Gay Marriage: Our Views

Group Conclusion:

Throughout this project our group found a lot of things that were unknown to us before about same-sex marriage. As citizens in society, we became much more informed. We also grew more aware of how editorial cartoons depicted issues - the truth behind them and the views they portrayed. Here's what we found:

Without background context of an issue, the editorial cartoon can be hard to understand. Because editorial cartoons represent the truth, they can be misleading if one's belief on the subject isn't based on fact but myth instead.
We found that in order to understand editorial cartoons, we had to use critical thinking skills. Many of the cartoons that we thought were framed in a positive way were actually, after discussing it together, framed negatively. For example, the Iowa Gay Marriage cartoon, the "Infinite Challenges-Prop 8" cartoon, and the "Judge Walker/Traditional Family Values"cartoon. We thought these cartoons were meant to be positively framed, but when we took a closer look we found that what the artist was really trying to say was framed negatively.
The cartoons did a good job at illustrating how we, as a nation, feel very divided. It was interesting to find an even mixture of positively and negatively framed cartoons, especially when we had a hard time finding negative cartoons at the beginning. It was interesting to see how both sides of the argument were represented, with truth supporting both positive and negative cartoons. Its a very divided issue in our nation and the cartoons did a great job at depicting that.
Within many of the cartoons that we looked at, whether framed positively or negatively, there seemed to be a general consensus that gay marriage is making very slow and repetitive progress. Many of the proposition 8 cartoons depicted this with illustrations of the infinite circles that we are in right now as well as the "gay marriage ceremony" where, for each step forward, three steps backwards were taken.
We found that on the positive side, many of the editorials show an empathetic side towards gays who are unable to marry, especially in cartoons like the "Fountains of Love" or the "Giving Thanks" cartoons. We saw a great depiction of the injustice that many gays are facing by denying them their natural rights. Again, this is seen in many of the New York Equality cartoons.
While many of the cartoons shared a common positive or negative opinion on same-sex marriage, we found that they had very different tones, depending on where the cartoonist was from, what area he/she lived in and represented, and what newspaper he/she drew for. For example, Pat Bagely from Utah almost exclusively focused on Mormons and gay marriage. Depending on what newspaper the cartoon had been published in, we saw issues and tones that had to do with that area.
Framing is a very prevalent theory, if not the only theory, used in editorial cartoons. Quite literally the artist is creating a frame and within that frame, images are depicted a certain way showing the viewer how to think about the issue. Specifically relating to gay marriage, the frames that we saw as a group focused a lot on equality for all and injustices that many gay people face today. From what we saw, its no longer an issue of whether gay marriage is right or wrong, but a matter of depriving people of natural freedoms that everyone should be allowed to enjoy.
We found that cartoonists favor truth rather than truthiness. While it is true that editorial cartoons represent a specific opinion, the basis of their cartoons are founded on truths.
The majority of our cartoons encouraged viewers to think about the equality for all men, a freedom heavily emphasized in our constitution, rather than judging others for their personal sexual beliefs. Everyone has the right to marry, who they want, when and where they want and they should not be denied that right.

Individual Conclusions:

Spencer's view:
After extensive research and analysis on same-sex marriage and political cartoons I've come to the following conclusions:

The debate about same-sex marriage has a long way to go. Currently only six states allow same-sex marriage, which means that there are still 44 that don't, and there are people in all those states, some greater in numbers some fewer, who want that to change. As said earlier, the differences in the cartoons does a good job illustrating this.
Besides the same-sex marriage debate, there is also the question of civil unions and domestic partnerships. Is it good? Is it bad? Do same-sex couples feel unequal because of it? Does it offer them the rights they need? It too leads to many, many complex questions.
The court system has played a huge part in the same-sex marriage debate and it looks like it will continue to play a big part in the future.
Same-sex marriage has made some tremendous strides in the last few years and it continues to move forward.

The views of Bradley Wells:

After extensive research and analysis on Proposition 8 and the editorial cartoons that I have encountered, I have come to the following conclusions about the usage of editorial cartoons:

Proposition 8 didn't just affect California, it has affected the entire country. Everyone in the country knew about Proposition 8. A little known fact is that at the same time as this was happening, Florida and Arizona also had votes to ban same-sex marriage, the lack of knowledge on this is because of how important California was to same-sex marriage and also the history California already had regarding the topic. This is apparent by the cartoons that include the Salt Lake City temple from the LDS faith and protesters that opposed Proposition 8.
Proposition 8 wasn't the first attempt by voters to ban same-sex marriage. A very similar Proposition, Proposition 22, was passed in March of 2000, but it was by a larger margin of victory. After being in effect for 8 years, it was deemed unconstitutional and gay marriages were recognized and performed in the state of California. This prompted the people who opposed same-sex marriage into action, launching the Proposition 8 campaign to restore marriage to that of a man and a woman. There are many editorial cartoons that point to the number 8 as a symbol for infinity, declaring that this argument is going nowhere fast in California and that it is a very appropriate number to be associated with this topic. In some of the cartoons, the number 8 is laid on it's side and if you look at it, you see the mathematical symbol for infinity. Also, even if judges deem Proposition 8 unconstitutional again, the supporters will again rally to create a new proposition. This cycle is most likely to continue until the people of California vote in FAVOR of same-sex marriage. It truly is a never ending cycle, with no end in sight.
I also came to understand that Judge Walker, a San Francisco judge who deemed Proposition 8 unconstitutional and set up a ban on it that was later nullified by the Ninth Circuit Court until further investigation has been performed, is gay himself. He is believed to have a partner, and many supporters of Proposition 8 were in an uproar about this and felt that the judge was biased since he was gay. One thing that did happen that I agree with was all the 18,000 or so marriages that had been performed from June 2008 until Proposition 8 took place are once again being recognized. These people had made the effort and paid the money to be married, it should be recognized.
Finally, people feel that being in a domestic partnership is not being treated as equal. Even though by being in a domestic partnership, you receive all of the same benefits, responsibilities and trials even that come from being married. They feel that they should be able to have the same title(spouses) and same verbiage(married) that heterosexual couples use.
This is one topic that will rage on for ages and may never be solved. We will have to wait and see what happens in 10+ years. It will be interesting to see how far things have come.

The Views of Travis Pessetto:

After my research on the religious side of cartoons and the brief other research I did to understand the editorial cartoons, I have come to the following conclusions:

I found it interesting that several religious schools have reluctantly started recognition of gay groups within their college campuses. Most religious schools still, however, do not recognize those communities and still advise gays to get counseling and change their sexual orientation. They see it as a physiological problem which opens the gay community up as a target.
As far as editorial cartoons go, some portray gays in a negative way and others portray them in a positive way, but the overall tone of each of them is for gay rights. For example, the editorial cartoon with a man praying by his bedside shows a negative spin on it because it shows him caring more for banning gay marriage than other, more important, matters.
My research also led me to the conclusion that gays are often afraid to express their sexual orientation because religion has such an impact on society that we believe the religious views and shun those who are different in the simple fact that they are gay. Put simply, we believe that being gay is choice because that is what religions tell us.
In conclusion, my research suggests that even if being gay was proved to be biological by science beyond a doubt, because of religious views gays would still be discriminated against.

Conclusion of Allie Jeppson:

While doing this project I learned a great deal not only on the truth behind editorial cartoons but also on the truths of same-sex marriage. I was faced with a question that I had never considered before: How can we deprive these people the right to marry when and how and where they want when no one else has marriage restrictions? Although I may not agree with same-sex attraction/marriage, I feel that our country is based upon equality for everyone and marriage is one of those rights that we cannot deprive people of in any state. Yet, it is clear, that this debate is still very divided and probably will be for many more years to come. But people who are confused about this topic should search out the facts before forming an opinion, and editorial cartoons are a good place to start as opinions can be seen, but the truth behind them are solid and when truths are sought out, they can form a firm foundation on which to base a personal opinion on the matter.

Views of Ami Meite:

While doing research on the laws of different countries concerning same-sex marriage, I found it interesting that more than half of the countries I had researched made same-sex marriage legal.

I also found that most countries that made same-sex marriage legal gave all the benefits a heterosexual couple would receive to the same-sex couple. Also I found that some of the countries that are for same-sex marriage made it a law with unanimous votes.
This research leads me to question why the same can't be done in the United States.
In the US we talk about religion and the sanctity of marriage, but the countries who have made same-sex marriage a law don't seem to think that it would defile the sanctity of marriage.
Even with all the research I have conducted, I cannot answer these questions as I do not know the views and opinions of everyone in the United States or in the world for that matter.
But what I have concluded is that this same-sex marriage debate still has a long way to go.
Even though the most of the countries that I have researched have made same-sex marriage a law, there are plenty of countries I have not researched and do not know the status of same-sex marriage in those countries. But if I were to guess I would say they are probably opposed.
So yes, this debate still has a long way to go.

Group Responsibilities:

Bradley: In charge of researching Proposition 8 and getting that page up and running on the blog. Created the drop down Navigation bar for the pages. Also in charge of finding and coding 4 editorial cartoons.

Allie: Team Coordinator. In charge of producing the introduction and cartoons page. Also in charge of finding and coding 4 editorial cartoons. Produced team work blog.

Ami: In charge of researching different policies on gay marriage in different countries and producing that page on our blog. Also in charge of finding and coding 4 editorial cartoons. Produced the project blog.

Spencer: In charge of researching different "hot spots" on gay marriage in the united states and producing that blog page. Also in charge of finding and coding 4 editorial cartoons.

Travis: In charge of researching gay marriage and religion and producing that blog page. Also in charge of finding and editing 4 editorial cartoons.