Our moms are on vacation again this week. Please enjoy this article from our new LA editor, Raphael.

Anti-Prop 8 protestor in Long Beach, CA. November 5, 2008. Despite the implication, it was Democracy (not Theocracy) that added anti-gay legislation to the California constitution. Photo: Raphael Mazor

A story on the LA Times Blog showed that in 2008, hate crimes dropped in LA County for most groups, with GLBT folk being the striking exception. There were 134 hate-motivated crimes against GLBT individuals in 2008, up from 111 in 2007. In contrast, the overall rate of hate crimes fell 4% over that same period.

What caused the increase? The culprit, most people figure, is Prop 8 and the months of political campaigning demonizing gay people and their relationships. Anti-gay marriage campaigns have been directly implicated in the rise of hate crimes against gay people. By allowing these votes, politicians endanger our lives.

Although there has been widespread condemnation of the passage of Prop 8, and expressions of consolation from our allies in politics and the media, there has been very little overt criticism of the very concept of asking the voters to choose who can get married and who can’t.

There has been some criticism of California’s notorious initiative process, in which any proposition can be put on the ballot if there is enough financial backing. The electorate then functions as a fourth branch of government, unchecked by the judicial, legislative, and executive branches, to make decisions on issues they may have never thought about before. That is, if they bother to vote at all.

I have long thought that putting minority rights up to majority votes is immoral (and a proven failure of a model for a civil rights movement). But now I realize that the vote itself, regardless of the outcome, is an act of oppression and a form of persecution against minorities. Proposition 8 not only took away our civil rights—it was an incitement of violence against gays and lesbians.

The District of Columbia is now tackling the issue of same-sex marriage. And the antis are again arguing that the City Council should put the issue up to a vote. Wisely, the Council has resisted. Mayor Fenty, responding to Utah Rep. Chaffetz’s plea that the issue be put to DC voters, stated that city law prohibits votes on issues of human rights.

It would be great if every state was as committed to protecting human rights as DC is. But sadly, DC goes against the grain. 31 states have put the rights, dignity, and (as we now see in LA) personal safety of its minorities at risk through an election, and in every case, we lost.

Perhaps our American obsession with democracy has led us to believe that elections are the answer to every problem. But when it comes to civil rights, elections are the problem.