California - Prop 8 - PASSED

[hhunt2]

This makes me sooo pissed off... where I live I see alot of gay couples, and I always say "Aww.." & smile when I see them holding hands.
Even though "gay" people are attracted to the same sex doesn't mean their any different from a straight person.

I told my husband that I was willing to protest a few weeks ago. Grab a bunch of people who agree with "No on 8". Take over a corner on a busy intersection and have about 6 people wearing large signs saying,
"I can't marry b/c I have brown eyes",
"I can't marry b/c I'm Asain",
"I can't marry b/c I'm bi-sexual",
"I can't marry b/c I'm disabled", etc.
Get my point??? There has always been discrimination for every single person/thing in America's history... why add on not letting gay PEOPLE marry (the word "people" is bold and underlined b/c they are still people!). I thought this was 2008; no more slaves, no more segregation, no more hate. But I guess it's still the same old corrupte government/people.

Oh another thing is, I was listening to the radio this morning....
A guy had said, there were propositions to protect animals (I believe those had passed) but a prop against gay people.
The funny things is, the government (and or people of the US) would rather make animals more important than people right now. Way to go government.

**Here's another thought...
We have strip clubs, porn shops, sex clubs (we've got 1 in Nothern California called "Power Exchange"), etc..... but the government was worried that same sex marrige would corrupte childrens minds.
Ummmm, everyday when I pick up my nephew, we pass by 2 strip clubs (both with bright neon lights and shady people hanging infront of it), 2 clubs owned by the Hells Angels, 4 porn shops, 3 tattoo shops, 7 bars and a few prostitutes with their asses hanging out.

Doesn't my nephews daily ride home from school corrupte his mind?? The government should be worried about other things than gay marriage.

 

[MrsRjizzle]

I grew up in church and was always taught that marriage was between a man and a women and anything else was a sin in the eyes of God. I also live in california which is a huge pool of every race, sexual orientation and religion. Because of where I live I am very comfortable around all groups. I have many gay friends whom I love and could not do with out.

When it came to voting on Prop 8 I skipped over it. Because I didnt feel comfortable making that choice.Becuase I cant say its ok and go against my religious beliefs and I cant say no and feel like I am determining someones fate.

But I dont feel like with this propostion being passed that anything has really changed. For 2008 years ( and many more before that) gay marriage wasnt aloud. Just because times have changed and people have become more accepting doesnt mean that people are ready to add it to the constitution. The moral of my story is. Things still are the way that they have "for the most part" always been. People will continue to love the one they are with and do what makes them happy no matter what the law says.

 

[MAC_Pixie04]

Quote:

Originally Posted by hhunt2 This makes me sooo pissed off... where I live I see alot of gay couples, and I always say "Aww.." & smile when I see them holding hands. Even though "gay" people are attracted to the same sex doesn't mean their any different from a straight person. I told my husband that I was willing to protest a few weeks ago. Grab a bunch of people who agree with "No on 8". Take over a corner on a busy intersection and have about 6 people wearing large signs saying, "I can't marry b/c I have brown eyes", "I can't marry b/c I'm Asain", "I can't marry b/c I'm bi-sexual", "I can't marry b/c I'm disabled", etc. Get my point??? There has always been discrimination for every single person/thing in America's history... why add on not letting gay PEOPLE marry (the word "people" is bold and underlined b/c they are still people!). I thought this was 2008; no more slaves, no more segregation, no more hate. But I guess it's still the same old corrupte government. Oh another thing is, I was listening to the radio this morning.... A guy had said, there were propositions to protect animals (I believe those had passed) but a prop against gay people. The funny things is, the government people would rather make animals more important than people right now. Way to go government.

I agree with what you're saying, but you can't blame the results on the government in this situation. The only government involvement was the chain of command that allowed these props to be put on the ballot in the first place. The people to blame are those who voted yes. People put those initiatives on the ballot, not always the government. You can thank your government's special interest groups and lobbyists for supporting a certain proposition, but the government initially gave gay people the right to marry; it was the citizens of California that voted "yes" who took it away. The proposition was a democratic way of deciding, and unfortunately it just didn't pan out the way many of us had hoped.

 

[*Stargazer*]

This is what drives me so crazy about this argument.

No one ever says "Gay Marriage is a sin, so I won't do it." Instead it's "Gay Marriage is a sin, so YOU can't do it. I don't really care if you don't even follow my religion."

Any why only gay marriage? Where is the outrage over all of the people who choose not to be Christian? Isn't that sinful? What about false idols? Why aren't these same people pushing to outlaw divorce, since heterosexual marriage is so sacred? Or outlawing work on Sundays?

 

[MAC_Pixie04]

Quote:

Originally Posted by MrsRjizzle I grew up in church and was always taught that marriage was between a man and a women and anything else was a sin in the eyes of God. I also live in california which is a huge pool of every race, sexual orientation and religion. Because of where I live I am very comfortable around all groups. I have many gay friends whom I love and could not do with out. When it came to voting on Prop 8 I skipped over it. Because I didnt feel comfortable making that choice.Becuase I cant say its ok and go against my religious beliefs and I cant say no and feel like I am determining someones fate.

I think that's very admirable of you; some people have told me they automatically voted Yes because they were religious and it would have sinful if they didn't agree with the Prop. I would rather have people not vote on an issue than to vote because their school or their church or their family tells them to. The whole point of voting (or not voting) is to make YOUR voice heard, not the voice of an organization you belong to even when you slightly disagree so that I say

Quote:

But I dont feel like with this propostion being passed that anything has really changed. For 2008 years ( and many more before that) gay marriage wasnt aloud. Just because times have changed and people have become more accepting doesnt mean that people are ready to add it to the constitution. The moral of my story is. Things still are the way that they have "for the most part" always been. People will continue to love the one they are with and do what makes them happy no matter what the law says.

Here however, I think the really infuriating part is that the right to marry was given to them and people went out of their way to "take it back," and for what reason?

Yes people will continue to love the one they are with and that will never change. But what if the one you are with happens to be your gay lover, and she gets sick and ends up in the hospital. If her family disagrees with your lifestyle and wills it so, you can't visit her in the hospital or have any hand in making kind of decisions in her affairs during and/or after the situation. Or later down the road, she dies before you, and some third cousin comes along and says "I'm her closest living relative, everything she has goes to me by default: you two weren't married." You lose everything you had with that person to some unfair stipulation in the law.

These aren't things heterosexual couples have to think about and fight for; for the homosexual community, these are big concerns, and I think that's just sad. They can't have the beautiful ceremonies they want to have because there's no telling how much time they might have, because they have to rush down to city hall before midnight on 11/4 to make sure that when they wake up the next day, their marriage is still going to be recognized.

 

[AdlersMommy22]

stargazer... I dont think you are understanding what I'm saying at all.. and maybe I'm not making myself very clear in what I'm trying to get across..

In my eyes- what pops into my mind first when I think of marriage is a religious union between two people. Thats what I grew up thinking about when I saw two married people, people getting married, the WORD marriage- In my mind the word "marriage" signifies a religious union. FIRST.

But I'm also not so blantly ignorant of the fact that marriage is not JUST a religious union. To me, it is first and foremost a religious union... Im aware that it is also a legal union... as well. To some people it may JUST be a legal union.. but to a lot it is a religious as well as legal one.

I was trying to explain when you said "they are seeking legal, civil marriages, not religious ones." that when someone SAYS "Banning gay marriages" I assume that not only do they mean legal marriages but also in the religious sense. Who am I to know if there aren't gay couples out there who would like to get married by a priest, or a reverent, or...any other had of a church? I was technically trying to thank you for clearning that up for me because I assumed it included marriage not only in the legal sense, but as well as in the religious sense.

I get the feeling you are getting mad at me and I really honestly agree with everything everyone has to say as far as homosexuals being able to marry legally who they would like, when they would like... and so on and so forth. I'm just as dissapointed with this ban as everyone else.

 

[*Stargazer*]

Quote:

Originally Posted by AdlersMommy22 stargazer... I dont think you are understanding what I'm saying at all..

No, believe me. I understand everything you've written.

 

[AngelBunny]

Quote:

Originally Posted by nelyanaphonexia yeah, I've heard this. I'm from Texas. I have no idea how that will go over here. I would say half the people I know here have guns. That is kind of how I feel about this too. It's horrible that because some people harbor hate in their hearts, that a large number of people have to suffer. I personally believe that everyone has the right to the pursuit of happiness, and if that means a gay marriage, than that is what they should get. I'm not sure about Cali, but here in Lubbock, TX gay marriage IS and probably always will be illegal. Heck, here they don't even teach proper sex education. I didn't go to high school here, and I'm damn lucky for it. I wouldn't even know what a condom was, unless someone told me it was one of "Satan's tricks for immorality" because there was an article I read here, not so recently, but it was expressing the "immorality" of the use of tampons by Christian women. I was like SERIOUSLY?!?! WTF?!??! I was expecting them to try and ban the sale of tampons just like the ban the sale of any and ALL alcohol sale here too. I can't wait to leave Lubbock. Of course, because of all of the lack of sex education, we have one of the highest teen pregnancy rates in the State. Maybe even the nation. I'm not sure because it's depressing to check. But, I'm sorry that Cali passed Prop 8. I can totally sympathize. I have Gay and Lesbian friends here who suffer everyday because of their community. It makes me sick every time I think that a community would do that to it's citizens.

I just had to jump in here and add my sentiments, because I was born and raised in Lubbock. It is sad that people are so controlling over the lives of others ... and Lubbock is one of the worst cities in the country for that. According to some polls Lubbock is the second most conservative city in the country, after only Provo, Utah! Not that I am saying that conservative views in and of themselves are only to blame ... but some places are completely NON progressive, and West Texas is definitely one of them!

I miss my home, but I can honestly say that I was glad to get out when I did. The teen pregnancy rates, drug use rates, etc are scary in that part of the country right now.

As for issues like Prop Eight I find it offensive to my rights as an American to even have something so assinine on a ballot. Why should I have to vote on if two people want to spend their lives together? It is none of my damn business!

Other propositions that pass at times are sickening to me as well ... one of the southern states (Alabama maybe? can't remember at the moment) passed a resolution stating that two unmarried people that are living together cannot adopt or foster kids. As an unmarried mother of two babies myself that lives with but is not and has no plans of every being married to their father, that seems a complete violation of rights. I know for a fact that there are millions of other people like me who would make great foster and adoptive parents, but since someone wants to intrude on that now, in states like Alabama at least, that can't happen!

Just sad ... and maddening all at the same time. Ok ... rant over!

 

[allyson]

I kinda skimmed, so if someone's already stated this, I'm sorry!

I don't understand how civil rights can be voted on by the people! Isn't it up to the government to protect the minority from the majority to provide equality?
I mean, look at it this way, if we had given the states the ability to vote on giving people equal rights in the 60s...well, you know what would've happened!
Overall I hope the government will one day realize that they have to stand up and protect everyones rights, and not let majority rule. I mean, that is what America stands for, isn't it? Or was supposed to...

 

[AdlersMommy22]

Quote:

Originally Posted by silverbelle282 completely agree. my god. i'm such a you groupie, but it's because you sum up my thoughts so elegantly. adlers mommy, thanks for sharing your opinions and clearing that up. i really appreciated hearing your thoughts and i'm all for discourse and open and honest dialogue. so, you're for granting legal marriage to homosexuals?

abso-freakin-lutley. If theres one thing i propose more and more and more in this world is more love.. more life... more happiness. I would love to see homosexuals be able to marry legally. Does that mean I agree with their decisious? Personally, no.. because a lot of it I dont understand- because I'm not homosexual. But Im not God, and I can't judge. But if its not hurting anyone or kiling anyone or infringing on any else's rights.. then I dont see what's so wrong with it...

And as I stated before.. God I would LOVE to see homosexual couples be able to do more adoptions... there are so many babies out there that need loving parents and if these two people who love EACHOTHER are willing to subject their child to a warm, happy environment where they can flurish as a person... then I'm all for it! Maybe if there were MORE AND MORE people adopting then less people would be having abortions for fear of that child not living in a happy home...

. More people in love, more babies, more chance for getting a head in this world as an open and careing individual? Sounds great to me!

 

[MAC_Pixie04]

Quote:

Originally Posted by AdlersMommy22 In my eyes- what pops into my mind first when I think of marriage is a religious union between two people. Thats what I grew up thinking about when I saw two married people, people getting married, the WORD marriage- In my mind the word "marriage" signifies a religious union. FIRST. But I'm also not so blantly ignorant of the fact that marriage is not JUST a religious union. To me, it is first and foremost a religious union... Im aware that it is also a legal union... as well. To some people it may JUST be a legal union.. but to a lot it is a religious as well as legal one. I was trying to explain when you said "they are seeking legal, civil marriages, not religious ones." that when someone SAYS "Banning gay marriages" I assume that not only do they mean legal marriages but also in the religious sense. Who am I to know if there aren't gay couples out there who would like to get married by a priest, or a reverent, or...any other had of a church? I was technically trying to thank you for clearning that up for me because I assumed it included marriage not only in the legal sense, but as well as in the religious sense. I get the feeling you are getting mad at me and I really honestly agree with everything everyone has to say as far as homosexuals being able to marry legally who they would like, when they would like... and so on and so forth. I'm just as dissapointed with this ban as everyone else.

You have to put it in a political perspective though; when a state bans gay marriage, there isn't supposed to be any religious implications because of the so-called separation of church and state. So you have to step outside of your deep-seated religious faith and put it into that context. We're not talking about not letting them have church marriages; this is stopping them from getting married PERIOD. I think that might be where your point is being misconstrued, because you're not viewing this Proposition from a political stance, you're thinking of banning gay marriage from a religious stance; the two ideas are--well should be--extremely different.

Everybody who gets married does not get married under a religious institution, but that doesn't make it any less of a marriage. It seems that your religion is pretty important to you, but sometimes you have to remove it from the context of your argument, otherwise it could say something completely different than what you intend. By saying that all marriages that aren't based in religion are simply legal unions, it seems as though you're belittling anybody's marriage who wasn't a church marriage, though I'm sure that isn't how you meant it.

 

[yodagirl]

Quote:

Originally Posted by AngelBunny Other propositions that pass at times are sickening to me as well ... one of the southern states (Alabama maybe? can't remember at the moment) passed a resolution stating that two unmarried people that are living together cannot adopt or foster kids. As an unmarried mother of two babies myself that lives with but is not and has no plans of every being married to their father, that seems a complete violation of rights. I know for a fact that there are millions of other people like me who would make great foster and adoptive parents, but since someone wants to intrude on that now, in states like Alabama at least, that can't happen! Just sad ... and maddening all at the same time. Ok ... rant over!

Its Arkansas(my home state)....I'm super pissed that it passed

 

[MAC_Pixie04]

Quote:

Originally Posted by allyson I kinda skimmed, so if someone's already stated this, I'm sorry! I don't understand how civil rights can be voted on by the people! Isn't it up to the government to protect the minority from the majority to provide equality? I mean, look at it this way, if we had given the states the ability to vote on giving people equal rights in the 60s...well, you know what would've happened! Overall I hope the government will one day realize that they have to stand up and protect everyones rights, and not let majority rule. I mean, that is what America stands for, isn't it? Or was supposed to...

To a degree yes; but you have to remember that the government wasn't always protecting EVERYONE'S rights. We had to fight for them. Women weren't held to the same stature as men and had to fight to be protected the same way; same goes for Blacks and immigrating Japanese and Vietnamese people. These groups of people--among many others--weren't always protected by th government and by the constitution, amendments had to be fought for and added to the constitution before these people belonged to the protected majority. Same thing is going to have to happen for gays, it's gonna be a fight, the government isn't going to just give them the right to marry, because the founding fathers defined marriage as being between a man and a woman, and now we have to try and debate that definition.

Unfortunately with this prop, because it was something we voted on, the democratic outcome is letting the "majority" rule, because more people voted Yes than No on Prop 8.

 

[AdlersMommy22]

Quote:

Originally Posted by MAC_Pixie04 You have to put it in a political perspective though; when a state bans gay marriage, there isn't supposed to be any religious implications because of the so-called separation of church and state. So you have to step outside of your deep-seated religious faith and put it into that context. We're not talking about not letting them have church marriages; this is stopping them from getting married PERIOD. I think that might be where your point is being misconstrued, because you're not viewing this Proposition from a political stance, you're thinking of banning gay marriage from a religious stance; the two ideas are--well should be--extremely different. Everybody who gets married does not get married under a religious institution, but that doesn't make it any less of a marriage. It seems that your religion is pretty important to you, but sometimes you have to remove it from the context of your argument, otherwise it could say something completely different than what you intend. By saying that all marriages that aren't based in religion are simply legal unions, it seems as though you're belittling anybody's marriage who wasn't a church marriage, though I'm sure that isn't how you meant it.

You're so right thats NOT the way I meant it AT ALL! I think thats why I was so confused at first and why I brought up being married in the church in the first place-- I wasn't even thinking about seperation of church and state what-so-ever. Sometimes I dont do a very good job of putting my thoughts down (I have wicked ADD haha) which is why I was trying to (but grrr.. I didnt get the words out correctly) thank stargazer for clearing up for me that they weren't talking about religious marriages. Just that when I think marriage.. I automatically think church- and in matters like this i need to -phew- put church and religion aside and concentrate on just it from the political point of view- as you said ... like I said, I dont have a lot of practice in voiceing my opinons or even talking about things like this... but I'm glad that you explained to me how the prop didnt involve anything religiously- I wasn't aware that it didnt.. thought it was all one big thing- but I wasn't considering seperation of church and state

phew. my head hurts.

 

[*Stargazer*]

Quote:

Originally Posted by MAC_Pixie04 because the founding fathers defined marriage as being between a man and a woman.

But did they?

That's a large part of this problem. The people who want to ban gay marriage seem to assume, erroneously, that heterosexual marriage is some kind of right. But where is it granted? Not in the US Constitution or Declaration of Independence. Maybe you could make the argument that it's covered under the "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" bit, but then it pertains to all of us, gay or straight.

Not only is marriage a civil institution in the US, but it's one granted by the states and the criteria vary state by state.

 

[allyson]

Quote:

Originally Posted by MAC_Pixie04 To a degree yes; but you have to remember that the government wasn't always protecting EVERYONE'S rights. We had to fight for them. Women weren't held to the same stature as men and had to fight to be protected the same way; same goes for Blacks and immigrating Japanese and Vietnamese people. These groups of people--among many others--weren't always protected by th government and by the constitution, amendments had to be fought for and added to the constitution before these people belonged to the protected majority. Same thing is going to have to happen for gays, it's gonna be a fight, the government isn't going to just give them the right to marry, because the founding fathers defined marriage as being between a man and a woman, and now we have to try and debate that definition. Unfortunately with this prop, because it was something we voted on, the democratic outcome is letting the "majority" rule, because more people voted Yes than No on Prop 8.

What I mean is that, though, is that this isn't something that should be voted on. There are just some things in society that really do need to be kept from the majority, you know what I'm saying? I don't know if I'm explaining myself correctly.
By no means, though, am I saying stop fighting. I want the fight to continue until the mission's accomplished!

 

[AngelBunny]

Quote:

Originally Posted by yodagirl Its Arkansas(my home state)....I'm super pissed that it passed

Thanks for letting me know ... I knew it was one of the A's but I was so pissed when I saw that it passed I forgot which one it was ... there will be more of those in the Southern states soon enough I am sure, and that is just sad!

 

[yodagirl]

Quote:

Originally Posted by AngelBunny Thanks for letting me know ... I knew it was one of the A's but I was so pissed when I saw that it passed I forgot which one it was ... there will be more of those in the Southern states soon enough I am sure, and that is just sad!

Its very sad...especially for people like me that want to adopt, but not necessarily get married (even though I love my fellow to pieces, we just aren't making any plans for marriage anytime in the near future)

 

[CellyCell]

I'm so sad it passed.
I want to let folks know it wasn't all of Californians who voted yes (I don't like when folks use generalized terms) and I come from an immigrant Hispanic background and we all voted No. Even my very religious, Catholic grandma was for it but then thought "everyone should be happy" and voted no.

I dunno if has been responded to yet (I skimmed a lot of the pages) but the 17,000+ folks who married here are and will be considered legal marriages.

If we now have our first Black president, I'm sure gay marriage will follow in the future... change takes time

 

[silverbelle282]

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Stargazer* But did they? That's a large part of this problem. The people who want to ban gay marriage seem to assume, erroneously, that heterosexual marriage is some kind of right. But where is it granted? Not in the US Constitution or Declaration of Independence. Maybe you could make the argument that it's covered under the "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" bit, but then it pertains to all of us, gay or straight. Not only is marriage a civil institution in the US, but it's one granted by the states and the criteria vary state by state.

i know what they were thinking . . .

thatvideosite.com :: Family Guy: The right to bear arms

i could only find the video on this site, that i've never been to. but it's hilarious.