In Sacramento, it’s been taken as a forgone conclusion that Proposition 8, the Nov. 4 ballot measure to ban gay marriage in California, would fail. But there’s some evidence public sentiment could be changing.
A new poll this week by the CBS affiliate in San Francisco finds that likely California voters favor the proposition by a five-point margin — 47 percent to 42 percent. That’s a 10 point swing from a poll just two weeks earlier that showed support trailing 44 percent to 49 percent against.
To take our poll click below.
The CBS affiliate suggests that the swing could be attributed to new pro-Prop. 8 ads that show San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom saying same-sex marriage is here “whether you like it or not.” But it also notes the new poll has a margin of error of 3.6 percent and that “the pollster continued to label the race too close to call — just as it did eleven days ago.”
That, however, hasn’t stopped Prop. 8 supporters from taking credit. In a statement released to the media, Yes on Prop. 8 co-manager Frank Schubert said, “We are thrilled with the new polling data. It confirms what we have heard from thousands of supporters. The ad that is running is powerful and provocative. Not only does it show the arrogance of those who would impose same-sex marriage on California whether we like it or not, but it also shows that voters are beginning to understand there are consequences to all Californians if same-sex marriage is legalized.”
Tough talk, that’s for sure. We’ll see if its true in a month.
RELATED PROP.8 COVERAGE
- Mary J. Blige, Melissa Etheridge rock out against Prop. 8
- OC residents give $6.2 million to support Prop. 8
- Guess who’s tearing down the other side’s Prop. 8 signs?
- Prop. 8 failure would be followed by thousands of gay nuptials
- Field Poll finds opposition to gay marriage ban
MORE ELECTION COVERAGE (complete coverage here)
TOPICS: President | Congress | Ballot measures | Prop. 8
LOCAL RACES: North County | Central County | South County | Schools
MORE: Recent election videos | Voter guide
Its the rights that goes along with marriage that is the issue. As long as guys can say, I do, and gain the same rights as a Hetro couples receive when they marry, you can call it something else beside marriage. But, it is a union of two people who want to live as one. Equal rights for all is the bottom line.
Brian,
I take issue with your poll question “Should Gay Marriage be legal in California?” Marriage between same gender couples is legal. From my perspective the question that should be asked is “Should existing legal marriages between same sex couples be voided?
Prop 8 isn’t about removing rights from anyone. It’s about preventing elitist judges from imposing laws that they have no right to impose on.
Prop 22 was voted and passed. Because the judges, years later, overruled prop 22 illegally, Prop 8 was established as an amendment so that it will not happen again.
Yes, I believe gay couples should receive the benefits that straight couples get. But marriage is sacred. The opponents of prop 8 want more than just equality for all… and that’s why voting no on prop 8 is so dangerous. I’m all for equal government benefits. But I’m not for the redefinition of marriage.
I’m not for the state telling someone that they have to provide services against their will (1. Pharmacists providing abortion contraceptives even if they don’t believe in it. 2. A doctor being forced to provide in vitro fertilzation (an optional medical procedure) to a non-traditional couple.) When the government tells you to leave your religion at the door and do your job. That is wrong. The first amendment allows the freedom of religion.
Prop 8 is more than an equality issue, and that’s why I support it.
Chris Prevatt from over at the great site, theliberabloc.com, raises a fair point about gay marriage already being legal and about Prop. 8 voiding that current right. He’s 100 percent correct. I worded the poll that way for simplicity’s sake. I think the average reader would understand the basic issue regardless of whether we used Chris’ or my wording, but its very fair to acknowledge that there is a difference between creating a new right and taking a right away. I don’t know that I would have written it differently, but it’s a fair point and Chris was right to bring it up.
Warren: You can’t have “separate but equal” to call one a marriage and one a union leaves a huge loophole for people to continue to discriminate against the gay community.
Kyle: It is perfectly legal for Judges to make rulings on the state law. California state law says that there will be no discrimination based on sexual orientation. Prop 22 was discrimination therefore it was struck down. Civil rights are just that “rights”. The population should not be allowed to vote on who should be allow civil rights and who can be “full” citizens of this state and country.
If civil rights were left up to popular vote then the only people that would be voting today would be white men. It took judges to open the schools to minorities, it took judges to get minorities the right to vote, it took judges to make it legal for interracial marriage, and it took judges to over turn the 1934 law that allowed women to be legally paid less then a man doing the same job.
Civil rights are not determined by majority rule.
No on Hate, No on 8
Absolutely I believe gay marriages should be legal. If two people (homosexual or hetero) wish to be together as a married couple, why not?
I am a happily married man to a woman for 13 years and I positively agree that these marriages should be legal. If they want to be with eachother as married people, do it. If you don’t like it, turn your head!
anal intercourse on the wedding night.
Brian Joseph as, it seems, many others (Obama called healthcare a “right” when it’s a commodity) just don’t understand what “rights” are. A right is not something a judge makes up. It is something that is given by God (”inalienable rights”). If a judge constructs something out of thin air, the people have the right to correct that judge, because, in this case, they had already spoken about marriage years before.
only 6 responses after 7 hours on this topic?
Something must be wrong
The Yes On 8 commercial is pathetic in the amount of misleading claims it contains. I’m happy that Pepperdine University blew a gasket and had their name removed.
The “activist judges in San Francisco” line in the ad is sadly hilarious. For those that don’t know, the State Supreme Court is based here in San Francisco. I wonder if they’d use the phrase “activist judges in Santa Ana” were the court based there. I doubt they would since using “San Francisco” has more effect in inciting fear on those who don’t take the time to study an issue and rely on a five-second soundbite to make a decision.
Holy crap!!!!!!!!!!! what is this world coming to.
8 is about removing rights. This issue was brought before the courts and it was ruled according to the law. The same was done in Massachusetts. Keep in mind that the State of California nor the Commonwealth of Massachusetts have not slipped into the ocean as a result.
People that still cling to Prop 22 need to wake up and realize that times have changed since that election. I’m sure there are people out there who still blow a gasket over the fact that interracial marriage was ruled unconstitutional by the State Supreme Court in 1948.
The cries of activist and elitist judges heard today over Gay marriage were the same cries heard in 1948. California didn’t fall in the ocean as a result of the 1948 ruling nor did the country when the Supreme Court struck down all remaining miscegenation laws in 1967.
Touting the sacredness of heterosexual marriage when the divorce rate is over 50% is comical. The divorce rate alone tells me that, as a society, marriage is not treated as sacred. Who knows, maybe gay marriages might cause an overall drop in the divorce rate, but only time will tell.
Kyle Says:
I’m not for the state telling someone that they have to provide services against their will (1. Pharmacists providing abortion contraceptives even if they don’t believe in it. 2. A doctor being forced to provide in vitro fertilzation (an optional medical procedure) to a non-traditional couple.) When the government tells you to leave your religion at the door and do your job. That is wrong. The first amendment allows the freedom of religion.
———————————————-
1) No one forces you or any body else to work in the public sector.
Get another job that doesn’t require it. Problem solved.
2) Freedom of religion ONLY means you won’t be thrown in jail for practicing your religious views for YOUR personal behavior. Period.
Once you force it on others, you’re infringing on their equal rights.
The voters have already stated they do not want gay marriage. That is why the measure passed and became law in the first place. Whatever the voters approve, some court will come along and overturn what the people demand and pass during elections.
dumbed down Says: “anal intercourse on the wedding night.”
Does that apply to the lesbian marriages as well? If so, interesting!
IMO marriage is an overrated institution anyway. I have one word for anyone who gets married, gay or straight, and that word is “Sucker!”
Q: Why do husbands always die first?
A: Because they want to!
A real marriage is between a Man and Woman only
The makeup of the electorate has changed since the 2000 elections. A lot of people have died and a lot of people have reached voting age.
I WANNA MARRY MY DOG!! WHAT ABOUT MY RIGHTS???
Marriage is between one man and one woman, that is what God has intended. If God wanted man and man, or woman and woman, God would not have created Eve from Adams rib. Only Man and Woman can create life, not one of the same sex. Im all for civil union ceremony, or a legal binding agreement, but not to marriage.
I will fight to overturn the Court’s reckless decision to allow gay marriage in California. This absolutely wrong. Listen homosexuals should be tolerated and respected but they should not force their lifestyle on our long held religous and societal beliefs of what marriage is - that being a union between a man and a woman. Maybe the civil union thing is okay because that has no religous implications but homosexuals should not be wed in the eyes of God.
Leave your extremist and restrictive religious views out of the lives of others!
A soul is a soul - regardless of gender. Its a shame that it is mostly so-called Christians that promote this hatred towards people who want equal rights like hetro couples.
The god and jesus I have read about, would not condone such bigotry. Let people live their own lives and you focus on your own.
Shame on you bigots who would support this oppressive proposition.
Kyle,
First, those judges weren’t being “elitist”. They wrote their opinion based on the state’s Constitution. It is illegal for the state to provide services or offer benefits to one segment of the population while denying it to another. Calling it marriage for some and a “domestic partnership” for others is reprehensible. I would hope that this country learned a thing or two from Jim Crow.
Secondly, we are talking about CIVIL marriages. The kind performed at city hall- NOT in churches! No minister, priest, or rabbi will ever be required to act in a way that violates the tenets of his or her religion. Yes, pharmacists are sometimes required to dispense medications that they may have moral issues with and doctors cannot turn away patients based solely on moral issues, but that is because they are public businesses operating in the realm of social service. They are bound by the laws of the state which demand that they do not discriminate.
I’ll tell you what - if a church had a medical clinic with doctors and pharmacists on staff for their parishioners, the state would NEVER require them to dispense birth control, perform abortions, or provide any other service that went against their faith. See how the separation of church and state works? It goes both ways.
Seriously, please reconsider your position. It’s based on conflated arguments and half-truths. All we’re talking about is allowing two, committed, loving people to legally marry. We’re talking about letting love win! I can’t think of a singularly more Christian thing than that.
Why do you guys care that two consensual adults enter a legal contract? How is marriage sacred again?
I think all these divorces destroy that claim.
I still can’t wrap my head around the fact I am voting for someone else’s freedoms. This system is screwed up.
Church and state are separate. I’m not religious and yet I’m allowed to get married. And I will for the tax breaks, benefits, and wedding gifts, but not for God, or for it ever to be in a disgusting church.
Marriage is for everyone, not just the religious. I would hate to be married in a state where marriage is redefined by the church, triumphed by bigotry, and discriminating to fellow tax payers based on their gender.
This question has been asked before but I have yet to see a reasonable answer to it. If marriage is defined as that between two consenting adults, does anyone not worry (whether gay or straight) that at some point when society “progresses” along, that it will then be 3 consenting adults? On what basis does one “deny” the “right” of consenting adults to marry two other adults and so on? Ignoring whether we think gay marriage is right or wrong, what about plural marriages? How do we constitutionally deny other adults that right?
8 has my vote
Kyle, Didn’t they decide it wasn’t constitutional?
What right do people have to try to void the constitution.
The constitution define how it is to be modified, and that wasn’t followed.
(Or the folks who pushed the original bill didn’t do their homework well enough to figure out what they needed to do to begin with)
Call it what it is, address it, and get into that… Be honest about what you’re doing and saying.
Hey Tim Liao:
Marriage, in the secular sense, has NOTHING to do with God.
There’s a reason your marriage in a Church is not considered valid until the State paperwork is completed…
Secular marriage and Religious marriage are separate institutions. They just happened to be called the same thing.
We don’t know enough about homosexuality to institutionalize it. If gay sex is “natural”, gay men should not suffer from fecal incontinence. We need more evidence that gays are a human subspecies and that gay sex is more than just a sexual preference.
Folks, what part of “Equal Justice Under Law” (the inscription on the Supreme Court of the US building ) don’t you understand? If marriage is sacred, then make it illegal to get divorced. If marriage is only for pro-creation, then any couple who doesn’t bear children in (insert a number) of years should be annulled. Is that what the supporters believe? We are talking about government’s recognition - not religious. If same sex couples are denied the right to marry, then the GOVERNMENT shouldn’t recognize ANY marriages. Let the churches do religious ceremonies, and have government only conduct civil unions for any couple so inclined to have government recognition. NO on Prop 8.
I (heart) Janna.
Yes on Prop 8. That’s all I’m going to say
Marriage as it is defined by Western societies that have been strongly intertwined with the church - for centuries has a moral definition of what marriage is. That definition allows for non-religious men and women to wed but it does not allow homosexuals to wed. If you want to state that it is 2008, so therefore times have changed and we should allow for two consenting homosexual adults to form a union in a society where the separation of church and state is the foundation then go right ahead. Go right ahead but do not call this marriage.
Being gay is gay. Homosexuality, as any psychiatrist will tell you, is abnormal. For society to condon abnormal behavior and place it on par with heterosexuality is just goofy, especially on the level of marriage. But that’s democracy for you.
The state of California has defined marriage as being between a man
and a woman for over one hundred years. The people of California
re-affirmed that definition through their vote. Four people overturned
that definition. Four people took it upon themselves to redefine what
the majority of this state does not want.
Prop 8 is not about equality, nor is it about civil rights.
However, one right that is being trodden down in the mud is my right as
a voter and resident of this state by these four judges.
Prop 8 needs to be passed and these four judges need to be removed.
I have linked to this post from “The sky is not falling vs your vote” http://www.jeremiahfilms.com/released/marriage/why8.html#sky
* The sky will not fall … if we are at war 100 years in Iraq - We are at war today, people can buy gas, go to work, buy food and watch a movie.
* The sky will not fall … if we do not drill for oil - gas stations are open.
* The sky will not fall … if the housing market bursts - It has and the sky is still there.
* The sky will not fall … if we don’t cure AIDs.
* The sky will not fall … when you die.
* The sky will not fall … if Gays get married - No it has not but devaluation of other people’s rights has taken place; Children will suffer if it is allowed to stand; The ACLU will use the court ruling and the fact people are “legally” married to change marriage across the country … more
NO ONE HAS MENTIONED THAT IF THIS PASSES - WE PARENTS WHO HAVE OUR CHILDREN IN PUBLIC SCHOOLS WILL HAVE TO TEACH THEM ABOUT “GAY MARRIAGE”! THIS SICKENS ME. I DON’T WANT TO EXPLAIN THIS ABNORMAL “RIGHT” TO MY KIDS. PLEASE LET THEM KEEP THEIR INNOCENCE!
Sherman
>The state of California has defined marriage as being between a man
and a woman for over one hundred years.
Where did they define this?
I believe the Constitutional and legal definitions don’t actually spell it out.
Which is the whole point of needing an amendment to allow the previously voted law to take effect.
What part of “UNCONSTITUTIONAL” do you people not understand. This isn’t about those four judges - if you want to blame someone, blame Jefferson, Washington, Adams, et. al. You can vote on a discriminatory proposition every election for the next 40 years - it won’t stand.
Go ahead and pass your hateful, astonishingly un-Christian proposition. We’re less than a month away from a Democratic President, who will surely be appointing at least one new justice to the Supreme Court. This issue can then be decided there, once and for all.
As a married man, the value I place on my marriage has nothing to do with outside factors. The value of my marriage is the dependent on the respect that I give it so if gays couples marry it doesn’t affect me personally so as a believer in personal rights I believe it is a human right to marry any person you want.
We have far bigger problems that require our attention than whether or not two people who love and care deeply about each other should be deprived of their right to marry. Marriage is a stabilizing institution, allowing for commitment to raising families, being anchored in their communities, maintaining homes, paying taxes, and contributing to the overall wholesomeness - yes, I said wholesomeness - of the fabric of our society. God did not create our species to remain stuck in the ideas and conditions of two thousand years ago, or we’d still be there. We were created to continue to develop, and hopefully for the greater good of our kind.
Obama President, Gay marriage, etc. It will not be long before all Hell will break loose, and these people will be wondering what they did wrong. Just as in the time of Noah.
Gay marriage—NO WAY—Unions between two people were intended by our Creator to populate the earth. The last class on Biology I took stated it is impossible to two escences of the same gender to add to the population of the species. That said, these same people advocate that if they are lucky enough to be born, then they should allow for the killing of babies at or before birth.
This poll is a scam. People are just refreshing the page and voting over and over.
You all say “Leave your extremist and restrictive religious views out of the lives of others”. We say, leave your immoral and radical ideas out of our religion (ie, marriage). We do have a right to our religious views and that is what our country was founded on.
I want to know why people think that a mother or father in a family is so re-placeable. The best situation for children is to have both. Understood that it does not alway happen that way and that some families are not ideal but a father and mother create equality and stability in a child’s life. Not to mention that FAMILY is the core of a society and the breakdown of family is a direct reflection on the breakdown in a society.
I believe that gays should be able to have a civil union or anything like that, except marriage. And quit comparing yourselves to the civil rights of Blacks and women. It is not the same.
SCAM! Over 200 votes have been logged in the past 5 minutes. People are deleting the cookies and refreshing the page to vote over and over.
This is not about rights. Gays have rights in this country. If they lived somewhere else they could be jailed and killed. We live in a great country but sometimes freedom needs to have a line. Did the founding fathers want free speech to protect people who constantly cuss? I don’t believe so. People take the Constitution to seriously. It is about marriage. Man and Woman together in one union. Marriage used to be a sacred thing. Now with all the divorces and this issue marriage seems to be less sacred and taken too lightly.
Are you going to keep deleting my message and let the scam continue????
We are supposed to have a seperation of church and state. Gays are allowed the same benefits, insurance etc, as a straight couple, as long as they fill out the correct paperwork. This prop makes the state decide on a religious issue. Should this pass, gay couples can sue churchs who refuse to marry them, for discrimination. I don’t believe it is right for the state to put that burden on the church. If a catholic church and its congregation do not believe in gay marriage, then the place they turn to for worship and guidance should not have to change b/c the state said so. Regardless of if gay marriage is right or wrong, there is supposed to be a seperation of church and state.
On another matter, if Prop 8 passes then my 5 year old will come home with a diversity book that talks about the normalcy of having two dads or two moms WITHOUT Parental notification, just like in Massachusetts. I don’t know how I will answer those tough questions at 5 years old. I wish I could discuss them with my child when they are old enough and ready. 5 is much too young.
It changes a lot more than, so what if two gay people get married? Sometimes even if the issue is correct, the wording can be wrong, perhaps I will pass a gay marriage prop that clears up all of these issues, prop 8 isn’t it.
Marriage is, and must remain, exclusively between one man and one woman. The intent of marriage is to procreate, promote the family unit and raise children in a healthy and supportive environment. Homosexual unions can not accomplish this in spite of their efforts to do so by contorting moral standards in attempts to normalize the perverse. Marriage is not a “right”. “Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness” are. Homosexuals may be allowed legal rights in some other union, but don’t call it marriage. That would only serve to degrade yet another tenant of our Judeo-Christian ethics. These same liberals who incessantly cry about how our stature as Americans has diminished in the world theatre, seem to overlook the fact that only six countries in the entire world recognize “gay” marriage. So please, don’t degrade our society anymore…..VOTE YES on Prop 8.
Janna wrote:
“I still can’t wrap my head around the fact I am voting for someone else’s freedoms. This system is screwed up.”
TheSarah wrote:
Civil rights are not determined by majority rule.
Neither of you really gets it. The system would be more screwed up if you DIDN’T get a chance to vote for somebody else’s freedom. Our civilization and our legal system are based on the people getting together as a whole and deciding what is permissible and what is not. Since we can never get 100% agreement, it MUST be decided by majority rule. That is the only fair way. That’s why people get upset when judges overturn mandates from the people, as happened with Proposition 22. Our constitution is just a legal document that was voted on, and can be amended. It defines what the people want. Since a simple law like Prop 22 didn’t carry consitutitional weight, Prop 8 is necessary and prudent.
Vote YES on 8.
We the people already voted no once and we now need to do it again because a judge overstepped his limits and ruled it legal. Bottom line the judge is wrong, gay marriage is wrong, and wasting money on this issue is wrong. Gay couples have the same rights so this is just a sword fight over the definition of the term marriage. Here is my problem with it, we keep changing the rules till there are no rules left. 20 years ago we were appalled at the mention of gays and gay marriage now itâ??s excepted all over place today we are appalled at the thought of child porn, incest, pedophiles, and bestiality and I canâ??t help but wonder what will be considered ok and put on a ballet in 20more years. It needs to stop.
Kyle said “Prop 22 was voted and passed. Because the judges, years later, overruled prop 22 illegally”. It was not overturned illegally.. Judges have the right to overturn a lower court ruling, so it’s not illegal. They did, however, overturn it on faulty legal grouds, citing California’s “equal protection” clause. Equal protection applies to condition, such as race or gender. It does not, however, apply to action. Sexual activity, whether from nature or nutrure, is an action, not a condition. If equal protection applies like the judges ruled, it woudl also have to apply to polygamy, plural marriage, and siblings marrying each other (all things that are banned by state law).
A new study published by the Institute For Marriage And Public Policy (IMAPP) in May, 2004, sheds light on the high incidence of legal “divorce” among gays who entered into a registered same-sex partnership.
-
The IMAPP report notes that, between 1995 and 2002, there were 1,526 gay partnerships contracted, compared to 280,000 for heterosexual couples. Five out of 1,000 new couples are same-sex. Sixty-two percent of those are male same-sex unions.
-
The survey revealed a high rate of legal divorce among homosexual couples. Gay male couples were 50% more likely to divorce within an eight-year period than were heterosexuals; and lesbian couples were 167% more likely to divorce than heterosexual couples.
-
According to IMAPP: “Even among childless households, same-sex male partnerships experienced almost a 50% higher likelihood (1.49 times as likely) of divorce during the study period, while childless lesbian couples were three times as likely (200% higher likelihood) to break up as a married couple without children.”
There are no ethics to degrade. This country was founded by Masonic power hungry Europeans, not Christians.
Look at the history of Free Masons and see how many of the founding fathers of this country were occultists, not Christians.
If you don’t believe me, look up George Washington + Free Mason.
Look at the symbols in Washington DC. The whole area is built in the symbolism of Free Masons! The White House, Capital, Pentagon and surrounding streets are laden in measurements, names and the designs of Free Masons. GOOGLE it if you don’t believe me and look at a map of Washington. You can’t deny the obvious pentagram and compass and owl design. The White House looks directly up to the Lodge of the Free Masons.
This country WAS NOT founded on Christianity. So stop inciting hate with the use of Christianity, which is a religion of love anyways.
The government will have you believe anything they want you to.
This country is not run on Christianity, nor are the laws that were created and have been created recently.
Vote Yes on Prop 8
1) No one forces you or any body else to work in the public sector.
Get another job that doesnâ??t require it. Problem solved.
RRRRRRNNNT. Nobody forces you to go to a doctor who doesn’t wish to participate in amoral procedures. Go to another doc. Plenty of them will do anything for $$. Trust me.
2) Freedom of religion ONLY means you wonâ??t be thrown in jail for practicing your religious views for YOUR personal behavior. Period.
Once you force it on others, youâ??re infringing on their equal rights.
Thank you for playing, but how is saying I don;t perform that particular service ‘forcing’ anything on anyone. Pretty twisted way of looking at it. Again, go to any of the majority of whore-docs that will.
Marriage was a union based on biblical terms and ideals. Period. Can’t deny or argue that. Historically speaking of course. You have to preserve that for the people how value it.
BUT, to have equal rights we also must have a union for men and also for women who want to join together as a couple. You then group the three categories together under one umbrella. This prevents discrimination and protects “marriage” as the Christians (and others) want and takes away the ability for them to hide their discrimination.
There, I’ve solved for everyone. yeah, right.
For gay couples, what civil rights do they NOT have that they think a legal marriage would provide ? Entitlement to medical insurance benefits as a dependant? The ability to file joint tax returns?
What is the problem with the homosexual community? They have a perfect opportunity to be inovative and special. Just as the heterosexual community has marriage to be descriptive of a union between a man and a woman, the homosexuals should be allowed to have the same, however, marriage is already taken. There are new words added to the dictionary daily. This issue reminds me of a small child that refers to everything as “mine” regardless. It is time for the homosexual community to mature and be tolerant of the heterosexual community.
Yes on 8
What part of a NO voting result (for gay marriage) was not understood??!!~
Marriage is not a sacred institution. It is a legal contract. Sure, churches perform marriage ceremonies, but unless the state issues a license, these ceremonies are meaningless in the real world. Gay marriage does not harm “marriage,” does not harm Christians, does not harm anyone. Opposition to gay marriage is just a form of homophobia, which is the last socially acceptable form of discrimination.
Bottom line - the minute they made marriage a government institution (via licensing and tax credits), it became the right of every citizen under separation of church and state as plainly stated in and protected by the Constitution of the United States of America. If you do not believe in marriage between same gender couples then by all means attend a church that does not perform these ceremonies. You cannot thump the bible as a reason for the government or yourself to violate the rights of citizens.
After living in Orange County for 25 years, i had to choose between living in the USA where I was born or follow my gay partner to Spain; U.S. laws prohibit gays from sponsoring their foreign partners for immigration - it is one of the more than 1100 State & Federal laws that openly discriminate against gays.
While I recognize that CA gays already have some civil benefits if they enter a domestic partnership, the REAL PROBLEM is at the Federal level. Because States define marriage, FEDERAL law only blindly follows state laws; if many states do not pass legalized gay marriage federal laws will NEVER change! Let me just name a few of the federal statutes that openly discriminate against gays:
1. You must be married to file a joint federal tax return
2. You must be married in order to participate in tax benefits when your spouse dies: for example, if you are not married and your partner dies, the federal government requires that you pay income tax on the value of your home, even if it is in both partners names.
3. If you are a Federal Government employee, you cannot enroll your partner in group health insurance provided by the government. You must be married for an enrollment.
4. If you work for the State Department and get transferred to Brazil, the government will pay for your relocation; it will NOT pay for your partner’s relocation (including air fare, movement of personal goods). Further, the government will not pay for your partner’s foreign language study at the new location-you must be married to get that benefit.
5. Domestic partners do not qualify for social security survivor benefits - you must be married to get that benefit.
There are hundreds and hundreds of laws like this that OPENLY discriminate against gays.
Unless California (as a leader state) continues to support gay marriage, other states will continue to follow our California’s lead and outlaw gay marriage. As a consequence, the FEDERAL government will NEVER change its policy.
Tomas and I are victims of outrageous discrimination against gays, so now we live in Spain and pay our taxes here. Life is good in Barcelona, but we paid a very very dearly to make the move.
Please vote NO on Proposition 8.
really think about it???? are you sure gay people would really like to get married? i think they would take it as a joke? i mean come of gay people are really switchy people they are not the kinda to stay with one person and really they are they kind that do things out of they spare moment and lusk!!! and come on america really thinking about it?>???? challenge it??? think? do they really need it?
Marriage is and always has been (Before this Perverse and Shameless no Morals having World of today) between a Man AND a Woman. Period. 50 years ago this was not even a Topic. Period. We need to get back to the Values of Yesterday, Today we are on the brink of Anarchy with things of this nature. SB 777 and this is just to much. The Freedoms of this country have been reversed from a God Fearing and Trusting Nation, to one that Mocks him and Alienates Him. How can “God to Bless America” if he is not Involved in America? He can’t and WON’T Bless what he is not involved in. There is a price to pay for all of this, my children and yours are going to suffer even more if this is to pass. The situation will be grim if it passes. How Impersonal can it get…Party A and Party B…Please Vote No. On Top of all that is going on, if you cannot see the signs, you will be left behind.
Philip.E
Christian.
Ok So I guess if the point of marriage is to procreate people should bechecked to make sure that they can procreate before being allowed to get married. Why does anyone realy care if gay people are married. be careful all you happily married heterosexuals..You may just have a gay child without rights.
Only if both chicks are hot!
Truth, go to Wallbuilders.com for some truth on what you believe of how this country was founded. For every one actually.
Thank You.
For all of those who crying about the California Supreme Court Ruling Proposition 22 unconsttutional need to remember it only passed by a slim majority. As Thomas Jefferson once stated: “A democracy is nothing more than mob rule, where fifty-one percent of the people may take away the rights of the other forty-nine. ” This is why we in America have Judicial Review, to avoid mob rule.
I am not a bigot just because I don’t support gay marriage. How about my religous rights to protect a institution that has had a religous foundation for centuries? All I am saying is that if you are a homosexual and you want to be married go create your own concept of civil unions and enjoy it but pushing this radical agenda and assume that the power of the Gay movement is going to change the minds of hundreds of millions of moderate to Conservative Jews, Muslims, Buddhist, and Christians is ludicrous. All the Gay movement is doing is uniting Black and White Churches, Muslims, Jews, and Christians, and religous people of all traditional faith for all of us of tradiational religous faith truly feel we are under attack. Even Progressive religous leaders have there backs against the wall because the homosexual agenda is so militant today about exceptance, even exceptance that goes against ones right to have religous freedom.
As for me and my family, we will vote “yes” on Prop 8. I will not have anyone (gavin newsome) tell me “whether i like it or not it is going to happen”. You gays should thank your buddy gavin this year.
Wait a minute look up the word GAY (do it in an old dictionary not a new one. The bleeding heart liberals have stolen the meaning of the word) Any way homosexuals are wrong you cannot have children The human species is meant to procreate to advance the species homosexuals cannot do this. Go back into the closet keep your sexual proclivity to yourselves The rest of the world does not want to hear or see it (example San Fransisco’s parade) enjoy the rest of your life. What can you not really do? You can do most anything you want. You are not the same as a hetrosexual human being period. So keep it to yourself. And don’t start yelling hate because again you will be wrong.
Marriage as a cultural institution predates the Bible. But, anthropologically, marriage has always been about property. Men created the marriage contract to publically declare their ownership of women. Just because the Christian church practices marriage ceremonies does not mean it is a Christian institution. If it was, all marriages outside of the Christian church would be invalid. Tell that to the hundreds of millions of non-Christians in the world who think they are part of loving marriages. Masking your hate behind a religion that is supposedly based upon “love your neighbor as yourself” is pretty pathetic. If you want to ban gay marriage, move to Afghanistan and join the Taliban.
I think marriage is a basic human right. I’d rather fault on the side of not taking away human rights. It seems to me the people that don’t want gays to be able to marry want to take away the basic human need to be with their partner of choice. Because they’re gay they’re not human? What’s next? What other rights do you want to take away from them?
Aaron. I know you and Tomas and I will always support what is a geniune love you two have for each other but there is a clear definition between what is a legal civil union and a marriage sanctioned by God. Aaron we all do support your love for Tomas but you can not expect all of us to change what are deep rooted beliefs are and for all those in the gay community - it really is just upsetting everyone that you guys want to force these changes upon society so quickly.
We the people already voted no once and we now need to do it again because some judges overstepped their limits and ruled it legal. Bottom line the judge’s are wrong, gay marriage is wrong, and wasting money on this issue is wrong. Gay couples have the same rights so this is just a sword fight over the definition of the term marriage. Here is my problem with this; we keep changing the rules till there are no rules left. 20 years ago we were appalled at the mention of gays and gay marriage now it is on the ballot to be made legal our schools teach it as normal and the media promotes it, today we are appalled at the thought of, incest, pedophilia, and bestiality and I can not help but wonder what will be considered ok and put on a ballet in another 20 years. It needs to stop. Vote yes on 8
Yes on 8 - Embrace the Hate!
Just as I thought. I gave an out for all sides EXCEPT the discriminating sides and what happens? Hetero’s fold and go to the morals and “institution” comments while the Homosexuals (as another poster said) cried, “mine, mine, mine!” If your goal is truly to “have equal rights” or “preserve the institution of marriage” than this should satisfy you. If your motives are otherwise than I suggest you get used to people having another opinion and learn to be ok with it. I’ll post again:
Marriage was a union based on biblical terms and ideals. Period. Can’t deny or argue that. Historically speaking of course. You have to preserve that for the people how value it.
BUT, to have equal rights we also must have a union for men and also for women who want to join together as a couple. You then group the three categories together under one umbrella. This prevents discrimination and protects “marriage” as the Christians (and others) want and takes away the ability for them to hide their discrimination.
stugots, comparing bestiality and pedophilia to homosexuality is why Christians like myself side with them. You push Christians away from you with your disgusting, bigoted comments.
if marriage is so sacred and is a religious institute, then perhas our government shouldn’t provide marriages PERiOD. Maybe a better idea would be to rename all “marriages” civil unions if they are performed by the state, and if you want to get “married” you can go to your church and recieve that “sacred” blessing there. Oh wait, but all you crazy christian’s wouldn’t be willing to do that because you want to live in a theocracy where religion dictates law!
I’m voting YES to Prop 8. It is not an issue of equality. Marriage is a protected institution that has had a religous foundation for centuries. There is also qualifacations to be married. Its to be a MAN-& WOMAN….PERIOD.
Some people dont meet the qulifactions, doesnt mean what you have is not “special” its just you dont meet the criteria to be eligiable. We shoulnd bend, adjust the rules to be fair…Life not fair and well thats life.
Do you think we should bend the rules for a driver license, because there are people out there who want it, but the still dont meet the qulifactions to get it??? Think about THAT
How sad that so many people in Orange County and those that are readers of the Orange County Register are so hate-filled.
Marriage is so sacred, that nothing should be allowed to threaten its sanctity. Considering that DIVORCE is the biggest threat to marriage, I propose this:
*Ban all divorces* to keep marriages sacred. That’s right - if you get married, no divorce for you ever. If you’re divorced, you must go back to your former spouses now and recreate that sanctity. If you’ve remarried since your divorce, your new marriage(s) are now null and void as you must return to your original spouse and recreate that sanctity. Any children you have from your remarriage(s) are now illegitimate.
Let’s see how our holier-than-thou hypocrite demagogues on their 3rd or 4th wives like *these* apples.
I will vote in favor of Gay Marriage. (NO on prop 8). This country extends certain benefits to people who are married, such as the right to carry your spouse’s health insurance, the right to take unpaid time off without loss of employment when your spouse is dying, the right of inheritance when a spouse dies, and several other rights.
Now, if those rights were granted in a “legal partnership” instead of a marriage, I would have no problem with accepting that as an alternative to marriage, and what I hear from the gay friends I have, for most of them THAT is what is most important.
Right now, the only way to grant gay couples those rights, is through marriage. I certainly can have peace with that, as having the same rights as everyone else is more important to me then defining what a marriage really is.
For the record, I am not gay and have been happily married for almost 10 years now. But having a wife that has a chronic health condition that requires medicine, AND keeps her from working, she is relying on my health insurance and income to provide. With the current prices of health care, it is almost impossible to afford healthcare insurance by yourself, and a non-working gay partner, for health reasons or otherwise, can currently not lean on the insurance of his spouse.
I personally don’t want to go into the discussion on what marriage SHOULD be, everyone has their own feelings about it and their own opinions. Generally, the definition of marriage is defined by a church, and churches - as far as I know - can continue to refuse to marry people that do not confirm to their standards of what a marriage should be. A gay couple however, can still be married by the justice of the peace in your local city/county, or a minister that is WILLING to marry them.
And with that, you leave the choice up to the people that want to get married, and the churches retain the choice on whether they want to marry same-sex couples, and can legally refuse them. The justice of the peace however, cannot as they are - or at least should be since there is separation of church and state - independent from any religion.
In the end, I believe that everyone should have the CHOICE. This country is built on freedom, and the United States is one of the last western countries to actually grant certain rights to gay couples. Even the Italians and Spanish - two VERY catholic countries - have gone before us and added rights to their respective law books that allows gay couples to wed.
I am catholic. And I will vote NO on prop 8.
Tony says you need to check your facts it prop 22 passed by a land slide in all but 6 districts
On March 7, 2000, the people of California voted on Proposition 22, a proposal to enact a state “Defense of Marriage Act” as an initiative statute. The text of Prop 22 reads:
“Only marriage between a man and a woman
is valid or recognized in California.”
Proposition 22 was ratified by an overwhelming majority of California voters, prevailing by a 23-point margin. Statewide, 4,618,673 votes were cast in favor of the proposition, comprising 61.4% of the total vote. Opponents garnered 2,909,370 votes, for 38.6% of the vote.
Final vote counts revealed that Proposition 22 won in 52 of California’s 58 counties, including all of the major metropolitan areas except for San Francisco. The six counties which did not approve Prop. 22 were all in the immediate San Francisco Bay area, including: Alameda county, Marin county, San Francisco county, Santa Cruz county, Sonoma county, and Yolo county.
This poll is totally rigged! I just watched over two hundred votes get cast in less than 1 minute! Hey Register, don’t publish this poll! It’s rigged and misleading.
VOTERS do not make laws. Voters elect the Legislature, the Legislature makes laws, the Judiciary makes sure the laws are followed - including the Constitution, which supersedes all other - and then the Executive implements the laws. Three branches of government, yo. Don’t like the laws? Have your legislature change it. There are no such things as “Activist Judges.” You may as well say there are “Activist Tax Collector” or “Activist County Clerk” or “Activist Mail Carrier.”
Hmm… According to this poll people definitely do not want gay marriage.
Eric, this Christian said just that. So before you loop us all together perhaps you should read my post again. Thanks for treating me like you accuse us of treating the gay community. I believe the term is hypocrisy.
If men and women with homosexual feelings want to live together and have their relations in their own home thats fine with me. Marriage, however is for one man and one woman. Enough said. Yes on 8
I disagree with you, so that means I am a hate filled bigot? What does that make you for calling me those names?
And besides…..I find homosexuals quite creepy. Have you ever seen the look on a young innocent kid’s face when he sees his first public display of homosexual relations? That should tell you something. We don’t need that here where we’re raising our kids and trying to instill morality.
Sylvia, we live in a democracy that according to our Constitution is supposed to be fair or treat all equally. by your stating that “life isn’t fair” you are admitting there is a problem. Which side are you on again?
How absurd. The Mormons — of all people — are trying to tell us that marriage is a sacred trust between one man and one woman? The Mormons??
Their founders practiced and promoted polygamy. The rationalized it as “The revealed Word of God”. It appears in — literally — hundreds of their founding texts and so-called revelations.
The Mormons abandoned polygamy ONLY because that was the price they had to pay for Utah’s admission to the Union. Everyone except a Mormon recognizes the utter insincerity and falsity of that manoeuvre.
And now these same Mormons are trying to tell Californians what marriage must be? What a ludicrous and sad joke.
tolerant?
Is everyone learning all this hate in church? I thought churches are suppose to teach everyone to love and accept everyone…If learning about gay people getting married and being a family because they love each other is the worse thing kids learn in school .trust me there much worse there their friends can teach them..
Most people feel very strongly about this issue as evidenced by the all the posts that are posted out of emotional response before reading into all that this proposition effects. This proposition does not just effect allowing same sex marriages to still occur as they have this year. Proposition 8 is to define marriage. It was not defined previous to prop 22 and therefore was not a topic of debate, much like when the founding fathers discussed whether or not to state all the rights that the people of america should inalienably have. The opinion of the judges in San Fransisco is what overturned prop 22 and now we have prop 8. Failing to allow the people to decide this matter is one issue. Homosexuals will not have any rights taken away if prop 8 passes. Tolerance goes both ways, not just towards the minority, in this case homosexuals. Read the studies that have been conducted out there that say that children raised in a home with a father and mother are more able to succeed and prosper in life, every child deserves that right as well! Every parent should also be able to teach their children the values that they want and not have the schools teach that same-sex marriage is equal to traditional marriage and that will happen if prop 8 does not pass. Don’t believe it, then study what has come about in Massachusetts, it has already happened there! No one is trying to deny anyone rights with prop 8, this issue is about morality and keeping marriage traditional for the majority of californians. Think about the other 27 states, which is the majority of America, and how they have already decided that marriage is only between one man and one woman! It is the priority in America! Same-sex couples do not need to interrupt the definition of marriage in order to have the same rights, they already have them! Please read into all the facts about this proposition and please vote!!!
fighterj, disagreeing is one thing, but preventing other Americans from enjoying the same rights as you enjoy is beyond simple disagreement.
emeryannharris has a small point by the way. Those in favor of banning gay marriage, based on Christian principles and ideals, often have already broken the sanctity of marriage by getting a divorce.
“So they are no longer two, but one. Therefore what God has joined together, let man not separate” (Matthew 19:6).
“I hate divorce, says the Lord God of Israel.” (Malachi 2:16a:)
Those who are against gay marriage based on religious principles, and have had a divorce in the past or are planning to file for one…..need to think long and hard what the sanctity of marriage REALLY means to them. You can’t have it both ways, and be against one form of marriage, while at the same time toying with their own.
PS - I am so tired of all these Bill Mahr loving idiots like Eric that think the have some kind a great intellectual rant that dispells Christianity and religion. Well news for Bill Mahr and his Chronies, you aren’t that intellectual and the same arguments that are being used today to debunk Christianity and religion are the same arguments millions have been using throughout the century. Religion has had its share of mistakes but let me tell you today that we would have never survived as a species and make it safely here to 2008 to enjoy our iPods and rants by unfunny comedians like Bill Mahr if it wasn’t for religion.
Frankly I love John Stewart and Stephen Corbert but Bill Mahr is just an idiot who really isn’t even that funny.
Wasn’t Jesus gay?
Maybe that’s why he was never married….
I swear somewhere in the bible it said he was gay, or maybe that was Mary…I’m looking it up now.
how do we make the world go round? boy and boy or girl and girl cant make life……they make a bigger thing out of nothing…in a couple of yrs you will be able to buy your own kid with what ever eye or hair color you want…..oh wait…thats already happening…this world is going down the drain
Equal rights for all…. No question about it, no problem for majority of people. It is marriage that is in question and on the line. Gay rights supporters want Much, Much more than equal rights. They want the the definition of marriage changed and the practice of their sexual preference forced upon even our youngest in soceity. Let’s be fair shall we.
I love all of the rationalizations and arguments people are putting forth to cover their prejudice and hate.
Gay marriage will not affect your ability to practice your religion.
Gay marriage will not affect the �sanctity� of your marriage.
And it is the court�s job to determine whether or not a proposition voted on by citizens is �constitutional.� So it is completely within the realm of acceptability for the court to have overturned Prop 22.
Just admit it: if you had your way, gays would be locked away in asylums away from polite �Christian� society. It wasn�t too long ago when homosexuality was considered a mental disorder and I�m sure most of you miss those good ol� days.
But, please, stop acting as though you have any rational arguments against gay marriage because there are none.
So, embrace your hate, let it out, vote yes on 8.
Sylvia,
The bible has many rules that have been bent. For starters both divorce (on whatever grounds) and adultery are sins, with the latter one being punishable by death.
We do not stone farmers to death because they plant different crops side by side, and we do not issue the death penalty to those who INSIST on working on the sabbath, nor do we allow people to sell their daughters into slavery.
Many of those things have been abolished, the laws “modernized” a long time ago. Why should we not be able to do that with marriage?
Take a look at this outtake of the NBC show “The West Wing” from a few years ago: http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=xWqgD7lGneU
The bible can be a guidebook for everyone’s PERSONAL choices, but is should not be made into law. If you think it should be law, take a good, long hard look at your past….. especially when it comes to adultery and divorce.
You can’t have it both ways, and allow breaking of the sanctity of marriage one way, but not another.
Big Loser your name says it all
I’m voting YES to PROP 8- That is my STAND.
Where does the Origin/word Marriage come from? Well it is believed to come from the Bible and I believe that’s where it originated. The Bible says, Marriage is between a man an woman. The Bible also says same sex relationships are a no no. So the government needs to stop plagiarizing the Bible by using the word marriage. Use another word for the unions and when they are officialized or whatever it’s called, then when it’s done by a church that believes the union is only between a man and a woman, it’s called marriage, and they have a wedding. But when the state legalizes a union between a gay couple, well call it something else, because it is NOT a marriage. So I’m sorry yes, I’m against a gay marriage, but I’m not against them having some other legal union.
Whether we like it or not? Who know what else they will impose on us “whether we like it or not”. What kind of people are we dealing with here?
It is good to see all the homosexuals coming out and quoting left wing T.V shows. Folks are tired of the homosexuals in the media, hollywood and law jamming their whining beliefs down our throats.
This is strictly a business decision made by 4 lawyers who want to increase business. They will be able to sue pastors who refuse to marry homosexuals. and sue and fire teachers who refuse to teach the new Chad and Bruce are parents curriculum.
Why is it when ever someone disagrees with a minority group they are classified as a bigot, raciest or intolerant? Why does the gay community insist on shoving there views down our throats. I could care less what you do in your own lives but keep it to yourself. I don’t need it shown to my kids or have it taught to them in school. Not to mention why should we foot the bill to pay for the new text books, the medical care and benefits for people with a hazardous life style that this will cause. I respect that you do not want religion shoved down your throats but then respect us not to want your gay agenda shoved down ours.
I do not believe that prop 8 is discriminatory. It does not ban gay marriage, it bans same sex marriage regardless of sexual preference. Neither a homosexual nor aheterosexual couple of the same sex may marry. A gay man can marry a gay women therefore it does not prevent gay marriage.
Religion and how religion embraces and practices its beliefs including, but not limited to marriage, has nothing NOTHING to do with this issue. This issue is about equal HUMAN rights.
Despite the propaganda, no one voting No on 8 is taking anything away from you. You and your church or family will continue to practice and live the same as you’ve always done and your marriages will be just the same as they are. What constitutes a marriage is not its title or name however what you do within the marriage BUT this is discriminatice if it only applys to male and female. Everyone should have the right to obtain a Marriage License and get a Marriage Certificate and call their Marriage a Marriage. Gay couples are no different that straight couples. The love and commitment is the same the law with its rules and regulations should be EQUAL.
If a gay couple having the right to marry, and call it a Marriage, changes how you view your religion and/or marriage then your sense of commitment and your beliefs were not that strong to begin with. I’m not standing here telling you your religious beliefs are wrong and you can’t practice Christianity/Catholicism/etc because my Agnostic belief is right. What you practice in your life is different from many others but its not the only way. Respect those around you in the sense that what they believe is different. Otherwise you’d be saying it’s your way or no way. \
You have a right to your religion and religious views/practice but not everyone shares those religious views and people must learn to respect that. I am a heterosexual woman married for 7 ½ years and while I’m a Democrat and Agnostic I have MANY friends who are republican, devout Christians, and Mormon friends. We admire our diverse views and have a lot in common despite the differences among us.
Wasn’t the U.S. once upon a time proud of its Melting Pot society with modern views on culture?
recordjerk your wrong and the most obvious proof of your “actions but no consequences argument” is the act of procreation. Today we accept homosexuality as normal and we are seeing the consequences. One of those consequences is birthrate. Yes there are other factors that determine birthrate including the murder of unborn children but homosexuality could also be another factor. Leave out your Leftist cynicism about how the world is already overpopulated and there is more than one way to have kids these days argument. The truth of it is, is if homosexuality had been accepted and even promoted throughout human history, our species would have either died off long ago or we would have not advanced to the stage of progress that we find ourselves today. Maybe, just maybe the acceptance of homosexuality today will be a factor attributed in the future to the near extinction of man.
you have the same rights as I do. The “right” to a marriage certificate would allow you the “right” to teach my children your morals in our schools, and I would give up my “rights” to parent. That is unacceptable to me so i will be voting yes on prop 8. Your agenda should not be forced down our throats.
Vote yes on 8!
Every argument trotted out against same-sex marriage on this page was also made against interracial marriage, school desegregation, and women’s suffrage. It’s against God! We’ve always done it this way! They want special rights! Please, somebody, think of the children! Etc.
If you must support this appallingly un-Christian amendment, please do so with the full knowledge that your children and grandchildren will be making apologies someday for your backwardness.
Tim Laio, What does procreation have to do with it? I am in a loving, successful marriage and never want to have kids. Is my marriage invalid? And, your whole argument is flawed since homosexuals are the direct result of heterosexual unions. In case no one told you, gay couples cannot procreate.
Also, are you telling us that the acceptance of homosexuality somehow affects your ability to procreate? You might want to see a doctor.
I might be wrong, but I think hate is probably the leading contributing factor to the destruction of humanity.
Enough with all the “You’re a hater” and “The Bible says this” already. Just go and vote your mind - if you have one.
I was against the right-wing push to ban it via a U.S. Constitutional ammendment - because marriage is and has always been a state issue. Gawd don’t bring in lame Fed issues (ie. IRS looks at your marriage status) as if they have a say in the issuance of a marriage license. Unless you believe the cop asking for your driver’s license had a say when the DMV issued it to you.
Now that it is properly a state-level question - I will vote for prop 8. No Bible thumping, no gay bashing; that’s just how I’m going to vote.
You vote your way.
This whole issue is ridiculous. Of course gay people should be allowed to marry and it should have nothing to do with the government. If they want the hassle of marriage it should be their choice. Hetero’s have screwed up the whole concept of marriage for life anyway. Maybe the gays can show us how it should be done.
This is the freaking 21st century. Why do some individuals think they have the right to interfere in the private lives of others? Beats me.
Fighterj, let’s not be melodramatic. This proposition has NOTHING to do with what children are taught in school, and it certainly doesn’t require you to “give up [your] ‘rights’ to parent.”
Either you’re awfully uninformed and gullible, or you’re deliberately misrepresenting the truth to advance the anti-gay agenda.
It seems like most god loving religious people are the hypocrites. Religious people say marriage is a sacred union between man and women. If that is the case then why are there so many divorces, why is there so much lust and infidelity? They also say marriage is to procreate. What if a person can not have children, should their marriage be null and void? Marriage is a union between two people who love each other. The bible is out dated and was written by man at or around 4 B.C. Don’t you think times have changed and maybe your god’s opinion has too?
I most definately do not believe in gay marriage and do not believe that this should be made legal by any means. Sure live your lives the way you want, but why should the fags and lesbians be leaglly married. That is not how marriage is suppose to work and the world knows that. Just as by boyfriend says,”You don’t see two male dogs screwing.”
What to you have against gays that you’d want to force marriage upon them?
Oh? What? They WANT it? Silly people. You’re going to have to drop the term “gay.” How about “Chastened?”
Wow T. your boyfriend is really smart He’s a keeper!
uninformed, gullible? It has already happened in the state of Massachusetts. Kindergarten kids were introduced to all of the “normal” families in books and the parents could not even get the right to be forewarned because gay marriage “is legal” in this state. Who is uninformed now?
Thank you Aaron Ashcraft, Eric, and Maarten. All 3 of you had very good arguements and for the most part, they weren’t emotional. You gave me something to think about.
As little as 30 years ago (approximately), it was still against the law in some states to marry someone outside your own race. I knew a couple who had to go to another state to marry because he was Caucasian and she was Asian. A Black marrying a White had to worry about being lynched even in my own lifetime, and I’m not yet of retirement age. I find it encouraging to see couples, gay or straight, making the commitment to marry, as long as they both take it seriously.
Hey T., tell your brain-trust of a boyfriend that I’ve seen two male dogs screwing, and it looked like they were having a great time. And it didn’t turn my dog gay or nuthin’
why do gays hate me because of how i believe ( marriage is between a man and a woman)…pure hate and i just dont understand it
Too many people get hung up on who is hating who. Good advice for both sides is “don’t throw rocks if you live in glass houses”
My personal take on this is Yes on 8. I don’t like it when other people’s opinions are forced on me. I don’t want to live where my kids will be instructed that gay marriage is the same as marriage. I definately do not need or want them learning that gay sex is the same as sex. California has the best anti-discrimination laws in the Union and this will inevitably take place. I cannot agree with the statements that say this won’t affect anyone else.
Biologically, homosexuality does not make sense. Religiously, it is condemned as perversion. Legally, this proposition has the potential to infringe on a person’s personal and religious rights. (I believe that religions should still be able to believe what they believe without sanction. I also believe that people should not be persecuted for their, for lack of a better word, “lifestyle”)
I do, however, request that both sides back down from name calling and belittling each other. BOTH SIDES HAVE VALID POINTS. BOTH SIDES HAVE DATA TO BACK UP THEIR ARGUMENTS. Gay or straight, we are intelligent people and should be able to conduct ourselves with more civility. Show respect.
I have friends that are gay and I have been able to talk with them and explain my point of view. They may not agree but they do not think that I am just disguising my hate. I really do believe that we are to love the sinner and hate the sin, be tolerant of others but be vigilant of our morals.
Christ’s example shows us that we need to love our brothers and sisters here on earth. That’s what we are. Whatever you believe in and whatever or whomever you call it, we are all here together. Anger and hate (from BOTH sides of any issue) have never brought peace.
I love that this issue has motivated so many people to actually start doing something, voicing opinions, blogging, posting whatever. THAT is what the founding fathers wanted. They realized that it was in the best interest of the nation to not obligate everyone to vote. They did this so that when an issue was brought to the forefront, the people to whom it mattered most would stand up and voice their opinion. THAT is democracy in action. Please, everyone, don’t listen to whatever polls there are here or on TV, EVERYONE, if this issue matters to you, VOTE.
perfectly stated stugots
Help me understand this…what are you going to tell your kids when they come home and tell you that in school today they learned about how two men or two women have sex? I’m not ignorant to believe kids to learn things like this out on the playground but it is different when it is taught by a teacher and in a text book.
What are my rights if I’d prefer not to teach my kids this?
It’s very interesting to see what the gay rights agenda really is. Their platform was set in 1972, and they’ve been working on it for more than 30 years. In fact, same-sex marriage is just one step in their goals. Specifically, it helps this one: “Repeal of all legislative provisions that restrict the sex or number of persons entering into a marriage unit; and the extension of legal benefits to all persons who cohabit regardless of sex or numbers.”
If you want to see the full platform, here’s the link. Some of their desires are very enlightening.
http://www.article8.org/docs/general/platform.htm
What a shocker! OC conservatives don’t support gay marriage?
I think anyone who wants to BAN gay marriage is a bigot, plain and simple. So just come out and say it! Oh, and get your Bible out of our government!
There is a big difference between tolerating and embracing. The word gay and the rainbow image have been high-jacked. Now the sacred, religious term, marriage, is being high-jacked. Civil Unions, YES…that is tolerant. Marriage for homosexuals, NO, that is forced embracing of a practice not condoned in the religious community. How about tolerance for 2000 years of religious beliefs?????
Fighterj, you’re wrong, but let’s assume you’re right. What if your own child turns out to be gay? The book s/he read in fifth grade about a normal family that happened to have two dads or two moms instead of a dad and a mom might be the thing that saves his or her life, especially if s/he’s being fed a steady diet of homophobia at home.
You don’t like the idea of gay people being mentioned in schools for the same reason you don’t like the idea of same-sex marriage: because it makes it harder for you to pretend we don’t exist.
I made a comment previously, but I think that the inclusion of the link is requiring moderation. So I’m going to rework my comment in case the other one doesn’t make it in.
It’s very interesting to see what the gay rights agenda really is. Their platform was set in 1972, and they’ve been working on it for more than 30 years. In fact, same-sex marriage is just one step in their goals. Specifically, it helps this one:
“Repeal of all legislative provisions that restrict the sex or number of persons entering into a marriage unit; and the extension of legal benefits to all persons who cohabit regardless of sex or numbers.”
If you want to see the full platform, google “1972 gay rights platform”. Some of their desires are very enlightening, including the legalization of prostitution, elimination of the age of consent, and the above request which could include polygamy and polyandry.
It’s hard for me to believe this is a “civil right”. Civil unions already exist under California state law. A civil union already has ALL the legal rights of marriage. This includes being at the bedside of a dying partner, getting insurance, determining inheritance, etc.
I think it is very disingenuous to compare not supporting Gay Marriage to denying voting rights for women or forcing blacks to the back of the bus or even deny interracial marriages (in this case there was no alternative to provide the legal rights and benefits of marriage).
I believe the burden of proof lies with the Gay and Lesbian community to enumerate the actual civil/legal rights that will be deny them by not permitting Gay Marriage.
Are they denied the right to vote?
Do they have to sit in the back of the bus?
Are there “separate, but equal” water fountains and sections at restaurants?
Are they denied work or passed over for promotion?
Are they denied insurance for their partner?
Are they denied the sharing of inheritance?
If there exists a “yes” to any of the above, then Gays and Lesbians have full recourse to the law, and recent history shows that they will win their case.
What I think this really is is a social issue. One group’s beliefs versus another group’s beliefs. And whose beliefs should become the societal norm and whose should become the protected minority.
My argument is that since the institution of marriage has been vetted by millennia of years of human experience across the multitude of the world’s cultures and civilizations and has remained as “between man and woman” therefore the burden of proof lies with the Gay and Lesbian community to come up with real ways in which marriage is benefitted by allowing individuals of the same sex to call their union by the same name of “marriage”.
In the past Century our society has experimented in a few other ways with the institution of marriage. Since thousands of years of history had taught society that marriage should exist until the death of a partner and that no sexual relations should exist outside the bonds of marriage, divorce and adultery were explicitly prohibited and even codified into law. In the last Century these strictures were relaxed (and yes I realize this is a matter of opinion) and both individuals and our society as a whole has suffered for it. My thoughts are “do we really have a right to keep tinkering with marriage?”
I believe that the vast majority of Californians (include myself) have no ill will towards Gays and Lesbians. I have friends and co-workers and even a best friend who are gay. If some ignorant idiot wanted to belittle or harm one of them because they were gay, I would be the first to jump in and defend them. And I think that the vast majority of Californians would do the same. At the same time, I think the vast majority of Californians are uncomfortable at the thought of so drastically altering the time-tested institution of marriage especially with all the consequences that might follow, including: “gay marriage” being taught to elementary school children, adoption agencies being forced to close for not placing children in gay households, churches being denied tax-exempted status for not solemnizing “gay marriages”.
Equal rights for EVERYONE!
I understand why there are those who oppose the ban, and those who are for the ban.
The beauty of living in America is that we are the land of the free.
This is a Civil Rights Movement for the new century.
I don’t believe in marriage, but I do believe that there are people who do. Those that want to get married should be allowed to.
I love the television ads that wrongfully say that gay marriage will HAVE to be taught in public schools. This clearly is a misinterpretation. There isn’t one CA state standard that says teachers MUST teach about marriage, of any sort http://www.cde.ca.gov/be/st/ss/
When planning lessons, a teacher uses the standards that are developed and your district’s state approved curriculum for each subject area (which address the standards for each grade level) along with outside materials and resources to enhance learning.
On another note, think about this. Your child becomes good friends with a student in class. You learn that your child’s friend has 2 moms or 2 dads. Are you going to tell your child that he/she can’t be friends with that child anymore (because of your PERSONAL belief about gay marriage)? If so, then you would be a hypocrite, because any good parent teaches his/her child from an early age to follow the Golden Rule: to treat others the way you want to be treated, along with showing respect for others’ differences.
If only we could all follow that simple Golden Rule that is taught to us at such an early age and reinforced thereafter. Ahhh, “what a wonderful world” it COULD (and should) be…
Yes on Prop. 8. Under the direction of God the Father, Jesus Christ created man and women. You can say whatever you want, but as a christian it goes counter to the bible and logic that God intended for two men or two women to procreate.
I was shocked to read Yes on 8 - Embrace the Hate. We need more people to say: NO on 8 - No on HATE!
First question is what is marrage?
1. Union between the happy couple with family and God as witness.
2. The Fed description - two people financally responsible for each decision as one enity. Remember the fed is removed from Church and State but won’t forget tax status.
1. I stand by a Marrage between a Man and Woman.
2. If anyone wants to enter a business contract, partnership, the Fed will reconize it no matter if one is married or not. Any thing different would be Illegal.
who cares
I’ve been married (and divorced) 6 times so I’m an expert! Don’t let gays marry, god wouldn’t like it.
Why is my comment still awaiting moderation? I posted it at 12:50. Al just posted his at 1:09 and it was approved. What’s with the delay? There’s nothing wrong with my posting.
trent1280, Your comment about Mormons really confused me.
You seemed to imply that the only reason the LDS church isn’t practicing polygamy is that they gave it up to become a state. But if they really wanted polygamy back, wouldn’t they support gay marriage? That would provide an initial weakening of the definition of marriage.
In fact, I can see a couple steps needed to get back to polygamy. First, gay marriage would change the definition of the people involved in marriage. Then they could get the number of people involved in marriage changed by using the bisexuals. Bisexuals could claim discrimination unless they could marry both a man and a woman. Then it would be a much easier path back to polygamy.
I would think that you would be rejoicing because the Mormons are supporting traditional marriage wholeheartedly.
YES ON 8
YES
YES
YES
MORALS & VALUES STILL EXIST !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
dumbed down Says: “anal intercourse on the wedding night.”
Does that apply to the lesbian marriages as well? If so, interesting
…24 carrots on the wedding night
Gary Acker: “Jesus Christ created man and women”
Uh…..what?
You might at least want to familiarize yourself with the Bible before you start imposing it onto our constitution.
Terry, I was being sarcastic when I said Yes On 8-Embrace the Hate. Sadly, there are plenty of people posting here that actually are embracing the hate despite claiming to worship a god of love.
yes on prop 8 all the way.
I have very close friends who are gay and who are actively involved in my life but yet I believe firmly in that I want to teach my children what I believe. It is my opinion that this has to be done according to their age and maturity. I am voting Yes on 8 because I want to conserve my right! I know a lot of people have problems with this issue because it is so close and dear to each of our hearts on both sides of the spectrum.
If you think I am right or wrong - it is what I find important to me. Yes on 8!
For those that say that marriage is sacred you might want to take a look at the alarming statistics. The divorce rate is around 50% and even higher in S. Ca. Around 70% of men cheat on their spouses so I dont think there is really “sacred” about marriage anymore. Who cares who gets married as long as they are happy!
Gay couples deserve to be as miserable as heterosexual couples ~ viva la marriage!
ses says : “the minute they made marriage a government institution (via licensing and tax credits), it became the right of every citizen under separation of church and state as plainly stated in and protected by the Constitution of the United States of America”. That’s actually not true. Marriage has always been strictly a state-by-state issue. However, the issue of limiting marriage to two persons of the opposing gender is not an issue of the Amendment I separation clause.
Without research I would agree that gays should be able to marry, but it is so much more than two people getting together. And for those of you that don’t know, about three years ago gays were offered ALL the rights for couples including health insurance, property rights and workplace discrimination protection through civil unions and domestic partnerships. If you watch carefully in Massachusetts where gay marriage is now legal, you’ll see that they want much more than recognition as a couple. They want to teach homosexuality to kindergartners, they want to force churches to cater their wishes, and they want to force small businesses to condone their lifestyle. I am not ready to have the government mandate transsexual education as diversity training. I can’t even opt if I don’t agree. See the David Parker case that was just updated 10/7/08 for the latest. You can’t opt out – it’s that simple.
http://www.massresistance.com/docs/parker_lawsuit/sc_petition/rejected.html
Your vote on Prop. 8 this November 4th has nothing to do with the court over turning Prop. 22, it’s about making a permanent amendment to the California constitution making gay marriage permanently illegal. Being a gay man and being in a long term relationship with the love of my life I oppose Prop. 8. Prop. 8 causes a division in our society telling gay people, like myself, that we are not equal to heterosexuals and thus cannot posses the same rights and privileges. Those that say that the issuance of a license by the state is not a right but a privilege are correct it is a privilege; however, the issuance of such a license should be done in a manner in which it does not discriminate against individuals based on their sexual orientation. Based on the claims that some supporters of Prop. 8 have made, should the state of California pass laws prohibiting individuals from obtaining a business license or even a drivers license because the petitioner is gay? This type of discrimination should not be tolerated in our legal system and it must not be passed on to future generations. Let’s analyze the divisive laws of the segregation era. Now decades after the segregation of African Americans we can clearly see how unjust and harmful divisive laws can be.
“They want to teach homosexuality to kindergartners”
No, they don’t. Just as children are not taught about heterosexual sex in school, they’re not taught about homosexual sex.
They are, however, presumably taught to spell the word “kindergarteners.”
If you’re pro prop 8, please understand that there are so many more evil heterosexual vices to clear up first…take on pedophiles, spousal abuse, and child abuse and neglect instead. That is truly evil that deserves your attention and outrage.
Right now gay people are checking out your library books and doing your taxes, and yes, teaching your children. They are your neighbors and your family members. If they want to go to city hall and file paperwork to ensure that they can take care of eachother, and make medical decisions let them. No evil being done there.
Now a word on those ridiculous ads, since when do they teach “marriage” to little kids in school? My kids are barely learning their core subjects. How much time could teachers possibly have to devote to this subject? Protecting kids from finding out that there are gay people in this world is such a losing arguement . By the time they’ve reached middle school they’ve seen enough re-runs of Will and Grace to figure it out for themselves. I would take well informed children over dangerously ignorant ones any day.
Just my opinion.
I’m 100% yes on prop 8. Marriage should just be between a man and woman as it has always been defined. Gay marriage is legal in Mass. and a lot of families are having problems with what kids are now taught in school. The same will happen here in california if this prop passes. Eventhough many say it will not happen, eventually it wil.
I have heard it argued that because traditional marriage has so many problems, we should expand it to include same-sex marriage. At first, it seems like a good idea. The gay community seems so enthusiastic about being married that they might invigorate marriage. However, it doesn’t seem to work.
Yes, marriage has problems. Cohabitation, divorce, abuse, single-parenthood, and infidelity are wounding it. I can see many ways that society could help these problems. The media could focus news, movies, books, and shows on good marriages and how to strengthen them. People could promote marriage as desirable. Anger management could be offered, and the value of human life and relationships instilled. Pornography could be curtailed. Men could be taught that to be a father and care for a family is honorable and important. And chastity and fidelity could be emphasized as essential characteristics in a good society.
However, I do not see redefining marriage as a way to help with any of those. Studies have shown that the gay community has the same problems as marriage, and additional ones besides.
Countries with legal same-sex marriage show a very low same-sex marriage rate (usually less than 10%). Cohabitation and living alone are much more common. They also show an equal or higher divorce rate for same-sex couples. Domestic violence is considered to be equivalent or higher to heterosexuals since it’s often under-reported. Since divorce rates are the same or higher, they have at least as much problem with single parenting. As for infidelity, it is rampant. One study estimated that even in committed relationships, gay individuals have on average 8 additional partners a year.
The gay community also has a greater incidence of STDs, mental disorders, and suicide attempts than the common population.
In other words, I don’t think redefining marriage will really help with the current problems of traditional marriage. It will just expand and increase the problems that marriage is already trying to combat.
This will be a 1st…
Taking away Civil Rights from a group.
You and I know that The Nazi did this and we all saw where that ended p.
Oh it can’t happen to California?
Didn’t it’s Govenor say he “Admired Hitler”?
Can’t happen in the US?
Didn’t W. Bush say “it would be easier to run the Country if we had a dictator… Just as long as I’m the Dictator”?
Today Gays (yea, we know a lot of homophobes out there hate ‘em)
But tomorrow it might be a Jew… a Black or maybe even YOU.
Those who won’t VOTE, or fight for everyone’s RIGHTS
don’t deserve their Rights.
Because eventually they will lose them too.
VOTE NO on 8
Emissary is NUTS!
He Says: “Countries with legal same-sex marriage show a very low same-sex marriage rate (usually less than 10%).”
Don’t most people think that the general Gay population is less then 10% of the whole??? So you think that gays are now 100% of the population and thus YOU are complaining that in other countries their marriages is low because they only marry 10% of the total marriage population??? Are You Nuts??? Or are you JUST mathamatically challenged? Stupid people do not deserve the right to speak.
Chris, sorry for not being clear. I meant that less than 10% of the same-sex population was choosing to get married. I apologize for the confusion.
I have to laugh at “emissary,” who apparently concludes that gay people should not be allowed to marry because their unions will not be sufficiently helpful to straight people. Guess what, emissary? This isn’t about you. This is about gay and lesbian citizens whose civil rights have traditionally been trampled upon.
And about that suicide rate—has it occurred to you that gay people would have less reason to be depressed if they weren’t constantly the targets of bigotry and discrimination?
LizardOC, I was trying to answer an argument. The argument states that traditional marriage has problems, and that redefining marriage to include same-sex would help with those problems. That was the reason for my comment, and I was trying to present the facts on why I didn’t think it was true. Do you think that expanding marriage to include same-sex marriage would help with the problems currently faced by traditional marriage?
I agree with the post from Chris Prevatt (October 8th, 2008 at 12:50 pm) that says:
I take issue with your poll question “Should Gay Marriage be legal in California?” Marriage between same gender couples is legal. From my perspective the question that should be asked is “Should existing legal marriages between same sex couples be voided?
*This poll question is completely misleading! I just voted incorrectly because of the wording, and then only realized after I submitted the box that I checked the wrong answer. * This question is couched in the idea of the Proposition which is No for marriage equality, and yes for discriminating against same-sex couples. Instead, in your question, it asks a question with answers that are opposite than those of the proposition. Very confusing and misleading.
Emissary, I’ve heard virtually no one make that argument. What I do hear frequently is the contention that since straight people have done a fine job of messing up marriage all by themselves, it’s beyond disingenuous to suggest that same-sex marriage will suddenly be the undoing of the institution of matrimony (as many of the “yes on 8″ folks would have us believe).
LizardOC, I think it’s a valid point that people are not implementing the institution of traditional marriage as well as it could be.
However, these are recognized problems with the implementation of marriage, not with the institution itself.
I think the main problem for me comes when people assert that there’s something wrong with the institution (definition) of marriage itself — something so wrong that it must be redefined in order to be “fixed”. Maybe I’ve just been around too many good traditional marriages, but I don’t see much to fix.
I have a hard time seeing how the institution of marriage could be better for our nation by redefining it. Traditional marriage brings together men and women and uses their complementary natures to build communities. It provides their children with a “mini society”; for almost two decades they see how men and women interact with each other in committed, loving relationships. They see how men and women treat their elders, their peers, and the rising generation. By the time they enter society as adults, both boys and girls know how to act within it.
When I try to compare the best that the institution of same-sex marriage has to offer, it doesn’t seem as good for society as the best traditional marriage. It isolates men and women. It is barren by design. It teaches children by example how only one gender interacts with society. I have read studies where school teachers noted that children raised by gay couples had a difficult time interacting with children who were not the same gender as their parents. They didn’t know how to act because they didn’t have the experience from the home.
Ultimately, the voters must decide what they believe is best for society. The legislature has already done what they could for the gay community in providing domestic partnerships. These couples have “the same rights, protections, and benefits, and shall be subject to the same responsibilities, obligations, and duties under law . . . as are granted to and imposed upon spouses.” (Family Code §297.5) That means the same hospital visitation rights, access to property of deceased loved ones, health benefits, the ability to filing taxes jointly, and the rights regarding having and raising children.
The big question is: are they different enough relationships to be defined differently? From all I’ve read and the discussions I’ve had, I think that the answer is yes.
I know that many disagree, and that is okay with me. I acknowledge that you have had different life experiences than I have. And I appreciate that we can have a respectful conversation. I am grateful that most people have strong opinions on this topic, because it shows that we are not indifferent to the minorities. It shows that we care about them and about society.
For Kyle and others, just when were marriages deemed sacred?? Please show me where it says that in the Bible. Civil marriages are conducted almost world wide. Marriages in the church(only the Christian church?) are referred to as sacred because they are performed in the church or by an ordained minister of the church but that is a man-made rule. I don’t think you will find it specifically in the Bible.
We have far more serious problems in the world why don’t you get this riled up over human Trafficking which
is the second highest money maker in the world. Eighty percent are female, but 50 percent are children!! Human trafficking is slavery, holding people against their will. It is not religion, it is not prostitution, it is a crime. Why don’t ;you all get busy with that. We have human trafficking here in Orange County and all over the U.S. It isn’t just an over there problem.
Protect equality for all of us, not just some on this Proposition. But focus your action and efforts on something more threatening.
Think said:
> Marriage was a union based on biblical terms and ideals. Period
> Can’t deny or argue that
I can both deny and argue against it.
Marriages have been documented before the concept of an Abrahamic God existed. Just because the Bible came along later and used a common and useful societal mechanism doesn’t mean they created it.
Also, they did not use the word “Marriage” back then. There is nothing special about those collection of letters other than what we define them to be. It just so happens the Bible defines Marriage one way, while the CA constitution defines it another.
And even if it were based on Biblical terms and ideals, so was American slavery. During those years, it was common belief that the Bible explicitly condoned it. In many places, people took it as their Biblically commanded duty to bring the word and discipline of God to those he so marked (sons of Cane).
Just because you read your version of the Bible a certain way doesn’t mean that it actually means anything.
How about me marrying a tree… or my pet rock? Do I have the right to do that and have it recorded in the State archives? Where does it end? Marriage is a right that one man and one woman have to be joined in matrimony. Equal rights for hospital visits, death benefits, on and on… that ’s great. But don’t call it marriage.
Roro says:
> I am voting Yes on 8 because I want to conserve my right
How is allowing gay marriage abrogating your right?
Why so worried about telling kids about gay marriage? There are gay people around, being gay in public… gasp. You’d still have to explain “gay” to them, so it’s not like any innocence is lost.
Unless you’re meaning we shouldn’t even tolerate gays?
Being tolerante has to be a two way street. If the the people of California want to make an ammendment after having their decision overturned by judges, let us do it. If same gender couples want to make same gender marriage legal why don’t they put it on the ballot.
Marriage is not a civil right… it is a benefit. Civil Unions have the same rights and benefits as marriages do… we are not trying to take away anything that they don’t all ready have.
Well said, civlyun. Thanks.
The issue is simply this: Heterosexuals (I include myself in this group, but not in their short sightedness) are afraid that gay people will make a better go of marriage than we have.
Let’s face it: how in the world could gay people POSSIBLY screw up the “sanctity” of Marriage worse than straight people have?
Simply put, God destroyed Sodom and Gomorah for a reason. It wasnt their high taxes, it was due in large measure to their sexual corruption (especially being gay). So yes I hear you people saying its worse today, why doesnt God destroy us now? If this prop doesnt pass, God just might nuke California.
Further still even if you do not believe in God, why would you want your kindergarden children FORCED to be taught about gay marriage being ok (just like in Massacusetts).
I am not bigotted, This is a moral issue that is being disguised as a civil rights issue. Thats a load of horse pucky. A civil right is a right or power which can be exercised under civil law. Gays say we are denying them the civil right to have the title of marriage. Thats it. In California they already have ALL THE SAME rights as a married man and woman just without the name. However if proposition 8 doesnt pass then heterosexuals will lose thier rights to shield their families and children from the unacceptable practice of homosexuality in thier schools, churches, and even in their own homes.
I grew up in Texas, but have been living here in California for 5 years. Texans wouldnt stand for this nonsense, not becuase they are rednecks, backwater hillbillies, or intollerant. It is simply becuase they are God fearing folks and realize that legalizing something like Gay marriage would bring the wrath of God down upon them.
So you say so what, this is California, we are not all Christians here. Well I do believe that California is rich and diverse in religious beliefs, but I dont know of any religion that promotes homosexuality or homosexual behavior. That includes Christianity, Muslim, Buddist, Jewish, etc…
Seriously do you want to be out on the beach one day with your family with young children and see two dudes making out and your child asks you why they are doing that? I dont.
In closing, if the plumbing doesnt fit dont go there.
yesforprop8@gmail.com
Question for people against 8. If marriage is a right for any adult, do you support marriage between siblings? Do you support polygamy? Do you support marriage between a mother and her son? We aren’t talking about having kids here, we know there are biological problems with incest, but do you really believe that the definition of marriage should be expanded to include these groups? If you don’t, you’re a hypocrite. Just thought I’d point that out.
Throughout history, there has always been something called “breeding.” Now, let’s look at what “breeding” means. Basically, it’s one of each gender, who come together sexually to make little ones of their own kind. Great. Now, if two of the same gender start coming together sexually, should we call that “breeding?” No. The definition of marriage IS between a man and a woman. Give gays all the rights they want, but don’t force us to call what they want marriage, because it isn’t.
I am voting YES on proposition 8!
Vote YES on Prop 8
I do believe in tolerance of those who choose to engage in homosexual behavior or any other immmoral behavior, but not at any time do I feel gay marriage must be made legal which mandates society embrace it.
This is a moral issue. Homosexuality is immoral behavior. It’s a choice…no matter what anyone says. No way, do I want homosexuals to marry legally. Marriage has not ever been meant for same sex couples. I hope the majority of society never accepts this faulty idea. It’s wrong.
The family is the center of society. Only man and woman can create life. Children have the right to be taught in a home with both a father and mother. This is the central purpose of our existence on earth. Keep marriage the sacred union God intended.
Prop 8 is not about free speech, health education in our public schools or religion. It is about amending the California Constitution to state the marriage in the State of California will only be recognized if it is between a man and a woman. It is about telling a group of individuals that while you are good enough to pay taxes, work and contribute to society your relationship is not valid and you do not deserve the same rights as others. THIS IS WRONG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Since when is marriage a human right?
>Further still even if you do not believe in God, why would you want your kindergarden children FORCED to be taught about gay marriage being ok (just like in Massacusetts).
I wasn’t forced to learn about heterosexual marriage in kindergarten… why would gay marriage be forced?
I wasn’t forced to learn about gay people in kindergarten… but you’re not talking about outlawing being gay, are you?
What’s the difference?
>However if proposition 8 doesnt pass then heterosexuals will lose thier rights to shield their families and children from the unacceptable practice of homosexuality in thier schools, churches, and even in their own homes.
That’s a load of bull. What forces any of what you’re saying?
Just because gay marriage is legal doesn’t mean the schools will teach it as a valid moral option (nor should they, schools should not be teaching morality to my children, especially controversial moralities)
Churches are free to keep that all out… They don’t have to admin gays, they don’t have to marry them, they don’t have to change a thing.
> I dont know of any religion that promotes homosexuality or homosexual behavior.
So what? #1, not everyone is religious at all
#2, The State is not supposed to interfere in church affairs, nor the church in state affairs… church/state separation.
And, while there may not be major religions that practice it these days, the true original of levitical doctrines against a men lying with another man were to separate the Jews from other religions of the time that actually used homosexual acts as part of their religion.
>Seriously do you want to be out on the beach one day with your family with young children and see two dudes making out and your child asks you why they are doing that? I dont.
why not? It’s no different than if a straight couple does it.
I really don’t want to have to explain that to my kid either.
You’re still discussing sex/etc… you can just add a “and they’re going to hell too”… assuming that’s what you believe
>In closing, if the plumbing doesnt fit dont go there.
You’ve got no right to tell me or anyone what to do with my plumbing (in most cases). And that’s enshrined in the California constitution.
Hey, can I vote on YOUR marriage?
On September 13, 2008 my father married his partner of 29 years . You will not begin to understand what this day meant not just to them but to everyone who knows and loves them. Not only was Robert’s family and my Father’s family there to share in this joyous occasion but also My mom Laura, who escorted my Father down the aisle had her entire family there as well. This is a relationship that had to wait 29 years to receive validation, but now a group of organizations would like to take this validation away, they are doing this by distorting the facts.
Here’s what fiction is and what fact is:
Fiction: Teaching children about same-sex marriage will happen here unless we pass Prop 8.
Fact: Not one word in Prop 8 mentions education and no child can be forced, against the will of their parents, to be taught anything about health and family issues at school. California law prohibits it, and the Yes on 8 campaigns knows they are lying. Sacramento Superior Court Judge Timothy Frawley has already ruled that this claim by Prop 8 proponents is “false and misleading.”
Fiction: Churches could lose their tax-exemption status.
Fact: Nothing in Prop 8 would force churches to do anything. In fact, the court decision regarding marriage specifically says “no religion will be required to change its religious policies or practices with regard to same-sex couples, and no religious officiant will be required to solemnize a marriage in contravention of his or her religious beliefs.”
Fiction: A Massachusetts case about a parent’s objection to the school curriculum will happen here.
Fact: Unlike Massachusetts, California gives parents an absolute right to remove their kids and opt-out of teaching on health and family instruction they don’t agree with. The opponents know that California law already covers this and Prop 8 won’t affect it, so they bring up an irrelevant case in Massachusetts.
Fiction: Four Activist Judges in San Francisco…
Fact: Prop 8 is not about courts and judges; it’s about eliminating a fundamental right. Judges didn’t grant the right, the constitution guarantees the right. Proponents of Prop 8 use an outdated and stale argument that judges aren’t supposed to protect rights and freedoms. This campaign is about whether Californians, right now, in 2008 are willing to amend the constitution for the sole purpose of eliminating a fundamental right for one group of citizens.
Fiction: People can be sued over personal beliefs.
Fact: California’s laws already prohibit discrimination against anyone based on race, religion, gender, or sexual orientation. This has nothing to do with marriage.
Fiction: Pepperdine University supports the Yes on 8 campaign.
Fact: The University has publicly disassociated itself from Professor Richard Peterson of Pepperdine University, who is featured in the ad, and has asked to not be identified in the Yes on 8 advertisements.
Fiction: Unless Prop 8 passes, CA parents won’t have the right to object to what their children are taught in school.
Fact: California law clearly gives parents and guardians broad authority to remove their children from any health instruction if it conflicts with their religious beliefs or moral convictions.
We should not eliminate fundamental rights for ANY Californians. Vote NO on H8 ote No on Prop 8.
4 judges vs. 61% of california voters?!!!! YEs on 8. Go to: yes-on-8.blogspot.com
>4 judges vs. 61% of california voters?!!!! YEs on 8. Go to: yes-on-8.blogspot.com
Those 61% voted for the wrong thing. The Constitution protects rights, and they didn’t vote to alter the constitution.
Interestingly, the main complaint I hear is along the lines of “now I’ll have to teach my kids about gay marriage, kissing on beaches, etc”.
Well, they don’t have to be married to kiss on the beach and put you in a position of actually parenting.
And legal marriage in one state is recognized by all other states, by the US constitution. So, since it’s legal in other states, you still have the same risk of someone saying that’s it’s legal. (Though in neither case does the school have to present that information, nor are they likely to)
I’d really like someone to get down to a real reason that matters, that doesn’t depend on a particular reading of the Bible.
Heck, on one reading, Jesus fulfilled the old testament covenant, negating Levitical decree on this, and never Himself said gay marriage was bad. (Saying Church marriage is between a man and a woman doesn’t mean civil marriage can’t be otherwise… render under Caesar what is Caesar’s, right?)
But since there are so many ways of interpreting the Bible, there needs to be a real reason, in my mind. Not just “we’ve always thought about it that way”… There are benefits and access you can only get as a married couple, why harm gays by restricting them in that way? Why waste so many $millions to overturn something you’ve just got to make another law to make separate but equal rights for anyway? Just leave it alone, and things are fine.
Those millions could be feeding and housing children and families who find themselves in the street due to no fault of their own. In my head, by wasting money on this, you’re saying “Sure, I don’t mind killing some poor people (some wouldn’t have died if they weren’t on the street), as long as I can be assured gays can describe themselves as married. It sickens me.
Well said, Kyle! I believe, too, that four judges do not have the right to overturn the vox populi. That, to me, is completely unconstitutional!
Furthermore, while I unequivocally support equal partnership for gay couples, I do not believe the definition of marriage needs to be changed. It doesn’t affect their rights one iota.
And it’s not about “civil rights.” This is so, so different from the interracial marriage changes from the 60s. Race is what you ARE, not what you DO. Changing the definition of marriage changes our entire societal structure and has far-reaching sociopolitical consequences that I think are being overlooked in the name of “tolerance” (which, I might add, seems to only go one way far too often).
Marriage is between one man and one woman.
I feel that gay couples should be able to live together. However giving them the right to marriage is now causing rights to be taken from the rest of us. Look at Massachusetts, where gay marriage is legal. A catholic adoption center was told by a judge they had to allow adoption to gay couples. It is against their beliefs so they had to shut down. Now catholics in that area do not have that service available to them. Where is the separation between church and state? Parents in a school district there had their kindergartener come home with gay rights material. When the parents asked to be notified when that would happen they were told it is a law and we don’t have to tell you when your child is exposed to it. When the father objected they called the police. Do parents no longer have a voice in what their children are taught? Or at the very least be notified so they can teach their values at home?
This is not just a marriage issue it is also a moral issue for many people. I can see that religious and parental rights could be denied by this marriage issue. I feel I must support it.
It’s not equal rights when those viewpoints are being pushed on people and forced to be taught in schools and churches will be sued and adoption agencies closed down because they won’t all bend to the desires of people with different values. I have yet to hear of a same sex business being sued by someone for violating their civil rights. Oh and BTW there is nothing being taken away from same sex relationships by passing Prop 8 that isn’t already available to them.
California passed the Domestic Partnership Act shortly after Prop 22. It affords ALL of the legal benefits of marriage to gay couples. Once registered as a domestic partner, you even have to go to Family Law court to get it dissolved.
So the issue is NOT about legal benefits, or rights. It is about REDEFINING the institution of marriage by gays to suit their lifestyle. It forces their definition on me, and my children. It forces my children, and my neighbors children to be indoctrinated about homosexuality under the fake mask of tolerance. It changes MY marriage certificate.
More than anything, however, I resent that ONE person decided he was going to IGNORE the law and forced that on the rest of us. I doubt highly that the gay community would welcome with EQUAL OPEN ARMS the situation is ONE PERSON on the California Supreme Court overturned the Domestic Partnership Act. Because certainly my heterosexual former mother-in-law and her longtime male partner can’t register as domestic partners….doesn’t the DPA discriminate against them?
As a biracial woman of color, who worked hard to support the Civil Rights Act of 1964, I wish that people who think that gay “marriage” is a civil right would wake up and re-read their history.
I find it so disgusting that alot people in OC are opposed to same sex marriage. They claim themselves as being religious; yet OC is know how fake and plastic it is. Everyone prances around playing I have more money than you! So many husbands and wives are cheating on each other yet some of them talk about how gays shouldn’t marry? Who are they to judge?
People in OC need to wake up and smell the coffee and sweep their back porch before judging others. Gays getting married does NOT force churches to marry them, nor are children required to learn about gay marriage. California law states parents have the right to op their child out of a discussion if it’s against their religious beliefs. If some say marriage isn’t a right for gays that goes for straights as well as there is no law
stating they have the right to marry either.
What we need to do is worry about the real issues period.
Christa said:
>I believe, too, that four judges do not have the right to overturn the vox populi. That, to me, is completely unconstitutional!
The constitution isn’t subjective… it isn’t unconstitutional “to you”, it “is” or it “isn’t” constitutional.
The voters in the last round voted for law… a law that the constitution said was invalid.
Had they voted to amend the constitution, it would have been a whole different story.
>Furthermore, while I unequivocally support equal partnership for gay couples, I do not believe the definition of marriage needs to be changed. It doesn’t affect their rights one iota.
Separate but equal has always worked in the past.
>And it’s not about “civil rights.” This is so, so different from the interracial marriage changes from the 60s. Race is what you ARE, not what you DO.
But the 60’s folks chose to DO things like try to get married.
It was about black people doing white things.
And it’s not at all clear that being gay is a choice. (The fact that they have had to endure constant threat of death over the ages makes me think it’s not a choice really… why would anyone choose something so dangerous, for something so icky? It just doesn’t compute.)
>Changing the definition of marriage changes our entire societal structure and has far-reaching sociopolitical consequences that I think are being overlooked in the name of “tolerance”
Like…?
>(which, I might add, seems to only go one way far too often).
Example?
Who are the general public to decide who should get married and who should not? When you look at the high divorce rate among “traditional” marriages what does it matter? What message are we sending our children with divorce and traditional marriage? It’s OK to marry the man/woman and if it doesn’t work out you can just divorce the person??? When you look at same sex couples they have usually been together for a very long time and they are only wanting what they deserve which is to be united as one with gaining the same benefits that traditional couples receive. We can read our bibles and see how God looks at it, but in the end it is not our place to judge; it is HIS! Gay couples are all around us; we are not going to be able to shield the kids from it. Let’s worry more about whether they can read and write beyond a 6th grade level when they are in high school! Mercy society! Look around us, we have a hell of a lot more worries in our life… the economy, Iraq, our soldiers, education etc….
My life partner and I have been together 29 years. We recently were married in a wonderful ceremony where our five grandchildren were our wedding party. All our families were there. It was a fantastic day for us all.
Those supporting Prop 8 are being lied to every day by those backing this sad and hateful change to our state Constitution. You do not vote to take away a right in the United States of America! Prop 8 is un-American. Prop 8 is shameful. Prop 8 is bigotry codified into our state law.
Marriage is a legal contract…not a sacred contract. If a church doesn’t want to marry a same-sex couple they are free not to do so. Keep your faith and your politics out of my marriage!
I BELIEVE in good and evil, wright and wrong, white and black, sweet and bitter, morality and immorality, light and darkness, freedom and captivity, life and death.
I BELIEVE homosexual behavior and acts are IMMORAL. (NOTE: I do NOT believe the same-sex attractions are immoral, if any one has them by “nature”)! I believe each one of us, by that same “nature”, has an ability to choose to act on emotions and attractions or NOT to act.
I BELIEVE A spouse’s love towards one’s wife or husband is MORAL; acts of love outside of marital bonds are IMMORAL. The former uplifts and brings happiness, the latter destroys and brings sorrow.
I BELIEVE the marriage of a man and a woman is natural and moral, it brings life; a relationship of same sex people is unnatural, immoral, and brings death (to civilization in the long run).
I BELIEVE in equality, fairness and tolerance in their true sense. I BELIEVE slavery, discrimination of blacks and women was not right.
I BELIEVE a person with homosexual attractions can CHOOSE to act natural and moral.
I BELIEVE if any person chooses to act unnaturally or immorally, he/she canNOT enjoy the same privileges as another acting in a natural and moral ways.
I BELIEVE in YES on Prop8 because it encourages each of us in California in the right direction.
Just think! What would be the consequence if we encouraged EVERYONE to be MARRIED and to stay MARRIED? Now, on the other hand, what would be the consequence if we encouraged everyone to be HOMOSEXUAL?
Proposition 8 will prevent war between state and religion. If it does not pass, churches will be slowly forced into embracing what they see as immorality. The lawsuits will keep rolling forward from the ACLU and others.
To carry same sex marriage to it’s logical conclusion: Before long those that believe in scriptural morality will have to hide to continue holding and teaching their beliefs. Religious freedom will disappear and the state religion of political correctness will rule with an iron fist.
Society will continue to replace traditional sexual morality with trendy sexual behavior and relationships at a much faster pace. We will see if such behavior is good for us or not.
For most religions, homosexuality is bad, but no more so than sex outside of marriage. If the definition of marriage is redefined, religious beliefs get very difficult to teach, especially to children.
Prop 8 isn’t just about Gay’s marriages and rights. It also stipulates that our children will be indoctrinated from very young that same sex relationships are normal. It’s one thing to help our children with math or science and be hindered because they teach it differently than when we were in school. It’s quite another thing to have to explain that what they hear about same sex lifestyle is morally against our beliefs.
It also makes it illegal for many church clergy to perform even traditional marriages. They have to be willing to perform gay and traditional marriages even if it is against their beliefs, thus severly affecting those who desire a traditional marriage.
This prop gives Gays rights but, takes too many of ours and our childrens rights away. It is too great of a sacrifice to us to truly be considered legal.
I am not so sure that I agree that as long as it is consensual that it is ok. We as a society say that plural marriage is not ok. There are rules and boundaries that are placed so the general masses can all get along. Where this line is drawn I am not sure. Many times so called freedoms come with many ties to it. Where liberties are granted to one they are taken away from another. I am still deciding on 8 but so far I lean more to a yes then a no. I did some research and found out that in deed parents were not able to be warned and able to pull their kids out of school so they would not be taught about something that they do not want their kids to be taught. What happens when everyone starts to be home schooled because they do not want their kids in public schools. I do feel that everyone should have the same rights to social security and rights of survivors. Like I said it is a confusing issue but so far I lean to a yes vote.
I don’t care if a gay couple call their relationship marriage or not, but being officially sanctioned means much more than that. The great Catholic Charities (I am not catholic) has a wonderful program for placing hard to place orphan children. They have helped millions by placing these children with couples. They had the choice in Massachusets after being sued by gays marriage people. They could either change the doctrine of the Catholic religion or stop helping those poor children. They no longer provide that service in Massachusetts. They would most likely be driven out of California too!
The “No on 8″ forces must be scared! They have a systematic program of stealing and destroying “Yes on 8″ signs and posters. Now who is being intolerant ?
Crime Spree by No on Prop. 8 forces in Safest City in America!
Mission Viejo which is proud of its low crime rate is having a spree of illegal and violate actions against the Yes on 8 proponents.
Antagonists are secretly tresspassing and stealling Yes on 8 yard signs. Man attacks woman on street corner with Yes on 8 sign. Is this “the safest city in America” sinking into a rampage of hate by those against proposition 8 ? It seems so. Now who is being intollerant and extremist?
It’s about society, and let’s look at: society needs gay marriage the way a fish needs a bicycle. Looked at dispassionately, it’s easy to see that traditional marriage is what should be supported above anything else.
This is 1% (by some counts, and certainly no more than 3%) of the population. Lesbianism is a fraction of that. Of the ones that are going to marry, a much smaller fraction applies. For sympathy for this group to turn society’s needs for stability on its head is a mind-boggling step for us.
For all the “arguments” that traditional marriage is itself being devalued by heterosexuals themselves, and therefore why care about homosexuals, this shows the attitude that the gay movement has towards heterosexual society and values. On the contrary, to many, many heterosexuals, traditional marriage is extremely valued. The failure of a (traditional) marriage is almost always seen as sad. Copy-catting by this minority that struggles to get itself named a privileged minority (on the basis of its sexual behavior, of all things) is no basis for changing society, and the foundations of society. Yes, society has problems, and traditional marriage has suffered over the years. Guess what? There are strong movements to strengthen (traditional) marriage around. The counter arguments that generalize from the specific (”I know a gay/lesbian couple whose kids are great” and “there are bad heterosexual marriages”) ignores the findings of many, many scientific studies about what the best environment is for raising children.
Gay or same-sex marriage is a societal experiment that is fraught with danger, danger already already established. Demonstrated legal danger to First Amendment rights: freedom of religion, freedom of speech. Add to this the cataloged and documented statistical dangers to the development of children, the foundation of our future society. Now that NAMBLA has entered the fray (quietly) and is no longer disavowed by the GLBT community, the electorate should be alarmed at the forces afoot in this issue.
Following the “sympathy for the gay movement” vote on this issue is a compassionate but irresponsible and poorly thought-out position to adopt.
The movement behind the No on 8 campaign represents the interests of a by-no-means disadvantaged population. Homosexuals are far from disenfranchised when it comes to tradition measures of disenfranchisement. They are disenfranchised neither educationally nor economically. On the contrary, they are well-educated and fairly well-off. And they are extremely articulate. They certainly make good arguments, and because the sympathy card has been played to good effect, folks get sucked into (or buy into) their viewpoint. The sympathy argument should be recognized for what it is: a manipulative method to gain and extend influence in society, influence that is way out of proportion to their numbers.
Support Proposition 8 is a stand that needs to be taken to defend against the very real consequences of modifying the definition of marriage.
Interesting reference to the Mormons earlier…especially because there are many other religions involved in the Yes on 8 campaign. Obviously, their are some people who are making comments in this poll who have not been doing their research…any catholics out there???
Vote Yes on 8
Another point…what about parental rights when the schools are teaching that homosexual relationships are ok? I am not ok with that and look at who’s rights are being taken away now. Our schools don’t have enough time to teach what they need to teach.
I am so tired of the people who teach tolerance/freedom of speech and also in the same breath tell you to shut up if your opinion differs from theirs…my liberal friends…!
The Prop 8 issue is not complex. The admendment is about the definition of marriage. Same sex couples will not loose rights currently afforded under the law.
Marriage has been defined since the beginning of time as a union between and man and a women with the potential of natural procreation. Since that is simply not possible between a same sex couple it cannot be defined as marriage.
Didn’t California Voters ALREADY VOTE on this measure??
SEEMS to me that just because TWO Supreme Court Justice’s want to Exercise a little POWER, to Undermine the Very Sacred Bond of Marriage
That WE ALREADY PASSED, by an OVERWHELMING Majority. These are the kind of Judges that need to be held ACCOUNTABLE for there actions!! Look at the COST we have to endure, That should NOT be an ISSUE… EVER… GOD CREATED ADAM & EVE… NOT Adam & Steve!!!
With all the Turmoil in the World, why Should we Ever Challenge The Most Sacred of ALL. The Sacred Bond Between ONE MAN & ONE WOMAN! God HELP US ALL, if WE CANNOT BELIEVE a SIMPLE TRUTH….
Frank Schubert and all the other pro 8 people say, “if gay marriage is legalized” because they want you to forget that it IS ALREADY LEGAL because if you know that it’s already legal, you’ll be able to see all their lies for what they are; the world hasn’t ended, Marriages are just as sacred as they were before gays and lesbians began to marry, children haven’t been harmed, and no church has been forced to perform same-sex marriage ceremonies. I was always taught to believe that lying was wrong, I suppose the Pro-8 people think lying is okay if its for a cause they believe in; as it’s written, “The deepest circle of hell is reserved for…liars”
When is enough, enough? What is the line that is too much? We change the definition of marriage to “consenting partners” and how do we legally stop incest, multiple wives/husbands? Even if the law prevents it, they may want to consent to it - then what?
Prop 8 isn’t about removing rights from anyone. It’s about preventing elitist judges from imposing laws that they have no right to impose on.
Prop 22 was voted and passed. Because the judges, years later, overruled prop 22 illegally, Prop 8 was established as an amendment so that it will not happen again. This is also about protecting our tender children and their future. Remember it was Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve.
The first amendment guarantees us the right to freely express our choice of religion. It does not give you the right to impose your religious views on others, which is what you are doing if you vote yes on Prop 8. Since marriage is a legal issue as well as a spiritual issue then legally, since we live by the motto of Freedom, we should allow same sex couples the same legal rights. As far as the spiritual side goes that is between you and your god (who probably doesn’t exist, and who would be turning his back on you in disgust for your lack of compassion and small mindedness) or your church.
If you’re voting Yes on Prop 8 then you are ignorant that there are other ways of life besides the ones that you live. Don’t be afraid of loving couples wanting to share in the same legal rights that are provided under the legal institution of marriage.
Be better than those who have fought against human rights. Because lets be honest, it’s the 50 percent of you who are divorced now that are a bigger risk to marriage then this issue.
If I could walk away from this disagreement, I would, but I cannot. The choices each individual makes are his to make. However, when those choices infringe upon the rights of others, they cannot be abided. With the legalization of gay marriage by the CA Supreme Court’s recent decision, the lines between Church and State have became further blurred.
The free exercise of religious worship and freedom of speech are limited within the guidelines of our laws. If gay marriage is the law, then those religions which teach that gay marrriage is sinful or refuse to perform those marriages will incur first censure then sanction. It does not take much imagination to envision this erosion of the Constitution of the United States.
In Canada and in the United States, the battles over religious freedom are already taking place. Those persons and religious entities who morally oppose homosexual behavior are the subject of human rights complaints, legal intimidation, and legal suits. Doctors who oppose artificially inseminating gay individuals, and abortions are being sued in courts.
Legalizing gay marriage is a most formidable step towards giving an individual or group the power to oppress the religious beliefs and freedom of worship of an individual or group as well as oppressing their freedom to express those beliefs.
The passing of Proposition 8 is no less than a measure to help preserve those rights guaranteed by the First Article of the Constitution of the United States.
Sheeple,Sheeple,Sheeple, Marriage has been made a mockery of for years straight or homosexal most people don’t seem to even consider it untill they have had an illegit kid or two.Anyway the poll was taken by a San Fran.CBS affilate that should explain the results.
It’s interesting that Bobi Rush’s viewpoint, which is widespread, would have the entire world’s religious beliefs be turned upside down. “Does the Bible teach that homosexuality is wrong?” “Yes.” Doggone it, the Bible therefore can’t be the word of God. Does anyone see what’s wrong here?
Well, there’s Christians, Jews, Muslims, Hindus, whose religions, or religious texts, all teach that homosexuality is wrong. Wow, they’ve been misled for hundreds or thousands of years! They are worshipping the wrong God, a God who simply is off-base for requiring a standard of behavior from His believers, followers and/or worshippers.
Why is the litmus test of religion suddenly whether or not it accepts homosexuality (homosexual behavior, to be specific from the Old and New Testament)? It is seen from Loveoneanother’s post, another popular viewpoint, that the purpose of the gay movement is to silence any and all who criticize it, especially religions. That’s a lot of hate from people who claim that a compassionate God looks down on them and approves of their behavior.
If the argument is that it’s okay to hate because it’s payback for past wrongs, that’s just completely disrespectful to civilization. Civilized people don’t respond that way. Why? Is it because it’s wrong? Well, yes. More so that it’s simply bad manners, and poor behavior. Children are normally disciplined for this sort of behavior. Why do sympathizers buy into this position? Isn’t a little embarrassing to do so?
Whoop! I meant Adam, not Bobi Rush. Sorry, Bobi.
In our quest to feel as if we are gaining more liberties in society, are we actually putting ourselves in a precarious position to lose more of them? Is Prop 8 only about gays and marriage? Will your vote on Prop 8 increase or decrease civil rights? California ’s Domestic Partnership Act (CDPA) already guarantees same sex couples all of the rights of married couples under state law. Rights then seem less at stake than the problem of encroaching upon religious freedoms by redefining what the word marriage means. Should an individual be able to sue a church to perform marriage ordinances even if they disagree with the religions tenets, doctrines, sacred text or counsel from spiritual leaders? Rather than protecting people’s rights to live as they choose, this seems to take away rights and override the rights of other cultures, traditions, religions and beliefs. This effort to redefine marriage raises serious issues of losing our rights to separation of church and state and the religious freedoms that our country has enjoyed. It is ironic that our country was settled so people could worship (or not) and follow the convictions of their heart, rather than by being forced to believe a certain way imposed upon them by government and we might lose that. Are we cultivating a precedent that will take away that liberty and regress to a time when people did not have that right? Do we want the state empowered to mandate and enforce uniform spiritual beliefs instead of allowing for the diversity of beliefs held today? Do we want to give the government power to come and regulate even the dictates of our own conscience? Aren’t we taking away individual liberties and discouraging and demonizing diversity when we take that step? In an era wherein we have given away unprecedented power to the government and are experiencing one of the greatest economic breakdowns ever, it behooves us to not take a short-sighted view of things but to look at the long term implications of all actions. Too often what seems like a good idea at the time has undesirable and unintended consequences. Society should empower all individuals to be treated with respect and to ensure diversity and the integrity of individual’s choice by protecting individual’s freedom of belief. We must preserve freedom of speech and religion even when those expressed or chosen are contrary to our own. As William Smith, Jr. stated-”We must remember that a right lost to one, is lost to all.”
Prop 8 is wrong. It is wrong to discriminate. The people fighting for 8 cannot even claim there is sanctity in marriage anymore because there is none. These people divorce, cheat, and carry on, but as long as it is between a man and woman, it is okay. They focus on mistruths like “save families” and “don’t let same-sex marriage be taught in schools.” What about all of the families that will be hurt by prop 8 passing? Since when is marriage taught in schools anyway?
Since granting same-sex marriage, Massachusett’s has had the lowest divorce rate in the nation. Canada and other countries that granted same-sex marriage have seen drops in divorce rates. The states that have changed their constitution to ban same-sex marriage have the highest divorce rates in the world.
Vote No on Prop 8 because we are better than this. It’s time to focus on real issues .
I plan on voting no on h8t on November 4.
Those fighting for YES on Prop 8 are indeed fighting for the sanctity of marriage. Marriage is a institution that was given by God. The same people fighting for YES on Prop 8 are also people that fight for the family unit to be strengthen in a society that perpetually tries to diminish it.
Society does not get to redefine the definition of marriage anymore than calling my tape dispenser a stapler makes it a stapler. Marriage is between a man and a woman, a fundamental definition from the beginning of time.
Voting Yes on Prop 8 will not take away any civil rights or liberties of those that are in a domestic partnership. Everyone does NOW and WILL have the same rights with the passing of Prop 8 and Yes on Prop 8 supporters uphold that premise that all should have the same rights under the correct definitions.
VOTE YES on Prop 8!
Stop using the “Historical Importance of Marriage” and “Historical Definition of Marriage” as a defense. You can’t selectively choose to ignore how much marriage has changed over the centuries to reflect the changes of society.
If someone wants to use the ‘historical definition’ of marriage then I am sure many wives would be a little upset to learn that they and their children are now the property of their husband!
I am also disgusted by the logic used by many groups who oppose gay marriage use children as shields; that a ‘real’ family requires a ‘mother’ and a ‘father’ and that children without both are somehow damaged or lessened. There are countless examples of gay couples raising children as well as single parents raising children that grow up to happy, productive, responsible adults.
Unfortunately, we can find countless examples where a ‘mother’ and a ‘father’ are both present in a ‘real family’ where there is abuse, neglect, and dysfunction. Heterosexuality does not inherently mean that straight men and women are better parents or that families with two parents are better than just one. The logic for these arguments was used for far too long in favor of mothers’ parenting abilities over fathers. There are good parents and bad parents.
I just want ANY of the gay marriage opponents to explain to me how this will negatively YOUR life - financially, socially, even spiritually. You try to say that gay marriage is being forced upon you? Aren’t you forcing your beliefs on others by denying them the choice on who to marry? If you are afraid of what your children will be taught in schools, then send them to a religious school of your choice or pull them aside and teach them your beliefs - which, I believe, is what many religious families need to do with regard evolution vs creationism - and what some families need to do when some schools teach a western view of history.
And if anti-marriage supporters are using religions reasons for their actions, then how do they respond to the churches that support gay marriage? Don’t those churches have the same right to express their beliefs as you do?
I believe most gay marriage opponents are afraid of losing their need for feeling superior - “My church is better than your church. My religion is better than your religion. My beliefs are better than your beliefs. My god is better than your god.” - How truly sad and childish that you choose to put your own selfish esteem needs over the rights of others - a person’s choice on who they marry has NO EFFECT on your life - gay or straight. There are no negative consequences. Fears of what ‘could’ happen cannot be used. History has proven, time and time again, that those fears have been totally unfounded - women voting, racial equality, interracial marriage.
What’s to stop Christian churches from banning together to block recognition of Jewish marriages? What if Catholic churches decide that you shouldn’t be able to get a divorce? What if any church decides that atheists shouldn’t be allowed to get married or vote? I’m just playing out the horrific consequences if Proposition 8 does pass! Who is going to save us from the raving mad churches out to take over the United States? Ridiculous? Yes, but anti-marriage foes seem to like to play this game in their direction and give it validity, why can’t I?
The middle ground is best for society where there is balance and openness for multiple points of view without fear of persecution from ANYONE.