Californians will be asked to support or reject a ban on same-sex marriage on election day. EVERY MONTH, Dave Mitchem drives 60 miles into Los Angeles with his elderly mother, Mary Joe Molloy, to attend midmorning Mass at Our Lady of the Angels Cathedral.
A softly-spoken, gentle, bearded man, Mitchem is, like others, troubled by the legalisation of same-sex marriages in California, following the state's supreme court decision last May.
On election day on November 4th, Californians will be asked to support or reject proposition eight, an amendment to the state's constitution that would overturn the court's decision and once again bar same-sex unions.
It reads: "Shall the California constitution be changed to eliminate the right of same-sex couples to marry, providing that only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognised in California?"
"I am very uncomfortable with gay marriages," says Mitchem. "I mean, the Book of Leviticus tells us that homosexuality is an abomination; that a man and a woman become one in marriage: not a man and a man, or a woman and a woman."
So far, almost $50 million (€37.57 million) has been spent by both sides of the argument, with some of the money for the campaign to reject the amendment coming from Hollywood stars such as Steven Spielberg, Brad Pitt and Ellen DeGeneres.
Yesterday, proposition eight was backed by 50 African- American pastors when they gathered in Sacramento "to stand up for traditional marriage and the rights of children".
Opinion polls offer contradictory predictions, though the two latest suggest "prop eight" could pass by a narrow majority - if undecided voters stay at home on November 4th.
The possibility that same-sex marriages could disappear within months of being legalised has led to a rush of applications to marry by gay and lesbian couples at San Francisco City Hall.
The amendment has divided the churches. The Catholic Church says it "simply affirms the historic, logical and reasonable definition of marriage - and does not remove any benefits from other contractual arrangements".
Marriage, the church says, is central to "stable, flourishing and hospitable societies" and is the "ideal relationship between a man and a woman for the purposes of the procreation".
Criticising the court ruling legalising same-sex marriage, the bishops said the decision "discounts the biological and organic reality of marriage", "diminishes" it to just a partnership and makes children no longer its "primary social rationale".
But on the ground the Catholic Church appears keen to stay out of the debate. On Sunday, Our Lady of the Angels priest Fr Francis Mendoza was full of smiles - until he knew the questions were about proposition eight.
"I'm sorry. I am not authorised to talk to the press. You'll have to speak to the monsignor," he said quickly, displaying a reticence that was shared by others among his congregation at the cathedral.
Episcopalians oppose proposition eight. "Everybody understands that Jesus, in his own culture, was notorious and persecuted for consorting with outcasts," says Rev Peter Laarman, a United Church of Christ minister who opposes the gay marriage ban.
"When Jesus said all are welcome at the table, I think he really meant all."
Californian governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, who twice opposed legislation that would have legalised gay marriage, now opposes the proposition.
"I respect the court's decision and as governor I will uphold its ruling."
Campaigners are pulling few punches. In one television advertisement, a cheerful girl wearing pigtails is seen in a kitchen with her mother telling her that teacher said "that a prince can marry a prince and I can marry a princess".
"Think it can't happen?" asks the advertisement's narrator. "It's already happened in Massachusetts, the first state to legalise same-sex marriages."
He goes on to warn parents that they will be powerless to stop it if proposition eight fails.
Infuriated, the pro-gay marriage campaign, Equality California, spent $1.25 million on television advertisements that declared: "They're using lies to persuade you. Proposition eight will not affect teaching in schools. Another lie."
Just days later, however, it emerged that a class of six-year- olds were taken on their first trip out of school to the wedding of their teacher and her lesbian partner. "Taking children out of school for a same-sex wedding is not customary education. This is promoting same-sex marriage and indoctrinating young kids," said Frank Schubert, a leading figure in Protect Marriage, which is campaigning for a Yes vote.
The content of proposition eight has been backed once before by the Californian electorate, when two-thirds voted in 2000 for state law to specify that only marriage between a man and a woman could be valid or recognised. In its 4-3 judgment in May, the California supreme court found that this violated the equal protection clause of the California constitution and should be struck down as unconstitutional.
California's conservatives have accepted that John McCain cannot take their state in the race for the White House. They have also lost hope that he can win the race nationally, and so have turned their attention to proposition eight.
"For those folks on the evangelical side, who have no place to put their money because they have pretty much given up on the McCain campaign, which they didn't like in the first place, this becomes a great place to put their resources," says San José State University political scientist Larry Gerston.
Before leaving for 10am Mass, Mitchem turns with a final word. "I don't have any prejudice against homosexuals, but gay marriage gives children the wrong message. If you are going to think that way as an adult, that's one thing, but not as a child.
"I believe that this is impacting on society as a whole. We are saying that we are okay with same-sex marriage, especially if Christian people are standing up against it [the proposition]. It isn't biblical. It is about the degradation of our society."
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Disclaimer
No responsibility or liability shall attach itself to either myself or to the blogspot ‘Clerical Whispers’ for any or all of the articles placed here.
The placing of an article hereupon does not necessarily imply that I agree or accept the contents of the article as being necessarily factual in theology, dogma or otherwise.
Sotto Voce
(Source: CCN)