The University of Southern California’s Initiative and Referendum Institute has a fascinating new report on Proposition 8, which seeks to outlaw gay marriage in California.
Besides walking readers through a history of gay marriage measures in other states, the report offers a succinct analysis of why so much — money, effort, time — has been dumped into this campaign.
As the report states: “The huge amount of money being channeled to fight this proposition, despite its minimal economic impact, reflects the view of both sides that California is a critical firewall in the battle over gay marriage. Rejection of Proposition 8, in effect a popular affirmation of the right to gay marriage, would provide tremendous momentum to the gay rights side, especially since it comes in a huge state that is seen by many as a trendsetter.”
The report adds that campaign finance reports show out-of-state contributions to both the Yes and No campaigns for Prop. 8 are high. It concludes that ”Spending on Proposition 8, currently at $55 million, is likely to reach a record level for a social issue.”
That dovetails with something my colleague at the Register, Marla Jo Fisher, told me — that her mother, in Utah, that the Mormon church is asking residents there to urge their California friends to support Prop. 8.
This measure, clearly, means something to activists across the country. It’ll be interesting to see how that plays out on Nov. 4.
Read more about Proposition 8:
- Neighbors at odds over Prop. 8
- Local donors give $1.6 million for ban on gay marriage
- Is tide turning on gay marriage amendment
I think same-sex marriage is OK. Same-sex couples are just as committed in their romantic relationships as heterosexual couples, say researchers who have studied the quality of adult relationships and healthy development. I have a friend getting married with the same sex under the help of the site **BiLoves dotcom** (a site for exploring sexuality, coming out, enjoying life, etc. And there are about 150 members per day and they are very active). And they live happily and wonderfully. If you go there frequently, you may find what you want more easily and frequently.
The world will end if gay marriage is allowed, cats will marry dogs and the economy will collapse. (I just thought I would get the conversation started.)
It isn’t surprising that there is such a large response to Proposition 8, considering the implications it could have on the future of California and of our country.
If proposition 8 doesn’t pass it will affect future laws regarding the legality of voicing beliefs against homosexuality as well as the ability of churches not supporting homosexuality to be able to claim tax exempt status, among other things.
Yes on 8!
http://link.brightcove.com/services/player/bcpid1815820715?bctid=1822459319
Proposition 8 is an issue for the entire country because it addresses the rights of American voters.
In 2000, California passed Proposition 22 (which addressed the exact same issues as Proposition
by an overwhelming majority of 61% to 39%. Earlier this year, however, the decision of the people of California was overturned by four judges on the state supreme court.
If only for political reasons, voters should vote YES on Prop 8 to show that laws are still created by the people, not just by the government.
Yes on Prop 8.
http://www.protectmarriage.com
http://www.whatisprop8.com
I most be getting old I can still remember when gay meant you were happy and the rainbow reminded you of GOD and people like this made you upchuck your lunch and when you got married you became husband and wife not dumb and dumber.
What gives anyone the right to say who someone can love or not love? Who can marry or not marry? Domestic partnership doesn’t give that equality, it doesn’t give them guarantee of insurance benefits or tax deductions for marriage. I am straight, I love my husband but I know I shouldn’t have a say if my neighbor/friend or family wants to marry same sex. If that is going to give them happiness then so be it!!!!! Let them have the same rights as everyone else! Instead of stepping forward in time its more like we have stepped back in time to segregation and out and out prejudice! Shame on everyone who votes yes!
Mormon millionaires from Utah bought Prop 8. Now, they are trying to buy its outcome. Laughable. Imagine Mormons giving moral direction about the nature of marriage. Mormons?? Their own founder had two dozen wives.
It’s shameful and ridiculous that any so-called Christians support Prop 8. They do so with the same fervent hatred that opposed inter-racial marriage just 50 years ago. They cite the usual select passages from the Bible, and leave out all the others. The ones about love. Respect. Decency.
They rely on Bronze Age admonitions to justify their creaking prejudices. They lost the inter-racial marriage battle. Soon, they will lose the same-gender marriage battle. Why? Because real Americans believe in fair play. And REAL Americans always defeat bigots and ignorance — every time.
It’s why we have become such a great country. And will always be so. Thank God.
The labels on the two lines in the graph are reversed, currently Precent for Prop 8 is winning. The Oct 6 Survey USA poll had Prop 8 winning and the older Field polls had it losing. Please fix your labels OC Register.
“I most be getting old I can still remember when gay meant you were happy and the rainbow reminded you of GOD and people like this made you upchuck your lunch and when you got married you became husband and wife not dumb and dumber.”
Please don’t tell me you’re registered to vote.
You can believe whatever you want to believe but marriage is between a man and a woman. I’m a minority and do not see how interracial marriage is in anyway related to gay marriage. If you disagree with Christianity, that’s up to you but the bible is clear on this issue. Gay sex (and straight adulterous sex) is evil and harmful. No one is telling you that you can’t have sex with someone of your own sex. But marriage should be reserved to one man and one woman. I actually find Christians who support gay marriage more insulting than the gays who are trying to push their gay agenda.
The report ignores the most recent Survey USA poll and gives more weight to the Field Poll which showed Prop 8 losing in September. However, the Field poll has in the past underestimated support for bans on gay marriage. Look at the Field poll on Prop 22. It’s final poll had Prop 22 wining by 52%, it actually won by 61.5% Also missing from the USC report is the poll conducted by LA Times in May showing Yes on Prop 8 winning 54% to 35%
trent280 The Mormon men had two dozen wife’s not two dozen husbands. You also need to read the complete bible not just the one or two that you misquoted. What the Mormons did was wrong just like gay marriage is wrong. But don’t worry no matter what the outcome of prop 8 some Liberal Judge will crawl out from under his rock long enough to overrule the true Americans and you and your boyfriend can come out of the closet vote for Obama and get married.
Just a few months ago, all the anti-traditional marriage people were saying that this proposition would fail but now the facts are coming out of the closet.
So “whether you like it or not” this is going to happen and the traditional marraige folks thanks to the endorsement of Obama and Mccain will win again. Sorry Gavin!
To those for Prop. 8: Why do other people’s lives matter so much to you?
I am a straight female with no qualms with gay marriage. I’m not religious but I grew up going to church. To those of you who are against gay unions because of your religious beliefs: Isn’t it ultimately up to God to judge us? What gives you the right, the audacity, to decide who is allowed to marry whom?
For those of you who simply throw outdated Bible verses at the subject, haven’t you realized that the words in that book were written thousands of years ago? Things change and evolve and we must change and evolve with them. There is no burning bush in 2008. (Although I know there’s one Bush about to be burned.)
…i’m voting yes on prop 8…
The majority of good-hearted Californians are voting against this silly proposition, including this very newspaper and the governor. Prop 8 mentions nothing of changing curriculum in schools. It wont. It mentions nothing of eliminating tax exemption for churches. It wont. It does mention eliminating an already-given right to many of your co-workers, neighbors, friends, and family members. Support them, don’t upset them. Vote no.
I’m also voting yes on Prop 8. Gay marriage is just plain disgusting!
Yes On Prop 8!!!!!!!
Well, I’m voting NO ON PROP 8. I believe in the ideals of America and the Bill of Rights. Religion and hate have no place in our constitution. $55 million dollars spent because of this bigotry, 10 years from now we are going to look at this as such a national disgrace. Come on people, pay attention to your own family, don’t take rights away from other Americans.
One of the downsides of democracy, or at least ours, is that in all fairness we have to give everyone the same civil rights. We can’t say all men are equal and then impose slavery. Personally, I think gay marriage mocks traditional sexual relations by suggesting that gay sex is no different than heterosexual sex. Most psychologists will tell you that homosexuality is abnormal, aberrant behavior. It serves no purpose (propogation of the species, for example). I still don’t understand why gays feel ‘pride.’ I guess they recognize their behavior is abnormal and need the make themselves feel better, much like men who post bumper stickers on their cars stating ‘real men love Jesus’ knowing that loving Jesus is in direct contradiction to traditional notions of manhood. Anyway, vote yes on prop 8.
Those who are against same-sex marriage are promoting discrimination. I’m straight, so is my wife, but we’re open to supporting same sex couples just like we do interracial couples. I spoke with one couple supporting Prop 8 - they told me marriage should only be between a WHITE man and a WHITE women (they believe other races should not be allowed to marry). That’s great - showing just how dumb their discrimination is. In my mind everyone I see saying “Yes” on prop 8 is just like that couple, close minded and discriminating. There was a time when women couldn’t vote, when women were not counted as equal, when a black man was a considered property and a fraction of a human, when blacks couldn’t marry whites. American’s wised up with time and moved past these ignorant beliefs and discrimination. Today we must move past blocking same sex marriages.
We are all humans, we all need to treat each other with respect and allow all people the freedoms to be happy in life. Live your life the way you want to, don’t hurt others, and don’t try to force your life on others. So what if two guys live together next door to me - chances are they would be more successful and better neighbors.
This is the most important issue of our generation because it will shape our society for generations to come.
whatisprop8.com
whatisprop8.com
http://www.preservingmarriage.org/video_01.html
The Bible says that to be with someone of the same sex is an abomination to God. I don’t care what the world thinks is right, I care what God says is right and so should all of you. The Bible is very clear that to be Gay is wrong, the people that argue that don’t read the Bible. The definition of marriage is man and woman and that should never be changed. So are the supporters of gay marriage saying that we have to support people no matter what their choices. What if some people decide that they want to marry children, or their pets? Should that be legal? You have to be moral, not go with the flow. God created us and God says it’s wrong. There shouldn’t be any question about it. Gays are wrong and we should not support their lifestyles. They are a bad influence on the youth, and it will be worse if prop 8 doesn’t pass. Get real people same sex relationships are not natural. Do not support something that is against God.
Thanks, guys. You make my point better than I did. Support of Prop 8 is based on ignorance, bias and fear, as you have so ably demonstrated.
Prop 8 denies a basic civil right to a large group of our citizens. In the past, we did this to blacks, Jews, and native indians. Most decent Americans realize that we were wrong. We did it to inter-racial couples for generations. We were wrong. Society evolved.
Today, bigots are trying to do the same to gay Americans. Your fears are understandable, but unfounded and irrational. Numerous other jurisdictions have permitted gay marriage, for years. Canada, Norway, Spain, Denmark, Massachussetts etc etc have not exploded. It’s business as usual in every one of them — except that they extended civil liberties to thousands.
Why are you afraid of liberty? Why are you opposed to freedom? Why do you oppose the idea of America, “with liberty and justice for all”?
You have been conditioned by fear, to fear. It’s sort of sad. It’s unnecessary. It’s unmanly. It represents cowardice, and not power.
If you were truly Americans, unafraid of the future, you would support all of our citizens as they seek the rights that we take for granted.
It’s the American way, you know.
Or, perhaps you’d be happier living in a place where there is only one point of view, and only one way to live. Say, North Korea. You might like it better there.
America is reserved for free men, not cowards.
Should Prop. 8 fail, you can bet your bottom dollar that every polygamist, polyandrist, etc., or other fringe group out there will be petitioning government or the courts the very next day, arguing to be included under the umbrella of marriage freedom. And, based upon the CA Supreme Court’s rationale that ALL parties petitioning for marriage are entitled to the equal protection under the laws as guaranteed by the 14th Amendment, that would also include the aforementioned groups. I hope that those same gay/lesbian groups and the ACLU will fight just as hard for the Warren Jeffs of the world as they have for their own positions.
You open the gate for one, you might as well open the floodgates for all.
No one is denying the civil rights of gays. This is about the definition of marriage. The Bible says in Genesis 3:24 “Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.” That’s what marriage is. The union of one man and one woman. That’s GOD’S word. Not man’s.
To compare the “struggle” of the right for gays to marry to the struggles of Blacks, Jews and Native Indians is borderline criminal. Those comparisons could not be further apart. Blacks, Jews and Native Indians fought for the right to live, and be recognized not only as a free people, but people! Stop using those comparisons. It belittles them and you.
The Bible says in Leviticus 18:22 “Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.” That’s also GOD’S word. Not man’s. This country was founded on Christian principles. Check your history. Christian principles are based on GOD’S word, not man’s. Of course, people have abused GOD’S word for many years, and no one can deny that. But sin is sin, and we need to call it what it is. Now before your head pops off, read this: JESUS CHRIST paid the price for everyone’s sins. Yours, mine, everyone. JESUS also taught that we should hate the sin but love the sinner. That’s what HE did. That’s the example he gave us.
As for other countries, just because they’ve allowed gay marriage doesn’t make it right. To coin an old phrase, if they jumped off a bridge, would you? I know that sounds silly, but think about it.
We need to get back to the basic ideals this country was founded on. The reason we’re in such a mess now is because we’ve turned our back on those basic ideals. Greed, lust, the relentless pursuit of money and immorality rule the day, and instead of putting an end to it, we’re trying to find ways to perpetrate it!
Many of our citizens paid the ultimate price so that we could live freely in this country. If gay people want to make the choice to spend their lives together, that’s their right. I say let them. They already have every civil right a married man and woman have.
But don’t force me to give up my right to the real, GOD given, definition of marriage.
Being American doesn’t mean we should adopt any idea that comes along. Being American means fighting for the ideals that made America America. Again, check your history.
Vote yes on Prop 8.
Yes on Prop 8.
This is about retaining marriage as it has been recognized throughout history.
It is not based on hate, or fear but on what marriage has always been. It merely restores marriage to the way it has always been in CA before a few activist judges suddenly discovered a new “right.”
And its kind of strange that this should even be controversial.
And its also strange and hypocritical that those who support gay marraige and call those opposed haters and bigots are themselves so full of those very same things as seen in some of the comments about this.
Neither I, nor my friends who are supporting prop 8 hate or fear homosexuals. It is very possible to be opposed to something without hating or fearing those who practice it, and even being able to love and respect them as human beings–a fact that many homosexuals and their supporters can’t seem to comprehend.
Last time I checked there was a serperation from Church and State. What is or is not in the Bible, should not have any bearing on what law is passed in the United States, “the land of the free”. I am a straight married woman with 2 children. Like almost everyone I know, I have gay family and friends. They may not like who I chose as my partner, but they support my decision, and I will support thiers. Passing a law to ban the marriage of gay people, is not going to stop them from being gay. A marriage between two people only effects the two people being married. I would never ask anyone to go against their beliefs and would expect the same of others. Prop 8 should never have been on the balot. To the ignorant people who support the law, there are gay people in the world, get over it!
When Jesus loves me…I make him wear a condom.
Marriage equality does nothing to infringe on ‘marriage’ in any way shape or form. Now the wing-nuts will say differently, however buried deep in Vatican documents are the truths that not only were priests allowed to marry and have children, but that some same sex unions were indeed blessed by the church. These of corse were happening in pre-Dark ages times. BTW: the Dark ages were caused by the invasion of Christianity into society. Prior to this, society funtioned just fine actually giving us the basis of our rules, laws, and system of government. Christianity did not invent Civility, they only plagerized it as they have with their high holy days, and dogmatic ceremonies.
I really get tired of this ” ………………… is based on Christian principles bull crap” , in actuality Christianity in nothing but a number of ideas and values that have been begged, borrowed and stolen from other societies, religions, and traditions….
Dave
Wow—equality for all people under the law is a “downside” of democracy, Dudeman? Gay people are so scary as to make you “upchuck your lunch,” Caseclosed?
I read a lot of California newspaper websites, and the pro-Prop-8 commenters on the Register’s site are consistently the most aggressively ignorant of the bunch. Orange County is to 2008 California what the deep South was to 1960’s America.
This is ridiculous that we are spending so much time and money on the subject. Don’t we have more important issues like the Iraq war and the economy, rather than telling people who love eachother what they can or can’t do. So much for the belief that church and state should be separated.
To all of you who are supporting Prop 8, I think the next prop should be that we should ban interracial marriage. I’m sure all the people voting yes on 8 have enough hate for others that this would surely pass.
Please, no matter where you are in the country, please donate $25.00 to the No on 8 campaign. If we can get 1 million people to donate $25.00 each the campaign will have $25.00 million dollars. The Yes on 8 campaign is now running ads with 4 year old children saying that we are teaching them to marry someone of the same gender. Unbelievable. I can’t believe what I am seeing on TV and hearing on the radio stations in the Orange County/Los Angeles area where I live.
Please donate so we can defeat this measure. These people will stop at nothing to promote lies, hate, and bigotry, along with denying basic rights against fellow gay Americans.
Since when is a state-issued license a basic right?
Vote yes on prop 8 and preserve the traditional family.
Trent, I think it is useful to note that most of us who support Proposition 8 are not the bigots you have labeled us so eloquently. Bigots by definition tend to be intolerant of opposing points of view. Judging by your comments, it seems as if you are showing some of the very same tendecies that you happen to be railing against.
The gay marriage issue to many of us is a moral and ethical issue based upon our personal beliefs, nothing less. If you wish to call us ignorant or some other derogatory term, that is your right. Honestly, it won’t affect us either way.
Gays have the same rights that I do and they are asking to be granted a new “right”. They can marry (nearly) anyone of the opposite sex as easily as I could, notwithstanding polygamy, etc.
I am with you when you point out that the anti-interracial marriage crowd was ethically and morally wrong. However, to say that these issues are identical misses one fundamental difference beween the minority rights you mentioned and gay rights. The minorities you mentioned above were all denied certain rights because of their beliefs or appearance. Gays are denied additional rights because of their behavior, nothing else. We deny additional rights based upon behavior every day.
Do you understand the irony in your second to last paragraph? Something about only one point of view and one way to live?
Personally, I believe that I am standing on principle (as are you) and we happen to disagree.
That is also the American way.
Just to clarify, when I said “behavior” I merely meant the sexual acts themselves that define homosexuality. Nothing more.
I’m not going to say that a lot of hate isn’t being thrown around on this issue (from both sides), but I it’s simply not fair or accurate to claim that all supporters of Prop 8 are hateful and bigoted. Without marriage, civil unions are still legal in the state, so to me Prop 8 is about changing the definition of marriage - a definition that is much more deeply rooted in religion and culture than governmental regulation. My vote’s a yes, and I can still love gay people in my life.
Ken: You’re perfectly correct. A driver’s license must be earned by right of age, skill and its proof. A crane operator’s license requires the same, as does a pilot’s license, or a teaching certificate, or a license to practice law or medicine. These all vary by state.
A marriage license? Quite different. It is earned by meeting certain minimal residency, age and medical requirements. Primarily, it is earned by right of citizenship.
Those of us who believe in America believe said right must be the inherent property of ALL Americans, and not just the majority of heterosexuals to which (I gather) you and I belong.
As you know, 50+ years ago the right of marriage was restricted to persons of the same race. Finally, we overcame that disgusting prejudice. Society evolved. It took generations.
Today, by defeating Prop 8, we will be achieving the same in regard to gender equality.
It’s a VERY American principle upon which we stand, and I invite you and all of my fellow straight friends to join us, and to stand up for a great American ideal: fair play.
Thanks for asking.
Interracial marriage has existed throughout all of history. It’s not a valid comparison. It wasn’t like guys were marrying guys until some Bible-thumper stood up and said “Stop! We need to outlaw this!” Even in societies where homosexuality was openly practiced, marriage was always between a man and a woman.
Anyone has the right to live with the consenting adult they choose, to make commitments, to participate in ceremonies, to ask other people to consider them spouses. However, nobody has the right to force the unwilling to give them something - in this case, marriage licenses. Heterosexual couples don’t have the right, either, by the way. As a society, we CHOOSE to issue marriage licenses.
Prop 8 is a blow to judicial usurpation of power belonging to the people.
“Society” does not issue marriage licenses. Marriage licenses are legal contracts issued by state governments.
Should the state be allowed to reject your application for a marriage license because one of you is a certain race? Religion? Age? Skin color? Ancestry? What if one of you is a Democrat and the other a Republican?
How can you make the case for discrimination based upon gender when discrimination based upon all of the above criteria (and more- the state cannot refuse a marriage license because one of you likes the color blue and the other likes the color red) is not permitted?
Legal contracts issued by the state should be given regardless of what gender you are. It is not the state’s responsibility to protect some group’s idea of what marriage should be.
If the state can discriminate on gender in marriage contracts, why not in other contracts too? Maybe we should only let females get cosmetology licenses because traditionally, females have been the hair stylists. Maybe only asian women should be allowed to get state licenses to do nails.
See all the horrible places this sort of thinking leads to?
Hi SoCalWingnut: Thx for yours. Most thoughtful.
Any nation which believes in majoritarian rule is always confounded by the idea of ‘equal protection under the law’ for its minorities. We struggle with the rights of blacks in a system whose original sin was slavery. We struggle with ‘Jewish quotas’ which persisted for generations, even at such great schools as Harvard and Yale.
Everyone knows the history of the great waves of Irish immigration in the 19th C, and the notorious signs reading ‘No dogs or Irish allowed’. Genocidal practices advanced by our own push West led to the destruction of whole societies.
But we have evolved, with struggle and pain, to admit our past, and try to reconcile it with our values.
Today, those who offended by gay marriage are, lamentably, making the same arguments we have always heard when a minority seeks rights otherwise granted to the majority. In our country, even statistical MAJORITIES have had to struggle: you will recall the Suffragette movement, and the century it took women to win the vote.
Today, those offended by gay marriage contrive their arguments on the basis of what they purport to be Natural Law, or God’s Law, or the Law of Tradition. They always seek shelter in such rationalizations.
And yet, the very people who criticize gays for alleged promiscuity would deny them the right to marry.
And yet, the very arguments made today against gay marriage were made 50 years ago against inter-racial marriage — and often by the same people, no less.
And today, those arguments are failing. Why? Because young people know better. White kids have black friends, Japanese kids have Indian friends, and all kids have gay friends. And they all know it. And they are unafraid.
The Chicken Little arguments made by the Prop 8 people are simply silly. When Prop 8 fails, cats will not marry dogs. Squirrels will not marry goats. And the Sierras will not tumble into the sea.
When Prop 8 fails, people will marry people. That’s all there is to it. And 10 years later, honest people will wonder what the fuss was all about.
And bigots will be on to some new crusade against The Other. That’s what they do, that’s who they are, and that’s what they fear. Bigots are, alas, the most easily frightened people in the world. I am glad you are not among them. Thx again for writing. Trent
Hi Ken: You make a good point, and it’s about Constitutional law. You argue that Prop 8 exists because of ‘judicial usurpation’.
I know you will be fair and acknowledge that one man’s ‘usurpation’ is another man’s ‘justice’. It has always been so.
Brown v Board of Education, an act of judicial interpretation that confirmed (in my view) a great American ideal, settled the claim of ’separate but equal’ for all time, and ruled it un-Constitutional. To this day, some continue to view it as ‘usurpation’. Others call it ‘justice’. I hope you are among the latter.
The ‘equal protection’ provisions of our California Constitution were ruled, by a narrow majority, to apply equally to gay as to straight couples. The same findings have been made in Mass and Conn, and numerous other international jurisdictions. The same American tests were applied.
Prop 8 pretends to favor the majority. In fact, it favors and would entrench bias, and fear. No more. No less. And that’s why it will fail.
Marriage, as we define it, remains a relatively recent social innovation. Even in Northern European nations, where it evolved earliest, the practise of ‘common law’ marriage persists to this day. In SE Asia, the practice of ‘arranged marriage’ remains a commonplace. In many other cultures, more numerous than our own, completely different sets of social approvals and blessings are the norm.
What you are describing is (how typically American of us) marriage as a form of contract.
What Prop 8 would do is assert that a class of Americans is NOT entitled to enter into a class of contract, with its various advantages and obligations.
Our state Supreme Court has held that such exclusion is, simply, un-Constitutional. They are, as a matter of law and fairness, correct.
Apply empathy, Ken: how would you feel if straights like you and I were denied access to the contractual privileges of marriage by a homosexual majority?
We’d be more than a little angry.
If the shoe were on the other foot, you too would oppose Prop 8. That’s why I oppose it. I hope you will reconsider. Thanks.
It’s simple
Vote no on Proposition Hate
Some folks here act as apostles of the obvious.
Of course Chinese differ from Moroccans, French from Aussies, tall people from short, large from small, white from black, and gay from straight. Everyone knows this.
The best scientific evidence at this time suggests that gay/straight differences are hard-wired from birth, hormonal in origin, and about as much as matter of ‘choice’ as having blue eyes, or being tall.
I didn’t ‘choose’ to be straight. Neither did you. Who would ‘choose’ to be gay, with so many bigots lurking in the bushes?
The question is whether or not all US citizens are entitled to equal rights and protections under the law. Most of us would say “yes”. Why? Because those are the highest American values.
Religious people are not required to drop their faiths. The defeat of Prop 8 will not turn Mormons into Christians, Catholics into Protestants, or Jains into Hindus. In fact, it will have no effect on church/synagogue/mosque/temple marriages at all. None. Zero.
They didn’t in Mass, or Norway, or Canada, or Spain, or Denmark, or anywhere else gay marriage is now recognized.
However, it must be admitted that a few fanatics WILL lose another opportunity to impose their personal beliefs on others. That much is true. That’s why, in our country, we separate church and state. That’s why we have no offical church. None. There IS a ‘Church of England’. There is no ‘Church of America’.
Our Founders came here to escape religious wars, not to foment them.
Anyone who insists on a religious view of marriage exercising authority over all other religious views of marriage is employing an old, tired, and dangerous tactic, one used by demagogues for centuries. Father Coughlin made a whole career of it.
As they used to say in Ireland, “Lots of Catholics. Lots of Protestants. Damn few Christians.”
Or as Pierre Elliott Trudeau famously put it, quite simply, “The state has no place in the bedrooms of the nation.”
The defeat of Prop 8 will mean the victory of Americanism. Quite simply.
trent, what your saying makes no scientific sense. you seem to suggest being gay may somehow be genetic. If that were so, how would the gene reproduce? Does it switch off long enough to reproduce, and then switch back on? Ridiculous. Being gay is most definitely a choice. And to all of you who think Christianity should not be involved in this, I say again check your history. The truth has always been the truth. Just because certain people twisted the truth to serve their own purposes does not negate the reality of truth. Those who abused GOD’S word were just that. Abusers. America was founded by people escaping people who were abusing the truth. Our fore-fathers knew the truth, and built the country around it.
The bottom line is this. Marriage, by definition, is between a man, and a woman. It has always been that way, and should always be that way. That does NOT mean that gay people should not have the right to live together. They why they have civil unions, which, last time I checked, had the same rights as married people. This is not about hate, discrimination, or any of that. This is simply about the definition of marriage, which does not need to be modified.
Vote Yes on 8.
Meant to say “That’s why…” Oopps.
Religion is a choice, too. Should we get a referendum together on whether people have the right to choose their religion? After all, we’re already having one on whether people have the right to choose their marriage partner.
In addition to removing civil rights, Prop 8 will negatively impact religious freedom for religious groups whose belief systems support same-sex marriage. That’s the Unitarian Universalists, the United Church of Christ, the Episcopalians, and numerous other liberal faiths whose religious rights you will be attacking and limiting.
Religious freedom for those who do not support same-sex marriage is already explicitly protected by language in the May 15th decision In Re Marriage Cases: “[A]ffording same-sex couples the opportunity to obtain the designation of marriage will not impinge upon the religious freedom of any religious organization, official, or any other person; 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. (Cal. Const., art. I, § 4.)72″ And even without that, it’s already covered. Pastors cannot be sued for what they say in the pulpit. Churches will not be sued for refusing to perform same-sex marriages. If either of those things were possible, they would have happened already to the Catholic and Mormon churches, which routinely refuse to marry people who are not Catholic, who are divorced (Catholic church), who are not Mormon. Heck, the Mormons won’t even let non-Mormons ATTEND marriages in their churches. Existing state law already addresses these issues. You and your church are safe from the icky gay people, got it?
Also, I wonder if anyone’s thought about the fallout that will occur if Prop 8 passes. No, not just the removal of rights from GLBT people - the removal of marriage from EVERYONE. That’s if Prop 8 passes. The State Supreme Court pretty clearly telegraphed what would have to be done if California tried to reserve “marriage” to a single group of people. It’d have to be taken away and all marriages converted to civil unions. The Court chose the more expedient route of saying “These rights apply to all comers, gay or straight, and it would be a real hassle to change everything to ‘civil union,’ so gays also have the right to marry. That’s the easiest, least expensive route to take.” However, they did say what the other option was: withholding that designation from both opposite-sex couples and same-sex couples in favor of some other, uniform designation. That’s what you are toying with, by trying to pass Prop 8. It would result in the Supreme Court saying “Okay, we have NO marriages in California. They’re all civil unions.” That would also have the effect of making it impossible for anyone in California who is civilly unioned to claim marriage exemptions on their federal taxes.
Don’t listen to liars. The Yes on 8 campaign is full of them. Protect religious freedom and marriage as well as civil rights - by voting NO on 8.
“traditionalmarriage:” you say “you seem to suggest being gay may somehow be genetic. If that were so, how would the gene reproduce? Does it switch off long enough to reproduce, and then switch back on? Ridiculous. Being gay is most definitely a choice.”
When did you take classes on genetics? Despite what you may think, not all genetics is Mendelian (one gene goes with one trait). Ever heard of inheritance through collateral lines? How about sickle-cell anemia, which kills if the child gets the gene from both parents, but doesn’t if the child only gets it from one? Homosexuality is often passed along in a collateral-line way.
http://www.webmd.com/sex-relationships/news/20050128/is-there-gay-gene - I quote: “Since sexual orientation is such a complex trait, we’re never going to find any one gene that determines whether someone is gay or not,” says Mustanski. “It’s going to be a combination of various genes acting together as well as possibly interacting with environmental influences.”
There’s also evidence that homosexuality in men may be the result of a gene that promotes hyper-fertility in their female relatives.
http://www.livescience.com/health/080617-hereditary-homosexuality.html - I quote: “Since gay people are less likely to reproduce than heterosexuals, many experts have wondered why, if homosexuality is caused by genetic factors, it wouldn’t have been eliminated from the gene pool already. But if the same genes create both homosexuality in men and increased fertility in women, then any losses in offspring that come about from the males would be made up for by the females of the family.”
Bottom line: it’s not a choice.
Actually most scientists do believe that there is a large genetic component to being gay. Keep in mind that genes can be recessive and still be passed on in addition to people passing on a gene who might be bisexual. Think about things like hair color and eye color that are passed on even if they aren’t expressed in an individual (my son has blue eyes and blond hair even though I have dark hair and hazel eyes).
There are many examples of things that are passed on genetically that aren’t favorable to reproduction.
The definition of what a marriage is has changed quite a bit over the centuries. It would probably serve many of us well to take a look back over history and see how it has varied, even in Christian societies! Marriage has not always been about a man and a woman, check your history.
No on h8
Traditional: Being gay is as ‘genetic’ as being straight. Gender identity is a complex of factors, and (as I said, and you can look it up in any scientific journal) this is the current consensus.
Please think of it this way: that fact that you and I are straight is nothing either of us ‘chose’. It’s as and who we are. Period.
Or this way: gays can and regularly do reproduce. It happens all the time. Any man with the producing equipment, and any woman with the receiving, can do this. It is a very straightforward feat, one made simple and rewarding, which is why it happens so regularly in our species, and in all other mammalian species. Nothing to it.
You would surely not deny straight couples the right to marry simply because they cannot reproduce, would you?
Or this way: who would ‘choose’ to be gay in a world with so many bigots lurking in the bushes?
Or this way: Our God never, ever makes mistakes. He made gay people for a reason. When you think of the art of Michelangelo, or the music of Bernstein and Tchaikovsky, or the writing of Edna Ferber or Tennessee Williams, we begin to understand His choices.
Or this way: the ‘definition’ you offer is not as stable as you may imagine. It has evolved throughout the eons. Women in Greek and Roman days were literally chattel. This was no ‘marriage’ between equals, in our sense. Indeed, that’s where the expression “giving away the bride” arose. She was property, to be appropriated.
Or this way: many cultures, including the Mormon in America, practice plural marriage. It’s actually fairly common, here and elsewhere. Your view of ‘traditional’ is not well-informed. There are many, many more cultures than ours in which marriage holds in different applications. In Greek days, it was quite common, in fact, for some men to take two spouses, one male and one female. And that culture gave us the very idea of democracy, and theatre, and free discourse. Not bad, yes?
Is North American marriage typically reserved for one man and one woman? Of course, except perhaps in Utah.
Did our tradition of marriage formerly exclude inter-racial marriage? Of course, to our shame, but we have done our recent best to correct this bias in our law.
The reason the definition of marriage continues to evolve is because our society evolves. In America, marriage has become a license, granted by the state, and a contract, enforceable by law. You know this is so.
As both contract and license, it is subject to our civil law, not religious law. As contract and license, it is therefore subject to the ‘equal protections’ clause of our State and Federal constitutions.
You don’t like being told what to believe, and what faith tradition to practice. Fair enough. Neither do I. That’s why organized religion, which rarely agrees on anything, has no place in this debate.
“No religious tests” are applied in America. It is the history and greatness of our nation. The same rule applies to a civil definition of marriage.
Catholics may define it one way, and Baptists another. Lord knows what Scientologists believe…
California has no choice in the matter. Its laws must apply equally and fairly to everyone. And that’s why Prop 8 will fail. It is, quite simply against the law. And against the spirit of America as well. I know you will agree.
Adam G, Kirk and Trent: All of your examples stem from theory, what scientists believe “might” be. The word “if” is commonly used in those explanations. However, there is no scientific proof of a gay gene. Only theory. But, what we know for sure is that it takes a man and a woman to create a child. You don’t need theory or a degree to understand that. We also know that genes are passed along by the parents. Therefore, if there were a gay gene, a man and a woman would have to pass it on. If that man and woman happened to be gay, they would be going against their nature. Does that not sound even slightly ridiculous to you?
Trent: You said “You would surely not deny straight couples the right to marry simply because they cannot reproduce, would you?
Wow. What a leap for you to say I that. I’ve gone over and over my comment trying to find where I suggested that gay couples be denied the right to marry because they cannot reproduce. I only brought that up as a way of trying to explain why the notion of a gay gene makes no sense. I also said that I’m not against two people who want to spend their lives together being able to have that right. What I am saying is that currently, when two gay people want to commit themselves to each other and express that by entering into a lifelong relationship, we call that a civil union, by definition. When a man and a woman want to commit themselves to each other and express that by entering into a lifelong relationship, we call that call that, as we always have, marriage, by definition! We should keep it that way. Also, GOD did not create gays. GOD created Adam and Eve. Read HIS word, and you’ll find that to be so. As far as what other cultures have done, are doing, what people did in the past, all undeniably true, but also undeniably against GOD’S word. People, thru history and even today, have used GOD’S word as a bludgeon, instead of the way it is supposed to be used, which is in love. That is unfortunate, and horrible. But we cannot use those examples of twisting the truth and abuse as evidence of what should be true today.
You bring up inter-racial marriage. That does not compare, because your still talking about a man and a woman. I don’t understand why people still want to compare “apples to oranges.” They are not the same.
Your notion of marriage evolving is unsettling. Marriage is not something that should be changed to fit the whims of the current culture. Marriage is a noun. It doesn’t change. I have no doubt you believe what your saying is right. You’ve expressed a lot of passion in this blog. But if you believe water is dry, and grass is purple, does that make it so? Of course not. Here are the facts:
The definition of marriage is the union of one man to one woman. Period.
The union of man to a man or woman to a woman is called a civil union. Period.
As far as the “Spirit of America,” I would gladly bleed on the flag to keep the strips red, but America has lost much of its Spirit. That’s why I call for a return to the principles our country was founded on. But that’s a topic for another day.
Vote Yes on Prop 8.
Boy I really need to do a better job of proof-reading before I post!
Please ignore the extra “I’s” and “that’s”. Thanks.
If Prop 8 is defeated, gays gain nothing as far as rights go. Their rights will be the same on November 5th as they were on November 4th. If Prop 8 fails, heterosexuals lose their religious freedoms and the will and desires of homosexuals will be thrust onto the heterosexual community. Tell me how that is fair. It is not phobic by any means. Nobody wants anothers viewpoint thrust onto them or their children. Funny how those who believe something contrary to the minority that is within their moral values are labeled biggots.
VOTE YES ON PROPOSITION 8 TO SEND A MESSAGE TO JUDGES IN THIS NATION TO STOP TRYING TO OVERTURN LAWS THAT “WE THE PEOPLE” VOTED ON ALREADY. “WE THE PEOPLE” MEANS THE MAJORITY OF VOTERS NOT 3 OR 4 JUDGES WHO THINK THEY ARE BETTER THAN EVERYBODY WHO VOTED IN 2000 ON PROPOSITION 22. SEND A RESOUNDING MESSAGE TO JUDGES AROUND THE NATION THAT “WE THE PEOPLE” ARE TIRED OF THEIR OPINIONS ON MATTERS THAT “WE THE PEOPLE” WANT. WHO IS GOING TO WIN THIS BATTLE? “WE THE PEOPLE” OR THE JUDGES WHO THINK THEY KNOW BETTER OR ARE SMARTER THAN THE REST OF US?
No on prop 8, because if they marry legally then they will open pot dispensaries and everyone will need medical attention and then start cooking meth to sell to our children and their parents.
Here’s some news for you, “traditionalmarriage”: Not everyone believes in ‘god.’ In this country and this state, I do not have to believe in your idea of god to have the same rights you do, or even believe in a god at all. There is no religious requirement for citizenship.
Marriage, like all other social conventions, is continuously evolving. About 70% of all marriages worldwide are polygamous, involving one man and several women. They’re still marriages by the standards of their societies. You may not like it, but civil marriage will continue to evolve. Trying to stop it is like trying to sweep back a tsunami with a pushbroom. You will not succeed. Definitions change all the time. This is one word whose definition has never been static. You will just have to cope.
Vote NO on Proposition 8. It’s the right thing to do.
I’m getting tired of seeing these Mormon spambots everywhere.
Anytime you see http://www.whatisprop8.com, you know it’s coming from a member of the LDS church.
Head over and check out “How to Blog About Prop 8″ at http://www.whatisprop8.com/how-to-blog-about-prop-8.html …
It’s basically a primer for Mormons on how to become Latter Day Spammers.
A quick check of the comments sections under the news articles that turn up from a search for Prop 8 terms reveals numerous drive-by comments with convoluted “Yes on 8 = tolerance” arguments and always accompanied by a link to http://www.whatisprop8.com …
This approach reminds me of some of the stuff I saw getting tried during the Romney campaign. In the current campaign, I don’t think such tactics are well-suited for the target voters the Yes on 8 campaign needs if they’re going to actually win this thing. Californians who’d be persuaded by such obvious tactics are more than likely either not going to vote or are already planning to vote Yes.
Traditional: You’ve chosen your nick wisely. It fits to you a T. That said, your self-admittedly ‘traditional’ definition of marriage is charmingly eccentric, and utterly out of date. I understand why you want to proclaim it.
You believe that your religious point of view is the only view: the only one worth upholding, believing, and enforcing. According to you, all others are wrong. Only you are right…
You must count yourself lucky to live in America. If you were lived in a theocracy that didn’t believe in your version of God? You’d be in jail.
You may wish America WAS a theocracy, but (thank God) it’s not, no matter what ‘Dr’ Dobson pretends. Never was. Never will be. And if it were a theocracy, but just not YOUR kind of theocracy, how then would you feel? Probably the same way gay people feel today.
You’d feel like a second-class citizen. And you’d be right.
That’s why Prop 8 is so laughably, and dangerously, un-American. Your ‘traditional definition’ of marriage is worth as much, and as little, as that of any other citizen.
You are, of course, entitled to believe it. You are NOT entitled to enforce it. Our Constitution does not permit it. “Land of the free”, you know?
‘Tradition’ has long been used to justify evil: slavery, anti-Semitism, the domination of men over women, race hate, men beating wives, cheating on taxes — it’s all ‘traditional’ in some circles. Much of it can be justified by select passages of the Bible. That’s how the tradition of slavery was justified in the Old South for generations. (Read Exodus…) Decent people don’t follow that ‘tradition’ any more. I’m sure you don’t.
That said, I’m afraid your appeal to ‘traditions’ is a creaky antique. Like corduroy roads, they just don’t work very well. Prop 8 will fail because its opponents appeal to a higher power: fair play — a fundamental value for us Americans.
Adam G: You are right. You do not have to believe in GOD to have rights. There is no religious requirement in this country for citizenship. There are, however, other requirements for citizenship in this country. One of them being the recognition of the principles our country was founded on. You keep bringing up what other countries have done and are doing. Since when do other countries or peoples dictate what we do, or become justification for change in our country? As for definitions changing all the time, some have to be sure. But the definition of marriage has not changed since the beginning of time, nor should it.
Trent: What “nick” are you referring to, and how would you know what, if anything, would fit me to a “T?” Your comments have become increasingly judgmental. I find that interesting. You wrote: “You believe that your religious point of view is the only view: the only one worth upholding, believing, and enforcing. According to you, all others are wrong. Only you are right…” When did I ever say those words? What I have written is what GOD has said. The words were HIS, not mine. One of the distinct differences between Christianity and what others call religions is that GOD’S word has passed every single attempt thru time to prove it untrue. Every attempt. Many a scholar has tried to debunk HIS word and all have failed. Every prophecy listed has come true, aside from the ones yet to come. Every…single…one. You only need to spend some time researching HIS word yourself, and you would find that out. That said, and this is for Adam G too, GOD still gives us the choice to choose HIM or not. He will not force HIS word on us. We must choose HIM. That’s also in HIS word. Yes, as I’ve stated before, people have and are still abusing HIS word. People have used excerpts and passages to push their own agenda without fully using the passages in the context for which they were written. And that is a horrible thing. If you would only check your history, you would find that our forefathers tried to pattern this country after GOD’S principles, but even then, they did not force them on others who didn’t believe.
You accuse me of trying to force my belief on others, and I have tried to tell you that my belief teaches you don’t force anything on anyone. But why am I being forced to accept this? What about my rights? Why is this even an issue since it was settled by a majority vote with prop 22? What gives officials, elected by us, who work for us, the right to nullify what we have already told them we want through the legal voting process? Why won’t we address that issue, that incredibly blatant abuse of power? And if they get away with it, where does it stop? Soon our votes won’t mean anything, because our elected officials will do what they want to anyway. If you believe in what is fundamentally American, that should bother you immensely. Does it?
Vote Yes on Prop 8!!!
Dear Mr Marriage: In web-speak, your nick (nickname) is ‘traditionalmarriage’. I presume that is not your actual name. You chose a nick for anonymity. It reflects your personality and point of view. Fair enough. My real first name is Trent, and 1280 is a family joke made by my son, who years ago mis-understood something I said.
Biblical literalists like yourself are in a minority in America, as they are elsewhere in the world. Most Christians do not believe in the so-called ‘young earth’ theory (all the scientific evidence is against it), nor that Bishop Ussher was correct when he calculated from all the begats that the earth was created one afternoon in October 4004 BC. It’s just ludicrous.
You claim that YOUR view of the inerrancy of the Bible is the ONLY view worth holding, and that all others are wrong. Many would respectfully differ, and assert that THEIR view is correct, and yours is worthless. This is so in virtually all matters religious. This is why America is a nation of secular and civic law, and not religious law. Those who prefer theocracy may look to Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, or Afghanistan for guidance. Americans look to the Constitution.
I, for one, have often wondered how Noah got the polar bears on the Ark. Did they live in the Middle East at the time? Were they well-behaved, or did they try to eat everybody?
You ask about YOUR rights, and no one can reply better than to point out the obvious: when Prop 8 fails, no one will force you to marry a homosexual. No one. Your marriage will remain safe. Mine as well.
Your question is strikingly similar to that posed by smokers, who insist on the ‘right’ to pollute the air, directly or indirectly, of others. Society has evolved. We no longer permit them to smoke in public places, and some of these tobacco addicts continue to insist that their ‘rights’ have been abridged. Too bad. They may believe in the ‘traditional right’ to smoke, but they cannot force me to smoke their polluted air, first or second-hand, if I do not wish to do so.
Similarly, they may continue in their private ways, but may not impose them on public others.
Some, like yourself, may embrace a unique definition of ‘traditional’ marriage, but it may not afflict anyone else. You will NOT be forced to marry gays, or cats, or stoats. In fact, your rights will not change at all.
Your sensibilities may be offended. You have made that clear. Your rights will not. The law makes that clear.
I have met racists who are deeply offended at the sight of black men and white women holding hands. Too bad. Look away.
I have met bigots who are offended at the sight of two women holding hands. Too bad. Look away.
You insist that “my belief teaches you don’t force anything on anyone”. But this is not so! Your so-called ‘traditional view’ denies the right of license and contract to a whole class of adult citizens. This is un-Constitutional.
Prop 22 was found unConstitutional. It failed the test. Prop 8 is an effort to undo that finding. It will also fail the test.
You are afraid of chimera, and have been tricked into fearing that your marriage will be undone when others may also marry. Unless your marriage is unbalanced in the first place, nothing will change for you.
Some Americans have the unfortunate desire to impose their wills on others, whether or not those others wish it. Prop 8 is a sad effort to take us back to the Bronze Age, when some people believed in the ‘tradition’ of wife-beating, no votes for women or blacks, no land for Indians, and No Irish Allowed.
This is why appeals to false ‘tradition’ are doomed to fail, and appeals to fair play succeed. It is the nature of America. Your personal interpretation of the Bible — and mine — is utterly beside the point.
It is sad that we are having to vote on this again. The voters already voted to keep marriange between a man and a woman. Does our vote mean nothing? We also voted for medical marijuana but look at what has happened with that. Sad.
Trent,
You stated that some Americans have a desire to impose their wills on others. I agree. Some would desire to require a wedding photographer to work a same sex wedding or face litigation. Others would desire to require a church with a nice ocean view to allow and perhaps even perform a same sex wedding or face litigation. I worry where an unwed, pregnant teen-ager will go for help to place a baby into adoption with a traditional family with a father and mother if all of the faith-based adoption agencies have been forced to close their doors because of litigation. Not all of this litigation will happen over night, but I think it will come in the years ahead. From what I can see the only so-called ‘right’ at risk if Prop 8 passes is that same sex relationships will not be able to define their relationship as ‘marriage’ and revert to ‘Domestic Partnership’, but will still hold ALL of the rights, protections and benefits of a married couple as defined in the California Family code (297.5). Those rights, protections and benefits in the marriage code do not go away if Yes on 8 passes. The way I see to limit the needless litigation is that we should keep the definition of marriage defined as it has been and only recognize marriage between a man and a woman and still allow same sex couples to keep all of the rights married couples have – with the exception being they can’t define their same sex relationship/partnership as marriage.
whowouldnameakidroland: Very, very well put!! I must admit you did a better job than me. Thanks.
Trent: Thanks for defining “nick”. Now, what are you reading? You claim I said: “You claim that YOUR view of the inerrancy of the Bible is the ONLY view worth holding, and that all others are wrong.” Those words don’t exist anywhere in my comments. What I said was GOD’S word is the only word that has been proving true, time and time again. GOD’S word is perfectly able to defend itself. It doesn’t need my, or any ones help. As far as how the polar bears got on the ark, it’s in HIS word. Have you read it?
You also said, “Americans look to the Constitution.” How I wish that were so, because if it were, this would be a non-issue. Have you read it recently?
No one believes that they will have to “marry gays, or cats, or stoats” (what’s a stoat?) if prop 8 fails. I don’t know why you would even say that. Your smoker’s example however somewhat fits, but I will stop short of saying that gays are a threat to my health, as 2nd hand smoke is. Let’s not go down that road. We both know that’s crazy talk. But, to compare what’s in your example, why should I be forced to adopt someone else’s definition of marriage, if I don’t want to? And I’m not in the minority. If I were, prop 22 would not have passed. Even if it was later declared (somehow) unconstitutional, the people still expressed what they wanted: the definition of marriage should remain unchanged. BTW, you didn’t comment on the blatant abuse of power. Why?
Vote Yes on Prop 8!!
Hey TM: You’re welcome. A stoat is a member of the ermine and short-tailed weasel family, and a pretty vicious creature. Stay away. No petting!
I read you closely, and correctly. You insist on maintaining that there is only one God, and that he belongs to you. You insist that your reading of the Bible is the only one worth intellectual consideration. You discount all others. You claim to know what marriage is because God told you so in a book you have read.
And, you continue to believe that your personal reading should be accepted in the face of the fact that millions before you, and millions to come, will read the identical text quite differently — and draw quite different conclusions. Such intellectual obstinacy and narrowness is why religious wars persist to this day.
If God’s Word were as simple and clear as you imagine, why would Christians have split into so many churches, sects and parties? Are you the only wise and sincere one of the lot? Are the Baptists, Hutterites, Methodists, Wesleyans, Scots Presyterians, Catholics, Amish, Russian Orthodox, Greek Orthodox, Albigensians etc etc all phonies? Come on now. Be modest. Jesus was.
I always, always doubt the claims of any person who claims to know God’s Will. All we can know is what we read from, and read into, our preferred translation. No more, no less, and certainly no basis for public policy.
I know the idea of gay marriage makes you queasy. Fair enough. However, your stomach problems (which you insist on referring to as the Traditional Wisdom of God) are no basis for public policy. None at all. This is America. We are NOT a theocracy, no matter what ‘Dr’ Dobson, or your Stake leader, or your priest may have told you.
This is America. We protect our minorities. That’s why Prop 8 is un-Constitutional, and will fail, as did its predecessor.
I am personally queasy when religious fanatics have children, because those children will grow up knowing little of science, math, literature, skepticism, or any of the civilizing values. They will only be allowed one book, and one point of view. Pitiful.
I am not prepared to deny them the right to marry just because they’re not very bright.
Everyone has bias — even you. Mine favors tolerance. Yours? Otherwise.
KidRoland: If all it comes down to is a word, let’s make a deal. Ready?
From now on, your relationship with your heterosexual spouse will be called a ‘civil union’, but have all of the benefits of official marriage.
At the same time, all gay spouses will get to call their relationship ‘marriage’, but have all the benefits of civil union.
What’s good for the goose…
If you think there’s something awry, it’s because you are more wedded to a word than to your partner, more to a traditional title than to a living love.
On the other hand, if you feel your relationship is denigrated by calling it a ‘civil union’, now you know how gays feel.
No fun being a second-class citizen, is it?
Trent: Once again, you are twisting what I’ve said to fit your own purposes, the same way people today and in the past have twisted GOD’s word for their own purposes.
You wrote: “You insist that your reading of the Bible is the only one worth intellectual consideration. You discount all others.”
Not true. What I said was that GOD’S word has withstood countless attempts at being discredited. Something that cannot be said of what others call religions. It’s still your choice, and others, to believe or not. GOD will not force you or anyone.
You wrote “If God’s Word were as simple and clear as you imagine, why would Christians have split into so many churches, sects and parties? Are you the only wise and sincere one of the lot? Are the Baptists, Hutterites, Methodists, Wesleyans, Scots Presyterians, Catholics, Amish, Russian Orthodox, Greek Orthodox, Albigensians etc etc all phonies? Come on now. Be modest. Jesus was.”
I never claimed to be the only wise and sincere one of the lot. In fact I never claimed to be wise or sincere. I try to be, but wisdom is learned over a lifetime, and while I will say I posses a tiny amount, I’ll be the first to admit I have a long, long way to go. Sincerity must be exercised daily.
You wrote: “I always, always doubt the claims of any person who claims to know God’s Will. All we can know is what we read from, and read into, our preferred translation. No more, no less, and certainly no basis for public policy.”
I never claimed to know GOD’S will. I would like to believe however that I am aware of some of the things HE’S trying to teach me. That’s a far, far cry from knowing GOD’S will.
You wrote: “I know the idea of gay marriage makes you queasy. Fair enough. However, your stomach problems (which you insist on referring to as the Traditional Wisdom of God) are no basis for public policy. None at all. This is America. We are NOT a theocracy, no matter what ‘Dr’ Dobson, or your Stake leader, or your priest may have told you.”
I never said that gay marriage makes me queasy, or was causing stomach problems. I also never brought up Dr. Dobson, or my pastor, and I don’t have a stake leader.
You wrote: “This is America. We protect our minorities. That’s why Prop 8 is un-Constitutional, and will fail, as did its predecessor.”
Is that predecessor you’re referring to Prop 22? Didn’t that pass with over 60% of Californian’s votes? Subsequently overturned by 4 people?
You wrote: “I am personally queasy when religious fanatics have children, because those children will grow up knowing little of science, math, literature, skepticism, or any of the civilizing values. They will only be allowed one book, and one point of view. Pitiful.”
Is this a veiled attack on my family and me? I will choose to give you the benefit of the doubt and think not. I have no problem telling you about my family. In my house we follow GOD’S word. We are also a family of avid readers, actors (school plays, nothing big), writers, science and tech geeks, and even have one person that loves math. GOD’S word does not teach us to live in a bubble as you have surmised. But in my house, we consider the LORD JESUS CHRIST as our SAVIOR. When my children are grown and on their own, they will be free to do as they please, and have been encouraged to do so. While in my house they will be taught GOD’S word, LORD willing, to the best of my ability. What they choose to believe and do after their out and on their own is their choice, as it should be.
Trent, once again I agree with you. I agreed with your earlier comment that some have a desire to impose their will on others and with your most recent comment about being a “second-class citizen”. That is the sad truth that some, but certainly not all, couples that want to call their same sex relationship ‘marriage’ feel like second-class citizens. I wish that wasn’t the case. My gay friends don’t feel like this. In fact, they have no desire to get married – they don’t really believe in the institution of marriage. But for those that do, I understand how they might feel.
Now we are talking about the real issue. This is not about riding in the back of the bus, drinking from a separate drinking fountain, not having the right to vote, not being considered for employment or any of your other illusory arguments or comments. Same sex couples fought for years to get all of the rights associated with marriage. California led out in this effort to insure same sex couples received ALL of those rights so that they could visit their partner in the hospital, make life or death decisions, split up estates, share 401K and other health benefits. Now that they have all of those rights, they want to re-define the word marriage and the only real solid argument that supports this desire is the argument that some same sex couples feel denigrated or like a second-class citizen because most in society prefer not to call a same sex union ‘marriage’.
My view is that by re-defining the long standing definition of marriage we help those who feel like second class citizens feel better, but at the same time, many of us who want to keep marriage between and man and woman will slowly see changes in society that are troubling. Most will be driven by litigation as I mentioned earlier. The list of those at risk of law suits is long. It is sad to think about the loss of faith based adoption agencies in California. Any small business that chooses not to provide service at a same sex wedding will face litigation – loosing their right to practice their own religious or personal beliefs. Even though the ‘No on 8’ supporters will deny this, lawyers are lining up to take away tax exempt status from churches that might have the gall to preach their view of the Bible and marriage. This is already called hate speech or bigotry. Any church that accepts public funds (and even those that don’t), will be at risk to loose their tax status if they continue to preach the virtue of traditional marriage - even if they use the public money to fund child care for the poor, soup kitchens or boy scouts. People that attend these churches or hold similar beliefs are already called second-class citizens, bigots and worse.
kidroland: one again, well put.
once. oopps.
Allo Kid and TM: please forgive a double-reply but I have to get off to rehearsal. I appreciate that your own are well-conceived and well-written, and I thank you for that courtesy. So many conservatives these days begin with bad spelling and end with bad syntax.
I too appreciate that society has evolved a good distance. Thirty years ago, straight folks like ourselves would not even bother to notice that we were riding at the front of the bus. We would take it as our ‘right’ to do so, and not trouble with those behind.
Today? Gay Americans have, indeed, made significant progress in achieving the same rights in law and civil society that we three take for granted as straights Americans. Progress is progress, and all should take some pride in it. It may be the Brokeback Mountain effect. It may have taken the murder of young Matthew Shepherd. It may be many things.
There are still among us those who believe that they — and only they — are qualified to assert what God meant, what he inspired, what he plans. Others are more humble. These latter bring more questions than answers, and admit that others may have it right more often than they do. I, for one, prefer the power of doubt and enquiry to the misery of smug self-satisfaction. ‘God’ may also be a verb.
It is correct that, at least in California, gay people have obtained an equivalency of legal rights. The Vice-President’s own daughter could live here with her partner, and (largely) be treated with respect. It is not so in more backward states, especially in the South.
It all seems to come down to a single word: ‘marriage’, and who gets to use it.
There was a time when the word ‘gay’, having been appropriated and given a new and more political meaning (English is like that), was a source of resentment to conservatives. “Gay should mean what it meant in the time of Oscar Wilde!”, I once read. (Poor, poor complainer. Little did he know… unless he was writing ironically and I missed it.) Some people once fought over the meaning of ‘mathom’, but seem to have given up that pointless quarrel. Perhaps they ran out of Bibles to throw at one another.
So it is with ‘marriage’. Its meaning evolves in front of us. Gay marriage is a fact of life now in Mass, very soon Conn and California, and for some years already in Canada, Norway, Denmark, Spain, the Netherlands, soon the UK, and so on. God has not seen fit to fire on those nations, nor have they imploded. In fact, they are weathering the current economic storms of greed rather better than we are.
A friend of my wife’s attended a gay marriage between two RCMP officers up in Nova Scotia. The couple was treated by their fellow officers, all in brilliant serge, to the traditional raised swords, and the wedding ceremony was performed by their commanding officer. I understand that the RCMP is still considered one of the world’s better police forces.
In Canada and elsewhere, gay marriage came as an issue, was fought over, settled, and no one any longer even notices. In fact, the only attention now paid (and very little at that) is to the inevitable phenomenon of ‘gay divorce’. So it goes.
We continue to evolve, and linguistic or moralistic protectionism cannot stem the tide for long. Some try: the US still holds out, and uses a system of Imperial measures that the metric world abandoned years ago. We pay for that particular backwardness too.
Permit a small wager: after Prop 8 fails, and gay marriage continues, let’s meet again in five years. I’ll bet $5.00 that we will have entirely forgotten what the argument was about.
God willing, we may even have moved on to important subjects, like ridding the world of polio, or AIDS, or genocidal dictators, or malaria, or pollution — in short, things that truly matter.
Thank you for reading mine. I appreciate reading yours.
Trent and KidRoland: I have also enjoyed our dialogue. I’m not a betting man, but would gladly like to meet again in 5 years after Prop 8 passes, and the meaning of the word marriage remains intact. I too hope and pray we have moved on to more important issues, such as the blatant abuse of power by our elected officials, the sorry state of our economy, how we can remain competitive worldwide, etc. In the meantime, unless you object, I bid you GOD bless and will keep you in my prayers.
TM and Trent: Best to both of you. I hope I’m alive in 5 years!
Prop 8 is wrong. It is wrong to discriminate against others. Religious extremists expect everyone to fit ino the mold they’ve decided everyone should fit into. If you don’t, you’re an enemy. Who will they target next?
I will vote NO on prop 8 because California is better than this.
No on Prop 8.
I am always amazed at the attitudes of “Christians” that judge others. I thought the only judgement is supposed to be left to God? Also, standing behind Gods words from the Bible….the Bible was written by men and based on their interpretations of what they thought or their perception of what was said. I don’t recall any chapter in the Bible titled “God” since he didn’t write a single verse. It is stories written by others. I believe in God, he is a loving and accepting God. I know he doesn’t believe in hate, which seems to spew from many of these comments.
VOTE YES ON PROP 8! I find same sex marriage proponents to be sooooo deceitful in the way they characterize their rationale for promoting same sex marriage. For example–don’t be fooled…this is NOT ABOUT DESCRIMINATION OR “EQUALITY” as they say. It’s about them wanting to indoctrinate children with the idea that “a moral family” can be made up of gays. You certainly don’t hear them talking about obedience to moral law. This is a moral issue. Gays may love each other like a moral family would, and that’s fine–but it is NOT a family bonded through moral marriage. That concept and term marriage is taken. Now they are saying “children won’t be forced to learn about gay marriage in schools.” But they fail to mention the reality that they’ll be forced to accept that a family can be made of up gays, and that this is morally accepted–even encouraged. Find a new term for your gay union, civil agreement, lifetime commitment–whatever. The term marriage is taken. THIS IS NOT ABOUT EQUALITY OR DESCRIMINATION PEOPLE!!! VOTE YES ON 8!!
Giving gay couples the right to marry has NOTHING to do with children’s education or religious freedom, and EVERYTHING with equality vs discrimination.
This proves the religious right will make up anything, just to get their way, and intrude into other people’s lives.
A Yes on 8 vote stems from ignorance and fear. Nothing more.
It’s important to understand a group to understand their motivation. Based on your comment, I went to the Mormom website and found this link which explains the position of the Mormon church - http://newsroom.lds.org/ldsnewsroom/eng/commentary/same-sex-marriage-and-proposition-8.
I have started reading through the links to understand the Mormon Church’s point of view and it provides me with the proper background to be able to comment intelligently.
I also found the website http://www.mormon.org/mormonorg/eng/ which explains what the Mormon church believes, so different than what mainstream would have us to believe about that religion.
Prop 8 will pass - pretty much - solely because of the radio quote by that obnoxious San Fran mayor, Gavin Newsom.
The pro-gay group doesn’t get it - the more “in the face” they become - the more they lose.
From a neutral point of view, let’s put the issue aside, or pretend it isn’t an issue about homosexual marriage. Let’s say it’s an issue about raising taxes. The voters voted on AN issue. Later on, it was overturned. This shows that no matter what the voters vote, if the government wants to overturn it, it makes Joe Citizen’s vote irrelevant(sp?) Am I correct? Just a thought.
Spencer- That’s because it’s unconstitutional! It’s the Supreme Court’s JOB to, in a case like this, protect the rights of a minority from the majority. People who are against gay marriage can have whatever beliefs they like, I really don’t care. And if my boyfriend and I want to get married, why should they care?
All this talk about “gay marriage being taught in schools” is not true. It’s simply not. And it says a lot about the Yes on 8 campaign that they have to invent a problem where there is none, in order to distract from the fact that apart from religion (which has no place in government), they have no legitimate objection to two consenting adults getting married!
And to frame it another way, do you really want to establish a precedent for using the Constitution to take away rights simply because they’re unpopular? That’s not what the Constitution is for, and it hasn’t been since Prohibition.
No on 8!!
Yes, cats and dogs will marry and polygamy will be allowed. Seriously, is this all the supporters of prop 8 have? I respect everyone’s view on this subject but not when the reason for supporting prop 8 is to keep humans from marrying animals in the future.
Fuzzy logic
Seriously people.
VOTE YES ON 8. SEND A MESSAGE TO THE 4 JUDGES THAT OUR VOTES DO COUNT! THEIR WE KNOW BETTER THAN YOU ATTITUDE SHOULD TELL YOU WHAT THEY THINK OF YOUR VOTE ON ANYTHING THEY DISAGREE WITH YOU IN THE FUTURE.
Your statement that homosexuality is “abnormal to most psychologist” is FALSE. I am a Psychologist and our association (American Psychological Association) does not see homosexuality this way. The APA was part of the legal team fighting to stop the discrimination and allow same-sex marriages. If you ever take a psychology class in any respectable university or college you will learn how incorrect you are.
Also, I am amazed on how many of you label the California Supreme Court as being composed of “liberal radical” judges. These judges are Republican and conservative. The head judge was actually appointed by Ronald Reagan.
I am a heterosexual married male that does not support discrimination.
Vote NO on Prop 8!
This is about “The Majority Rules” Not gay or straight. . . California VOTERS passed 22 by 61% in 2000! All the rest is personal opinions - this is why we vote in private - it is my right to vote “Yes” because I have a right to vote for things the way I want them…..If 22 was shot down then I would have to accept it because the “majority” voted that way - SIMPLE…we have rights and laws “by the people”- so if the people voted to stop same sex couples then we should all abide by the outcome and move on!
Newport dude - find another career, being gay is a mental/emotional disease with no cure
Do civil unions come with all the same rights that marriage gives? If not - why? Would everybody be happier if they were? Do we know all the facts? Is each state (that allows civil unions) different in what rights they allow? Maybe we should upgrade the civil unions before we get to changing anything first. I think this is a big step for most people. Maybe we should be voting for better civil unions!
First they took away the rights of the parents
and I did not speak out
because I was not a parent.
Then they took away the rights of the churches
and I did not speak out
because I was not a member of a church.
Then they took away the rights of business owners
and I did not speak out
because I was not a business owner.
Then they came to take away the rights from me
and there was no one left
to speak out for me.
– An adaptation of a poem by Pastor Niemöller
I am a father of three small children. I am a liberal. I am voting Yes on 8 because I do not want my innocent 5 yr old being taught about deviant sexual behaviors (that do not by their very nature have the ability to bring children into this world) - and should be kept behind closed doors. I do not hate gay people. I had gay room mates in college and still have a number of gay friends. I do, however, not appreciate other people (the government) telling me that they are going to teach my innocent minded children about such behaviors. In addition, I believe in freedom of religion and speech. In Canada, where Gay Marriage is now legal, a Church Minister was sued by a gay activist group for preaching from the Bible that homosexuality is morally wrong. The minister, in Calgary, Alberta lost the law suit. Also, in the state of Massachussets where Gay Marriage is legal, a business owner was sued and lost for not wanting to take pictures of a Gay couple’s wedding because they believed homosexuality is morally wrong. I wonder if the founders of this country ever envisioned that one would not be able to preach from the Bible or protest taking gay people’s pictures?
(Janbag I like your point!) From what I understand under CA LAW, if prop 8 passes, none of the current rights that same sex couples have will be taken away. I sure hope that everyonne’s doing they’re homework on this issue…and that doesn’t mean forming your opinion based on radio & television ads, even the nightly news. They are often biased & leave out chunks of info…don’t be naive. Regarding what will happen if prop 8 passes: just look at what happend in other states…the school, church, etc. issues ARE vaild concerns. Is there a guarentee they will NOT be affected? (of course not, after all, we’re voting on this topic…AGAIN). While it may grant a small group one more right, it’s going to take away more, & more important ones from the majority. Again, research whats been going on in other states where Same-Sex Marraige has been legalized. Ie: Pastors are being sued for for refusing to marry same sex couples, because it contradicts their religious beliefs. Now doesn’t it seem more important to protect something as sacred as religion, than to change the definition of marraige, and impose that change on others?! Yes they have the right to join their life with whom they choose, but I don’t think they’re personal life choices should have such a large impact on everyonne else. It’s NOT like the early 50’s…racism. African Americans did not choose their race, as did any other race. How can we compare these two groups to each other? We can’t, in fact I think it’s insulting to the minority races. Same sex couples are making a choice of whom to be with. Remember- it is a matter of opinion as to whether or not gays are ‘born gay’- there is no DEFINITIVE evidence which says so. So please, do not compare this to racism, equlization of rights & so on. They already share many rights as civil unions, perhaps we should improve the right of those unions, rather than REDEFINING marriage for the majority. In case you haven’t noticed, I’m voting YES on 8!!! And still love my gay/lesbian friends & family.
I want to thank all of the No on 8 voters on this board. I am a lesbian who can’t figure out why some people who preach hate in God’s name and twist the Bible’s words presume to know The Creator’s plan. Who knows why God made gay people? I don’t know, but I also don’t presume that He imagined only one type of love between consenting adults…
If Marriage was synonymous with Reproduction, the Yes on 8 people who use a “traditional” definition of marriage might actually have a point about the definition of marriage as being between a man and a woman, but since plenty of males and females marry and choose not to have children or CANNOT for infertility reasons have children (Why does God make some people infertile? I do not presume to know, and I do not judge people who cannot reproduce “naturally”), it is clear that marriage does not mean that the ability to reproduce is necessary. I believe God cares more about LOVE and Commitment than he cares about the flaps of skin in our pants.
But again, ultimately this is not about God, even though God gives us all free choice and says we should not prevent others from living our paths and making choices, even if those choices don’t make sense to others. This is about the documents that govern this great nation. It’s about the values Americans hold. It’s about certain “unalienable Rights” and civil liberties. Because, do your research Yes on 8 supporters, civil unions DO NOT grant the 1400+ legal rights that marriage grants, AND they are a lot messier (paper-wise) than a legal marriage license. IF proposition 8 were truly about a definition and not about rights, gay people probably wouldn’t care that much, though it does hurt to be told that we would have to use a different word for our love union because straight people are touchy about the word marriage. But the proposition IS about rights and that’s why everyone who can see through the illusion of the Yes on 8 campaigns “rational” argument know that this proposition is about exclusion and HATE.
As for the education argument–it doesn’t hold water. IF schools talk about homosexuality, they will neither praise nor condemn it. They will simply note that it exists, which is true and which is a truth that your children can see if they ever see two people of the same-sex holding hands or kissing in public. It is up to the parents of these children to instill intolerance–the schools won’t take that responsibility upon themselves. I imagine that the people who believe that homosexuality should not be talked about in school also feel apprehension about sex education, in which schools neither promote sexual activity nor condemn it. Instead, schools say, “Whether you CHOOSE to have sex or not is none of our business. But we will teach you about your bodies and about what sex is about the potential causes and effects of sexual activity.” It is up to parents to talk to their children about their values and beliefs; it truly is none of the government’s business to tell us what to believe in our personal lives.
Thank you, No on 8 supporters. You remind me that God has not forsaken me.
~Carol
P.S. IF a school were to slip into subjective waters to say, “Homosexuality is fine,” guess what–it would not be the end of the religious fundamentalist world; there’s nothing stopping parents from telling their kids, “Don’t listen to what the school says; homosexuality is an abomination.” There is nothing stopping any of you from telling your straight or gay child that certain people are unworthy of God’s love and of equal rights. So please don’t pretend to give schools that much power over your children’s beliefs UNLESS you believe that your children will believe in the “unconditional” part of God’s love, and you FEAR that your child will “catch” homosexuality just by LEARNING of its existence. Trust me; your hate is much more of a disease than homosexuality could ever be.
P.P.S. I teach college English in California’s Central Valley, one of the most hate-filled places I have ever experienced. Here, whites seem to hate blacks who hate Hispanics who hate the Hmong who hate the Japanese who hate. . .and the list goes on and on. And half the population, at least, is ignorant about homosexuality. I have to read paper after paper about how “homosexuality is a moral abomination and is the reason America is so corrupt.” My students can’t see my minority status, so they assume that I feel the same way they do. At least, I can’t imagine my students would write, “Blacks are an abomination” if I was black–my minority status would be obvious, and they would feel shame. But guess what? I read their papers and I evaluate their writing, not their beliefs, even though reading their writing breaks my heart and makes my physically ill. I DO NOT teach them my beliefs about ANY social, political, or spiritual issue. So to say that teachers and schools WILL push their personal agendas is a fallacy rooted in fear and ignorance. I treat all of my students equally because I believe we are ALL deserving of the same respect, love, and rights.
P.P.S. I have fundamentalist family who spout the paroxism, “Love the sinner, hate the sin” at me all the time, and they claim to love me and everyone else who is different from them, but then they slander their Mormon friends’ beliefs behind their backs and never ask me how my girlfriend is doing. It always makes me realize that they don’t love me–they can’t. They can’t love me because they don’t accept the fact that I didn’t choose my sexual orientation. SIN is chosen. I did not choose to feel romantic love for women. You Yes on 8 people might retort: “Okay, God made you gay. But when you act on that feeling, you turn from God!” Why would God make me gay only to then say I can’t act on my love? That sounds like a cruel, hypocritical God to me, a God made of men’s fears and not of the Truth.
Excuse my mistake. I meant to say “proverb” or “adage,” not parox[y]sm, which is a sudden attack, either of laughter or of spasms from a disease. I think the term applies to Proposition 8 perfectly, actually, because when I walk outside my door and see my No on 8 signs surrounded by lawns sprouting Yes on 8 signs like nightshade, depending on my mood, I will laugh at the situation or I will feel as if I cannot breathe, as if the KKK is my neighbor.
To all my lost people that say they believe in God. You just can’t take part of his word you must take all of his word. You all know we don’t hate the sinner,just the sin cuz it puts a big downfall towards the collapse of a nation. Rome is a prim example in the division of state and religion. History proves it.
Why don’t we ban all marriages and make everyone have civil unions?
They are all the same right? Any Yes on Prop 8 folks care to step up and put their money where their mouth is?
Civil unions are not marriages - stop saying they are the same thing.
Unless you care to show us?
I agree with Chuck! We should call all unions legal contracts and save marriage for religious ceremonies. Now the problem would be if same sex couples wanted to have a religious ceremony. What would be the effect of that? Any ideas?
I also must ask, “equal but seperate”. I don’t understand. Every individual has equal rights but a homosexual and a hetrosexual marriage are not the same. How can they be defined so everyone is happy?
I agree that the government should not “marry” anybody, straight, gay, male, female, transgendered, white, black, young, old, Democrat, Republican, Christian, Buddhist, atheist, agnostic, whatever. The government shouldn’t marry anyone. But the government should give civil rights to its people on equal terms. Maybe the government should pull out of the marriage sector and instead issue licenses for civil unions that guarantee everyone, no matter their sex, color, creed, etc., the same rights.
That would leave marriage up to the churches. There are plenty of churches that marry same-sex couples because those churches believe that God created everyone equally and that two consenting adults have God’s blessing to marry. There are also plenty of churches out there that don’t choose to marry same-sex couples, and that’s fine. But yes, if this were to happen, there would be same-sex couples walking around with the same rights that heterosexual couples have and with the same wedding bands on their fingers. Is this happening now? Yes. Was it happening before Proposition 8 came along? Yes. Gays could marry in churches with or without the government’s consent–the marriage just didn’t give them civil rights that heterosexual marriage grants. Now, married same-sex couples in California enjoy the same state civil rights that married heterosexual couples in CA enjoy. All Yes on 8 wants to do is take away the civil rights. The passing of proposition 8 won’t stop gay marriage–it will just stop same-sex couples from enjoying the same civil rights. The proposition, therefore, is discriminatory in nature. It gives one group legal rights while eliminating those rights from another group of people.
Either yes on 8 people are uneducated about this issue or they truly believe that what the government says will stop same-sex couples from marrying in churches and telling the world that they love each other and that their love is recognized by God. Even if this proposition passes, gay people will love each other and marry each other and hold hands on the street. Children will still see same-sex couples hugging and caring about each other, even if the government won’t let gay people marry. So what am I saying? I’m saying vote NO ON PROP 8 because all that proposition does is take away civil rights that should be guaranteed to all.
Thank you for your time.
atchemp Says:
I agree with Chuck! We should call all unions legal contracts and save marriage for religious ceremonies
That would be totally OK but everybody else uses the legal term “marriage.”
So why not kill Prop 8 and enter a new one next time that says “The State of CA does not acknowledge the institution of marriage, only Civil Unions. Marriage is a religious ceremony only. For Federal and international purposes, a Civil Union under CA law is equivalent to marriage.”
If this were an amendment saying blacks could not marry, there would be riots. If this were an amendment barring people with the same color of eyes from marrying there would be assassinations. Why should gay people just sit back and let idiots pass such an amendment without rioting or assassinating the anti-gay leaders, like normal people would normally react?