Among the report's "Top Ten Recommendations" is the observation that it is crucial to "Counter Anti-Gay Prejudice." "We must develop effective arguments to keep voters from being misled by false and defamatory allegations of harm to children historically used to instill fear in voters," the report states. "In Prop 8, our base of supporters shrank in the final six weeks when the ads exploiting prejudice went on the air."
Talking honestly with the public was also identified as a key recommendation. "In three different realms, No on 8 demonstrated the power of honesty," the report observes. "Honesty with our supporters was motivational: they donated in massive numbers when No on 8 honestly shared the bad news that we were in danger of losing. Avoidance of the most direct, honest response cost us a key slice of the electorate that started out with us: parents fell for the anti-gay 'Princes' argument when we waited too long to reply with the truth." Moreover, "Being less than fully honest with ourselves affected part of the No on 8 polling; it tested messages in a way that yielded misleading answers."
The report suggested that valuable lessons be learned, and remembered, not only from families' defeat in California but elsewhere as well, such as in Maine, where, a year after Prop 8, a law that would have extended marriage parity was rescinded at the ballot box in before it could take effect. "From Maine, California can learn at least three lessons," the report says. "First, although pro-LGBT forces in Maine raised and spent 50% more money than anti-gay forces, their experience showed that money alone can't solve the problem with 'Princes' and its appeal to anti-gay prejudice.
[Read the article or read more articles from Edge.]