After Colorado passed Amendment 2 (I think it was) a while back, a lot of folks found the state-approved homophobia so off-putting that Colorado ended up losing a lot of tourist dollars due to organizations and individuals canceling conferences and tourism packages here.
While some have suggested that something similar might happen to California, I doubt it — the state is simply too big and important to be shunned. There were other places besides Colorado to go skiing — Utah, for example — while there are too many aspects of California that simply cannot be bypassed. Not to say that the state might not suffer for its majority decision, but it won’t be through boycotts.
Utah, on the other hand, is home to the LDS Church, which coordinated plowing massive amounts of its followers time and money toward Proposition 8’s passage. Up to 80% of the money raised for Prop 8 came from Mormons, and while California has a sizeable Mormon population, a lot of that came from Utah.
So now Utah might find that there are other places for tourists to go for skiing — Colorado, for example. More importantly, some folks are arguing that the active role that the LDS Church took in the Amendment 8 battle might well have violated their IRS standing as a tax-exempt institution. That seems a bit out there at the moment — but it will be interesting to see how the argument progresses.
One thing for certain: I expect there will be unexpected repercussions of the vote.
Yeppers…
I am still waiting for Act Up and others to call for a Boycott of California….or they are just a bunch of useless Hypocrits that no longer deserve any support.
And I have been Boycotting Utah for decades, so no loss to me there (though I did spend $40 for gas there back in the 80s 🙁 ).
How’s it feel Dave, your tax dollars supporting Prop 8?
Actually, I live in Colorado, so my tax dollars aren’t supporting Prop 8.
Actually, I’m not sure that Prop 8 costs anything, except for whatever law suits are being filed regarding it.
I thought these churches got federal tax relief, in which case…
(Remember I have no idea about US tax, apart from it apears to make the UKs look ‘Janet and John’)
well, that’s a point — churches are generally exempt from federal and state taxation, largely (philosphically) because it would be too easy for a non-favored church to be oppressed via taxation.
Now, does lack of taxation equate to tax support? An interesting question.
Yes, because either your tax is higher to make up for the lost tax from an exempt organisation- the church puts you out of pocket, or the tax raising authority can not fund as much as it wants to, and the money has instead gone to prop 8.
I’ve had some very ‘diplomatic’ discussions over the years trying to convice people to pay all the tax, and not withhold some as they were opposed to Iraq/immigrants/social security. One lady, while I made no specific promise, I left her with the impression her money would all go to the ‘fluffy’ end of government expenditure, and none would go to fighting in Iraq.
Well, the fact is, if people were given the opportunity to pay taxes for “just” the stuff that they like, government would collapse within 24 hours.