Proposition 8's opponents seem tobe quite intent on riding the Alienation Express all the way into the last stopon the railroad of irrelevance. However, having already commented on their disgraceful behavior, it seems redundant to condemn their most recent antics without some level of reflectionas to the reasons for their behavior. By that I do not mean the question ofwhat they hope to achieve (they obviously want the bill overturned), but ratherwhy they have chosen these specific tactics.

The answer seems self-evident onone level. In reading the article which was most recently posted aboutProposition 8's opponents, one has difficulty not being reminded of the actionsof two notable lobbies; one historical and the other contemporary. To see whichgroups I am referring to, think of the tactics Proposition 8 opponents areusing: Engaging in mass boycotts so as to bankrupt the organizations that areintent on denying them their so-called "rights", while simultaneouslyproducing lists of businesses and private individuals who have donatedmoney to the pro-Proposition 8 cause. Obviously, the boycotts are meant toinvoke the Civil Rights coalition of the 1960s, and the Montgomery bus boycottsspecifically, but what might the publishing of names and addresses signify?Intentional or no, this behavior is reminiscent of anti-abortion groups thatpublish the names of abortion-providing medical professionals on their Websites.

Leaving aside the irrelevantquestion of whether one agrees or disagrees with either of these movements,they both have one thing in common. They are (or were) both dedicated to theidea of expanding civil rights for previously disenfranchised groups. It wouldbe unnecessary to dredge up quotes from Martin Luther King Jr. proving as much,but if articles like this are any guide, the pro-life movement considers itselfvery much to be part of the same legacy. Even as MartinLuther King Jr.'s niece has joined the pro-life cause because she sees itas part of her uncle's struggle, the idea that pro-life activists seethemselves as heirs to the Civil Rights movement is beyond question.

I shall not consider the questionof whether such a comparison is unnecessarily self-indulgent. That isirrelevant and up to the reader to decide. What is relevant is that whether thecomparison is accurate or not, the fact remains that if such a comparison wereaccurate, it would provide the group utilizing it with a great deal ofrhetorical firepower, as well as some level of license to take more extremeprotest measures. (After all, whoever stands in the way of the heirs of civilrights will almost certainly end up on the wrong side of history). As such, anincentive clearly exists for all sorts of groups to try and frame themselves ascontinuing the fight for civil rights.

This incentive is not a bad one,rhetorically, but it becomes dangerous at the point where a group such as thepro-life movement (or the opponents of Proposition 8) believe so strongly thatthe comparison is true that they mistakenly believe that everyone else alsobelieves it is true. If such a belief enters the collective unconscious of apolitical movement, then a very dangerous implication also begins to grow,which can best be laid out in the following syllogism (with Movement Xsignifying the group who believes the comparison):

Proposition 2: Movement X = TheCivil Rights movement

Proposition 3: Therefore, MovementX is on the correct side of history

Such a syllogism is logicallycorrect, but morally dangerous because most activists who believe themselves tobe on the "right side of history" therefore believe that whateverexcesses they go to can be excused by virtue of the fact that they are, apriori, on the right side of history. Such a belief can and often does leadto ruthlessness, political tone-deafness and alienation of one's allies, all ofwhich appear to dominate the current anti-Proposition 8 movement. This isunfortunate, because whatever ideological vision one holds, Proposition 8 isnot a settled question and should not be treated as such. The seeds of backlashare being sowed, and the opponents of Proposition 8 should take some humility beforeit is too late and they are crushed.

Perhaps most dangerously, theproponents will then have the authority to write the history books.