Seattle,
WA – In response to California’s Proposition
8 decision, Shook Ones and Paper
+ Plastick Records are offering a new track for $1,
available here: www.audiblediversiongroup.com/PaperandPlastick/design/2603.
All proceeds from “Breakfast For Dinner”
will be donated to organizations fighting for same-sex couples
in California, such as Equality California,
the ACLU, and Lambda Legal.
Shook Ones vocalist Scott Freeman has issued
an official statement explaining his thoughts on Proposition
8, which can be seen below.
From Shook
Ones to you,
What else is there to say? Proposition
8 has officially become state sanctioned and defended
discrimination with the California Supreme Court’s 6-1 decision
to uphold it.
In doing so, the Supreme Court effectively
cemented the notion of “separate but equal”
as an acceptable practice for the state. It was the majority’s
opinion that reserving the term “marriage” only for
opposite-sex couples did not present a substantive negative effect
on same sex couples who would not have access to “marriage,”
just like only being allowed to ride in the back of the bus doesn’t
have a negative effect on ones ability to arrive at their final
destination, right?
“Music
is a powerful tool to bring about change and I’m proud
to help bring awareness to a topic of which some people
who live outside of California might not be aware.”
-
Vinnie Fiorello
President, Paper + Plastick
Drummer, Less Than Jake |
|
The 6-1 margin of victory is depressing.
Only one judge in California’s Supreme
Court saw this issue through the lens of minority rights, and
their subsequent erosion in this decision. "The rule the
majority crafts today not only allows same-sex couples to be stripped
of the right to marry, it places at risk the state constitutional
rights of all disfavored minorities," wrote Justice Carlos
R. Moreno. We can easily draw comparisons between the same sex
marriage ban and the ban on interracial marriage that existed
in many states until the landmark case of Loving v. Virginia
in 1967. These are both issues of basic civil rights. Basic
civil rights that in no way infringe on or inhibit any other citizen’s
rights. These rights concern only the two people involved. So
if the state can’t stop me from having breakfast for dinner
tonight, why can they stop two people from being “married”
because of their birth-given sexual orientation?
Furthermore, what I find troubling in this
ruling is the blatant disregard for the separation of church and
state. While I understand that the Supreme Court’s role
was to determine the constitutionality of Proposition 8,
the notion that they are trying to make a ruling on something
that is so clearly an issue of individual’s belief in God
is absurd. This is a war we may never win though, so we will not
digress on this topic. Sorry for my unfocused approach.
In the wake of the Supreme Court’s
decision, how do we proceed? There are some who believe that the
challenge to Proposition 8 needs to be taken to the federal
level, and are doing just that. On the flip side there are those
who think this fight is won by a "building block" approach,
winning a series of smaller battles and working to the final victory.
Either of these schools of thought could shower me with a wealth
of good points and impassioned resolve, and who am I to judge
which is the more valid approach?
I do have some thoughts though.
The federal lawsuits that have recently
been filed by two couples from California are ambitious and obviously
good intentioned. But I think they may be underestimating the
temperature of the water they are wading into. This country has
a long way to go on civil rights for all minorities of race or
sexual orientation. I think you would have to be living under
a rock to disagree. With this in mind, we are left with two couples
who lost their battle in a pretty progressive state like California,
and who want to take the fight to a Supreme Court that made up
of seven Republican appointees to two Democratic ones in a federal
system that has 30 states with bans on same sex marriage. There
is something particularly scary about the precedent that could
be set if the plaintiffs lose their case at the federal Supreme
Court level.
The other school of thought on how to proceed
sees the next battle at the ballot box. This is where a slim majority
was able to strip the rights of a section of the population, and
this is where they can be returned. I am inclined to see more
promise in this approach.
If you were to research the passing of
Proposition 8, you would find fairly sordid accounts
of how its wording on the ballot left many confused about what
a “yes” or “no” vote actually translated
to. Additionally, you would find that in the lead up to the vote,
many opponents to Prop 8 saw the mounting support for
Obama in their state and took that as a sign that Prop 8 had
little chance of passing. The supporters of Prop 8 had
not made that assumption, and their well-organized nationwide
effort to push the proposition through paid off, catching many
by surprise. This is why groups like Lambda
Legal, the ACLU
and Equality
California see the ballot box as the next battle.
I think the overturning of Prop 8 needs
to take place at a state level, and the advancement of same sex
rights in general must work through state levels before it makes
a run at the federal level. It is at the state level where opponents
to these civil rights are making their fight. One example in my
home state that is still very quiet but stands to be quite damaging
is Referendum
71. It is the Washington Values Alliance’s
preemptive strike to make sure the term “marriage”
can never be applied to same sex couples. The sponsors of this
referendum have until the 25th of July to collect the required
signatures to get on the November 3rd ballot. I can only hope
that residents of Washington pay attention to this referendum
so that we don’t have a repeat of proposition 8 here.
So here’s the deal: all
of us in Shook Ones and at Paper + Plastick
believe one thing: gay marriage should exist.
The discussion of same sex marriage rights is not the brainchild
of some “gay agenda.” In fact, it is an issue that
exists independent of the context in which it finds itself. The
issue is Civil Rights and putting an end to the “separate
but equal” ideas that should have died with the civil rights
advances of the 60’s.
It has nothing to do with being
gay or lesbian, but unfortunately groups who look to
some higher power for how to live have made it about being gay,
lesbian or transgender.
It’s a farce. I don’t believe
in God, but the supporters of Prop 8 aren’t trying
to stop me from getting married. But if I wanted to marry a man,
they would have a whole lot to say about it then. Unacceptable.
So here’s what we are doing:
We are making an exclusive song available for
digital download right now. The song is called
“Breakfast
for Dinner”, the cost is $1
and all of the proceeds (all of them) are going
to be donated to the groups who are fighting on behalf of same
sex couples in California (Lambda legal, ACLU of California,
and Equality California)
“Breakfast
for Dinner”
lyrics
All under one roof, but the
servants entrance for you
and we’ll lock that deadbolt.
On Tuesday night,
that’s what 70% of all those who should know better
said.
Talk me through how verbs of connotation escaped you.
I need to understand how you can draw this distinction
Without reciting from your old book.
You know as I do that this is no place
To make believe the issue, or cite majority volition
It’s about principle, of which you all have none.
I dare you to make me understand how you think.
I believe there’s no way to reach you.
There’s no way to reach you.
Cause I don’t think there is any hope.
There’s no way to reach you.
Man on top: you will know and you’ll see
That forgiveness is
a two way street.
So whoever you are, you’re gonna be out of luck
Talk me through how verbs of connotation escaped you.
I need to understand how you can draw this distinction
(it’s about principle of which you all have none)
Talk me through how verbs of connotation escaped you.
I dare you to make me understand.
Is there no way to reach you?
- music and lyrics by
Shook Ones |
The song is a sort of follow up to “order
form” and deals with the passage of Proposition 8.
More specifically, it deals with how many minority groups in California
voted in much higher percentages to support the proposition, and
how I was completely disappointed that these minorities who supported
it were failing to draw comparisons between this bill and the
struggles of minorities in this country.
In light of the recent Supreme Court decision
in California we wanted to make the song available as
soon as possible... thus the digital download. But
wait, there is more!!!
As soon as humanly possible, “Breakfast
for Dinner” will appear by itself on a one
sided, limited edition 5” vinyl. It will have etching
on the B side and will have a hand-screened jacket that will be
filled to the brim with literature from all the groups who are
involved in making Proposition 8 and other bills like
it a thing of the past. These should be ready in about a month
and a half and all the proceeds from this will also be donated
to the groups mentioned before with the addition of the ACLU
of Washington who will be fighting Referendum 71.
Visit www.paperandplastick.com
or www.audiblediversiongroup.com/paperandplastick
for a direct link for the exclusive track. Also, if you just feel
like donating to these groups in addition or in lieu of buying
the track, awesome! Here are the links:
Equality
California
www.eqca.org/
Lambda
Legal
www.lambdalegal.org/
ACLU
of Northern California
www.aclunc.org/
ACLU
of Washington
www.aclu-wa.org/
Thanks for you time!
P.S. We apologize for grammatical oversights and run on sentences.
We've been out of school for quite some time.
www.myspace.com/shookones
www.legitimatebros.com
To
request music, interviews, or obtain additional info,
| Eddie
Horn
Reybee, Inc.
(646) 214-6000
eddie@reybee.com |
Sheehan
Perera
Reybee, Inc.
(347) 454-9859
sheehan@reybee.com |
|
|