relate your struggle to the Black Civil Rights Movement. Please take a moment to examine the differences between your struggle and the Black Civil Rights Movement next time you auto lock your doors in South LA.

[Mike D.]

Hey Smile. Why don't you go back to school, learn how to spell, and stop butchering the English language. Your narrow minded view of marriage is obviously the result of lack of education. By the way, for those of you who oppose gay marriage... ever heard of "Separation of Church and State?" If you oppose gay marriage because of your religious belief, so be it. However, you don't have a right to impose your moral belief on everyone else.

[Mari]

I wil keep it simple:

“Religious conservatives' insistence that same-sex marriage is "a threat to the sacred covenant that God created for one man and one woman" is based on the widespread belief that the institution of marriage is sacred. It is a false belief. Quite the contrary, marriage is a secular institution created by the state, completely separate and distinct from the religious sacrament of HOLY MATRIMONY. Beginning with New York, the states created CIVIL MARRIAGE at the turn of the 19th century to facilitate interfaith unions that the church would not permit.” By Skeeter Sanders

“Government has no business imposing some people's religious beliefs over others. Especially if it denies people's civil rights." Mildred Loving

[T. Rogers]

This is NOT about equal rights. Civil unions in California have all the same rights as marriages. This is about trying to get validation from the broader society. Period. And people can see that. I have nothing against gays. I am not concerned about what people do in their beds, or what kinds of contractual agreements they draw between themselves. However, for me, there are two problems.

First, the typical relationship between two people of the same sex and two people of the opposite sex is NOT the same. Sorry. You cannot spin that away. It defies all logic for one to say it is. That is the problem with basing "rights" on "love". How do you quantify love? You can't. And if you can not quantify it you cannot use the rule of law to attempt to validate it (Especially when the rule of law already gives you a valid option).

Second, the comparisons to the Civil Rights Movement only hurt the cause. The CRM was founded in the black church. It was powered by faith in God, because blacks had nothing else to believe in. You cannot belittle and demonize faith in God and then say your cause is an extension of the Civil Rights Movement. It proves you truly know nothing about the Civil Rights Movement and really DO NOT identify like you say you do.

[Daniel]

So Elton John is satisfied with drinking at the other fountain, that still doesn't make separate fountains equal.