Why California’s Proposition 8 Would Make Jesus Weep (2 Viewers)

[jonessed]

Going to be close?

Not really. It's up by 12 points and has been trending that direction all night.

Still not being called, guess this is going to be close?

4% with 93% reporting. Closer than I thought, but not exactly a nail biter.

 

[timschochet]

I am trying to look at the bright side of things. Four years ago, a similar proposition passed 75-25%. This one will pass 52-48. We are moving in the right direction.

Still, though, I am very depressed this morning. Bigotry is the victor here. fear and dislike of homosexuality rules the day. Nobody will be able to convince me differently. All of the ads focused on the possibility that our children might be "exposed" to gay marriage. It is so revolting. I am really angry about this.

 

[adonis]

I am trying to look at the bright side of things. Four years ago, a similar proposition passed 75-25%. This one will pass 52-48. We are moving in the right direction.Still, though, I am very depressed this morning. Bigotry is the victor here. fear and dislike of homosexuality rules the day. Nobody will be able to convince me differently. All of the ads focused on the possibility that our children might be "exposed" to gay marriage. It is so revolting. I am really angry about this.

The solution is civil unions.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

There was no rebuttal because I didn't have time to really get into it and I didn't want to hijack this thread. All of those arguements have taken place multiple times on this board if you really want to get into it.

But to give you a short answer....Slavery in itself isn't a sin, unless prohibited by the law of the governing authorities (which it is here). And you should note I said "as far as what are sins" not in respect to what the punishment for sins should be (you'll probably note that there aren't a lot of stonings going on in churches). While concerns for the over-influence of a specific religion are well founded, Christianity isn't just a flippant belief system and there are some very intelligent, well reasoned individuals who have thought the whole thing through and come to the conclusion that it Christianity is indeed legit.

You don't have to hold your nose to debate Christianity and sarcasm shouldn't really be considered eloquent.

I have a hard time accepting any claim as "well reasoned" that would argue that keeping another human being as chattel "isn't necessarily a sin" yet loving who you choose love somehow is.

Fixed. If we want to be romantic about this, I don't think people make calculated decisions to fall in love.

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

I am trying to look at the bright side of things. Four years ago, a similar proposition passed 75-25%. This one will pass 52-48. We are moving in the right direction.Still, though, I am very depressed this morning. Bigotry is the victor here. fear and dislike of homosexuality rules the day. Nobody will be able to convince me differently. All of the ads focused on the possibility that our children might be "exposed" to gay marriage. It is so revolting. I am really angry about this.

The solution is civil unions.

The solution is to stop valuing words and imaginary traditions more that people.

 

[timschochet]

I am trying to look at the bright side of things. Four years ago, a similar proposition passed 75-25%. This one will pass 52-48. We are moving in the right direction.Still, though, I am very depressed this morning. Bigotry is the victor here. fear and dislike of homosexuality rules the day. Nobody will be able to convince me differently. All of the ads focused on the possibility that our children might be "exposed" to gay marriage. It is so revolting. I am really angry about this.

The solution is civil unions.

I don't agree. To me, that is just like "Separate but equal". The 14th Amendement to the United States Constitution protects the rights of all citizens. I don't believe we can deny consenting adults the right to marry. I say the solution is to challenge this proposition before the Supreme Court of the United States of America.

 

[NoFBinLA]

I am trying to look at the bright side of things. Four years ago, a similar proposition passed 75-25%. This one will pass 52-48. We are moving in the right direction.Still, though, I am very depressed this morning. Bigotry is the victor here. fear and dislike of homosexuality rules the day. Nobody will be able to convince me differently. All of the ads focused on the possibility that our children might be "exposed" to gay marriage. It is so revolting. I am really angry about this.

Same here - Federal courts here we come.

 

[Ray Stevens]

I am trying to look at the bright side of things. Four years ago, a similar proposition passed 75-25%. This one will pass 52-48. We are moving in the right direction.Still, though, I am very depressed this morning. Bigotry is the victor here. fear and dislike of homosexuality rules the day. Nobody will be able to convince me differently. All of the ads focused on the possibility that our children might be "exposed" to gay marriage. It is so revolting. I am really angry about this.

Anything preventing a new Proposition allowing gay marriage from being on the ballot next election?

 

[adonis]

I am trying to look at the bright side of things. Four years ago, a similar proposition passed 75-25%. This one will pass 52-48. We are moving in the right direction.Still, though, I am very depressed this morning. Bigotry is the victor here. fear and dislike of homosexuality rules the day. Nobody will be able to convince me differently. All of the ads focused on the possibility that our children might be "exposed" to gay marriage. It is so revolting. I am really angry about this.

The solution is civil unions.

I don't agree. To me, that is just like "Separate but equal". The 14th Amendement to the United States Constitution protects the rights of all citizens. I don't believe we can deny consenting adults the right to marry. I say the solution is to challenge this proposition before the Supreme Court of the United States of America.

Marriage is a covenant with God. It carries with it legal obligations. Gay people want not only the legal obligations that come with it, but also the blessing of God. Government cannot, and should not force that blessing of God on the union of gay people, or even straight people for that matter. The only thing government should bless are civil unions, not only for hetero's, but for homo's as well. Let the churches decide who they will marry, and who they won't, and let government wipe their hands of this issue.It's a rights issue, and equal rights should prevail. Government can fix this by saying that all civil unions will have the rights formerly given to "marriages", and leave to the churches who will or won't be married. States could not make a law governing what local churches can or can't do regarding who is married, so I see no reason that would stop gays from enjoying marriage now, just like straight people...it'd just be that they'd get it through rather liberal churches.

 

[timschochet]

Someone asked me the other day on one of these threads why I was so anti-populism. This is one of the reasons. IMO, the right of individual consenting adults to marry each other is not something the state should prohibit. The reason why we are a republic, and not a democracy, is that individual rights of this sort must be protected from the whims of the majority. This is a key reason I am libertarian, small "l". This sort of proposition, in which a thin majority is able to impose its will restricting individual rights is a threat to classical liberalism and the intent of the Founding Fathers as I understand it. That's why this proposition MUST be challenged before the SCOTUS.

 

[Ray Stevens]

Marriage is a covenant with God.

Mine isn't.

 

[Disco Stu]

I am trying to look at the bright side of things. Four years ago, a similar proposition passed 75-25%. This one will pass 52-48. We are moving in the right direction.Still, though, I am very depressed this morning. Bigotry is the victor here. fear and dislike of homosexuality rules the day. Nobody will be able to convince me differently. All of the ads focused on the possibility that our children might be "exposed" to gay marriage. It is so revolting. I am really angry about this.

The solution is civil unions.

The solution is to stop valuing words and imaginary traditions more that people.

Yes. How many current forms/laws/etc mention the word "marriage"? Do we really want to spend the time and money to add "civil union" to all of those? Just to keep gays from using "our" word?

 

[StrikeS2k]

I am trying to look at the bright side of things. Four years ago, a similar proposition passed 75-25%. This one will pass 52-48. We are moving in the right direction.Still, though, I am very depressed this morning. Bigotry is the victor here. fear and dislike of homosexuality rules the day. Nobody will be able to convince me differently. All of the ads focused on the possibility that our children might be "exposed" to gay marriage. It is so revolting. I am really angry about this.

/minirantTim, I just want to point out that you repeatedly say in your own defense that you never get personal or call people names. Yet, anyone who doesn't agree with you on certain issues is a bigot or a racist. Let me tell you something, Mr. high and mighty, you don't know what other people's motivations are for their stances on certain issues. Unless you have PROOF that an individual is truly a bigot you shouldn't be making those types of comments and you certainly shoudln't generalize that to ANYONE who disagrees with your stance on an issue. It's one of the reasons I don't respond to your posts. You really need to reevaluate yourself and quit judging others. /end minirant

 

[Disco Stu]

I am trying to look at the bright side of things. Four years ago, a similar proposition passed 75-25%. This one will pass 52-48. We are moving in the right direction.Still, though, I am very depressed this morning. Bigotry is the victor here. fear and dislike of homosexuality rules the day. Nobody will be able to convince me differently. All of the ads focused on the possibility that our children might be "exposed" to gay marriage. It is so revolting. I am really angry about this.

The solution is civil unions.

I don't agree. To me, that is just like "Separate but equal". The 14th Amendement to the United States Constitution protects the rights of all citizens. I don't believe we can deny consenting adults the right to marry. I say the solution is to challenge this proposition before the Supreme Court of the United States of America.

Marriage is a covenant with God. It carries with it legal obligations. Gay people want not only the legal obligations that come with it, but also the blessing of God. Government cannot, and should not force that blessing of God on the union of gay people, or even straight people for that matter. The only thing government should bless are civil unions, not only for hetero's, but for homo's as well. Let the churches decide who they will marry, and who they won't, and let government wipe their hands of this issue.It's a rights issue, and equal rights should prevail. Government can fix this by saying that all civil unions will have the rights formerly given to "marriages", and leave to the churches who will or won't be married. States could not make a law governing what local churches can or can't do regarding who is married, so I see no reason that would stop gays from enjoying marriage now, just like straight people...it'd just be that they'd get it through rather liberal churches.

The Christian church didn't invent marriage. If they want a term that's exclusively theirs, let them create a new one. "Church union" or something.

 

[timschochet]

I am trying to look at the bright side of things. Four years ago, a similar proposition passed 75-25%. This one will pass 52-48. We are moving in the right direction.Still, though, I am very depressed this morning. Bigotry is the victor here. fear and dislike of homosexuality rules the day. Nobody will be able to convince me differently. All of the ads focused on the possibility that our children might be "exposed" to gay marriage. It is so revolting. I am really angry about this.

The solution is civil unions.

I don't agree. To me, that is just like "Separate but equal". The 14th Amendement to the United States Constitution protects the rights of all citizens. I don't believe we can deny consenting adults the right to marry. I say the solution is to challenge this proposition before the Supreme Court of the United States of America.

Marriage is a covenant with God. It carries with it legal obligations. Gay people want not only the legal obligations that come with it, but also the blessing of God. Government cannot, and should not force that blessing of God on the union of gay people, or even straight people for that matter. The only thing government should bless are civil unions, not only for hetero's, but for homo's as well. Let the churches decide who they will marry, and who they won't, and let government wipe their hands of this issue.It's a rights issue, and equal rights should prevail. Government can fix this by saying that all civil unions will have the rights formerly given to "marriages", and leave to the churches who will or won't be married. States could not make a law governing what local churches can or can't do regarding who is married, so I see no reason that would stop gays from enjoying marriage now, just like straight people...it'd just be that they'd get it through rather liberal churches.

I'm not sure about your first statement...marriage as a definition need not be related to God or religion.But putting that argument aside, your idea will never work, because the state has always recognized marriage and always will. Therefore, if gays are not allowed to marry, they are not receiving equal treatment under the law. Gays are not looking for God's approval, but for the state's approval. This should not be denied them.

 

[NoFBinLA]

I am trying to look at the bright side of things. Four years ago, a similar proposition passed 75-25%. This one will pass 52-48. We are moving in the right direction.Still, though, I am very depressed this morning. Bigotry is the victor here. fear and dislike of homosexuality rules the day. Nobody will be able to convince me differently. All of the ads focused on the possibility that our children might be "exposed" to gay marriage. It is so revolting. I am really angry about this.

The solution is civil unions.

I don't agree. To me, that is just like "Separate but equal". The 14th Amendement to the United States Constitution protects the rights of all citizens. I don't believe we can deny consenting adults the right to marry. I say the solution is to challenge this proposition before the Supreme Court of the United States of America.

We are fighting over a word - marriage. Many of the same folks who vote for things like prop 8 also say they don't mind gay civil unions. What is the difference? The word marriage - that word has been saddled with very religious connotations. Understandably so - how long have civil unions been around? (I honestly don't know that answer right now) People used to get married and it was in a church or synagogue - some place of worship. For hundreds of years. Many still do. Of course for many it has very religious connotations.What gets lost in that is the fact that marriage has expanded - not everyone who is married was married in a religious ceremony. Many not in places of worship. But they are married and recognized as such. If people are protecting the word marriage for religious reasons, they are a little late and I see no protests as to whether a man and a woman who have a civil union are married. They are. It's only when you throw gay people in the mix it gets iffy. Are we going to start saying people married by the justice of the peace aren't married? That those married in another faith are not married?Who sets the criteria next week?The problem with the agenda is being set by one religion in a state - and country - where there are many religions.Anyway, I am sure many will disagree with me and that's fine - let's just keep it respectful, huh?

 

[FatMax]

I am trying to look at the bright side of things. Four years ago, a similar proposition passed 75-25%. This one will pass 52-48. We are moving in the right direction.Still, though, I am very depressed this morning. Bigotry is the victor here. fear and dislike of homosexuality rules the day. Nobody will be able to convince me differently. All of the ads focused on the possibility that our children might be "exposed" to gay marriage. It is so revolting. I am really angry about this.

Anything preventing a new Proposition allowing gay marriage from being on the ballot next election?

None. I'm sure it will happen. Not sure about next election, but sometime within the next 3-5 years I would expect to see it.

 

[beavers]

I am trying to look at the bright side of things. Four years ago, a similar proposition passed 75-25%. This one will pass 52-48. We are moving in the right direction.

Still, though, I am very depressed this morning. Bigotry is the victor here. fear and dislike of homosexuality rules the day. Nobody will be able to convince me differently. All of the ads focused on the possibility that our children might be "exposed" to gay marriage. It is so revolting. I am really angry about this.

Same here - Federal courts here we come.

This is going to be interesting -- the federal courts. There's nothing in the Constitution that states gay marriage is illegal. Only the DOMA (Defense of Marriage Act) states that marriage is between a man and woman. Obviously, this violates the 14th Amendment. And it will be interesting to see how the Bush appointed Supreme Court rule on this. The chances of a federal amendment passing are pretty much non-existent and even less so in an Obama administration.This is a very sad day for America. Californians denied Americans equal rights based on their "personal, religious belief" that has no right in government.

What I find ironic is that all of the abortion banning initiatives (FAILED), right to die (suicide) (PASSED), and decriminilization of marijuana / medical marijuana (PASSED). But the gay issues --- resulted in bans in FL, AZ, and the removal of rights in CA. Oh, and Arkansas banned gay adoption and gay foster. The evangelicals and mormons chose to put their efforts and money into denying rights to gays and lesbians instead focusing their efforts in saving lives of unborn children and terminally ill patients. WTF.

FYI: Fox News just reported that the results are within 2% points. And I agree with the previous poster that there should be a 2/3 majority to pass a state amendment.

 

[adonis]

Marriage is a covenant with God.

Mine isn't.

I'd say that the majority, vast majority, of Americans recognize that definition of marriage, which is a big part of the hangup.

 

[NoFBinLA]

Marriage is a covenant with God. It carries with it legal obligations. Gay people want not only the legal obligations that come with it, but also the blessing of God.

I know a ton if gay people. None of them are concerned with that. If you voted because of that, you have made a huge assumption that is pretty off base. Much as you guys keep trying to make it a religious issue, the homosexual community is interested in civil rights. It's why you and they will never understand each other. They don't get why you keep seeing things that are not religious (to them) in religious terms while you cannot see how they don't.

 

[Ray Stevens]

Marriage is a covenant with God.

Mine isn't.

I'd say that the majority, vast majority, of Americans recognize that definition of marriage, which is a big part of the hangup.

You think the vast majority of Americans don't think I'm married? I've never had anyone say that to me.

 

[adonis]

I am trying to look at the bright side of things. Four years ago, a similar proposition passed 75-25%. This one will pass 52-48. We are moving in the right direction.Still, though, I am very depressed this morning. Bigotry is the victor here. fear and dislike of homosexuality rules the day. Nobody will be able to convince me differently. All of the ads focused on the possibility that our children might be "exposed" to gay marriage. It is so revolting. I am really angry about this.

The solution is civil unions.

I don't agree. To me, that is just like "Separate but equal". The 14th Amendement to the United States Constitution protects the rights of all citizens. I don't believe we can deny consenting adults the right to marry. I say the solution is to challenge this proposition before the Supreme Court of the United States of America.

Marriage is a covenant with God. It carries with it legal obligations. Gay people want not only the legal obligations that come with it, but also the blessing of God. Government cannot, and should not force that blessing of God on the union of gay people, or even straight people for that matter. The only thing government should bless are civil unions, not only for hetero's, but for homo's as well. Let the churches decide who they will marry, and who they won't, and let government wipe their hands of this issue.It's a rights issue, and equal rights should prevail. Government can fix this by saying that all civil unions will have the rights formerly given to "marriages", and leave to the churches who will or won't be married. States could not make a law governing what local churches can or can't do regarding who is married, so I see no reason that would stop gays from enjoying marriage now, just like straight people...it'd just be that they'd get it through rather liberal churches.

The Christian church didn't invent marriage. If they want a term that's exclusively theirs, let them create a new one. "Church union" or something.

We're working in a democracy here, where the majority, the vast majority of people claim christian affiliation. If we want to effect change, we can either hit the majority over the head with a court ruling from the supreme court, which is certainly one way to do it, or we can attempt to sidestep the political field-mine laden area of "marriage".Some see it as cowardly, others might see it as pragmatic. Whatever the result, I want gays and straight people to be able to commit to each other for life, and have that recognized by the state. If the easiest and quickest way to do that, in a permanent way, is civil unions...so be it. I think the court is an effective way of doing it too, but I think that the backlash would be greater.

 

[Disco Stu]

The evangelicals and mormons chose to put their efforts and money into denying rights to gays and lesbians instead focusing their efforts in saving lives of unborn children and terminally ill patients.

Does "terminally ill" not mean what I think it means?

 

[timschochet]

I am trying to look at the bright side of things. Four years ago, a similar proposition passed 75-25%. This one will pass 52-48. We are moving in the right direction.

Still, though, I am very depressed this morning. Bigotry is the victor here. fear and dislike of homosexuality rules the day. Nobody will be able to convince me differently. All of the ads focused on the possibility that our children might be "exposed" to gay marriage. It is so revolting. I am really angry about this.

/minirantTim,

I just want to point out that you repeatedly say in your own defense that you never get personal or call people names. Yet, anyone who doesn't agree with you on certain issues is a bigot or a racist. Let me tell you something, Mr. high and mighty, you don't know what other people's motivations are for their stances on certain issues. Unless you have PROOF that an individual is truly a bigot you shouldn't be making those types of comments and you certainly shoudln't generalize that to ANYONE who disagrees with your stance on an issue. It's one of the reasons I don't respond to your posts. You really need to reevaluate yourself and quit judging others.

/end minirant

No, you misundertand me. Perhaps deliberately, I don't know. I have said several times that many people opposed to gay marriage have reasons and intentions that have nothing to do with bigotry, and I would never accuse an individual of bigotry if I did not know their reasons. That being said, I believe that the victory of Proposition 8 is a victory for bigotry and intolerance. There is a difference between the two concepts. You yourself may not be a bigot, but you are contributing to the maintenance of bigotry. I have never once said or implied that anyone who disagrees with me is a bigot or a racist, and I challenge you to contradict this.

 

[FatMax]

Marriage is a covenant with God.

Mine isn't.

I'd say that the majority, vast majority, of Americans recognize that definition of marriage, which is a big part of the hangup.

So let me get this straight. You think if you asked Americans what the definition of marriage is, the vast majority would say "a covenant with God". Is that correct?

 

[adonis]

Marriage is a covenant with God.

Mine isn't.

I'd say that the majority, vast majority, of Americans recognize that definition of marriage, which is a big part of the hangup.

You think the vast majority of Americans don't think I'm married? I've never had anyone say that to me.

That's not what I said. I said the vast majority of americans believe, without much thinking, that marriage is an agreement between man/woman and God. I bet, if you're straight, they pay less than no attention to you or your marriage...they just assume you're like they are.

 

[beavers]

The evangelicals and mormons chose to put their efforts and money into denying rights to gays and lesbians instead focusing their efforts in saving lives of unborn children and terminally ill patients.

Does "terminally ill" not mean what I think it means?

Suicide, in god's eyes, is wrong. It doesn't matter why you do it, it's wrong. See Terry Schiavo.

 

[adonis]

Marriage is a covenant with God.

Mine isn't.

I'd say that the majority, vast majority, of Americans recognize that definition of marriage, which is a big part of the hangup.

So let me get this straight. You think if you asked Americans what the definition of marriage is, the vast majority would say "a covenant with God". Is that correct?

I think that God would certainly play a part of their definition, as would going to a church, and having a preacher do the ceremony.

 

[GroveDiesel]

I am trying to look at the bright side of things. Four years ago, a similar proposition passed 75-25%. This one will pass 52-48. We are moving in the right direction.

Still, though, I am very depressed this morning. Bigotry is the victor here. fear and dislike of homosexuality rules the day. Nobody will be able to convince me differently. All of the ads focused on the possibility that our children might be "exposed" to gay marriage. It is so revolting. I am really angry about this.

/minirantTim,

I just want to point out that you repeatedly say in your own defense that you never get personal or call people names. Yet, anyone who doesn't agree with you on certain issues is a bigot or a racist. Let me tell you something, Mr. high and mighty, you don't know what other people's motivations are for their stances on certain issues. Unless you have PROOF that an individual is truly a bigot you shouldn't be making those types of comments and you certainly shoudln't generalize that to ANYONE who disagrees with your stance on an issue. It's one of the reasons I don't respond to your posts. You really need to reevaluate yourself and quit judging others.

/end minirant

No, you misundertand me. Perhaps deliberately, I don't know. I have said several times that many people opposed to gay marriage have reasons and intentions that have nothing to do with bigotry, and I would never accuse an individual of bigotry if I did not know their reasons. That being said, I believe that the victory of Proposition 8 is a victory for bigotry and intolerance. There is a difference between the two concepts. You yourself may not be a bigot, but you are contributing to the maintenance of bigotry. I have never once said or implied that anyone who disagrees with me is a bigot or a racist, and I challenge you to contradict this.

So what you're saying is that blacks and Latinos are bigotted?

According to exit polls, whites opposed the amendment 53-47. But blacks supported it 70-30, and Latinos supported it 51-49. The polls have blacks at 10 percent of the electorate for this issue, with Latinos at 19 percent and whites at 63 percent. (Asians, at six percent, opposed the proposition 53-47.)

 

[Disco Stu]

The evangelicals and mormons chose to put their efforts and money into denying rights to gays and lesbians instead focusing their efforts in saving lives of unborn children and terminally ill patients.

Does "terminally ill" not mean what I think it means?

Suicide, in god's eyes, is wrong. It doesn't matter why you do it, it's wrong. See Terry Schiavo.

That's fine. But would they really be "saving lives"? Temporarily I suppose...

 

[timschochet]

I am trying to look at the bright side of things. Four years ago, a similar proposition passed 75-25%. This one will pass 52-48. We are moving in the right direction.

Still, though, I am very depressed this morning. Bigotry is the victor here. fear and dislike of homosexuality rules the day. Nobody will be able to convince me differently. All of the ads focused on the possibility that our children might be "exposed" to gay marriage. It is so revolting. I am really angry about this.

/minirantTim,

I just want to point out that you repeatedly say in your own defense that you never get personal or call people names. Yet, anyone who doesn't agree with you on certain issues is a bigot or a racist. Let me tell you something, Mr. high and mighty, you don't know what other people's motivations are for their stances on certain issues. Unless you have PROOF that an individual is truly a bigot you shouldn't be making those types of comments and you certainly shoudln't generalize that to ANYONE who disagrees with your stance on an issue. It's one of the reasons I don't respond to your posts. You really need to reevaluate yourself and quit judging others.

/end minirant

No, you misundertand me. Perhaps deliberately, I don't know. I have said several times that many people opposed to gay marriage have reasons and intentions that have nothing to do with bigotry, and I would never accuse an individual of bigotry if I did not know their reasons. That being said, I believe that the victory of Proposition 8 is a victory for bigotry and intolerance. There is a difference between the two concepts. You yourself may not be a bigot, but you are contributing to the maintenance of bigotry. I have never once said or implied that anyone who disagrees with me is a bigot or a racist, and I challenge you to contradict this.

So what you're saying is that blacks and Latinos are bigotted?

According to exit polls, whites opposed the amendment 53-47. But blacks supported it 70-30, and Latinos supported it 51-49. The polls have blacks at 10 percent of the electorate for this issue, with Latinos at 19 percent and whites at 63 percent. (Asians, at six percent, opposed the proposition 53-47.)

Some of the Blacks and Latinos who voted yes on Prop 8 are bigoted towards gays, yes. Some are not. I cannot judge this without listening to their individual reasons for doing so. However, EVERYONE that voted for 8 is contributing to an atmosphere of bigotry and intolerance, and that is my point.

 

[adonis]

Marriage is a covenant with God. It carries with it legal obligations. Gay people want not only the legal obligations that come with it, but also the blessing of God.

I know a ton if gay people. None of them are concerned with that. If you voted because of that, you have made a huge assumption that is pretty off base. Much as you guys keep trying to make it a religious issue, the homosexual community is interested in civil rights. It's why you and they will never understand each other. They don't get why you keep seeing things that are not religious (to them) in religious terms while you cannot see how they don't.

Gay people want to be married, because that's what they've always dreamed of and everyone else does it. I have no problem with gay people, I have gay friends, I support gay unions and even gay marriage. But I also recognize the challenges surrounding it, and I'm saying that the best way, in my own opinion, to produce the most rapid and effective change here, is to make all unions recognized by the government "civil unions", and relegate the concept of "marriage" to church services.Marriage carries with it a strong religious attachment in the minds of many many americans, and resistance comes from this group. The resistance would still be there, likely, even with civil unions, but I don't think it'd be as strong. They've fortified the idea of the word of "marriage", put all their eggs into the basket of saying "we want to define marriage as being between a man and a woman" or something like that, but if we strip out the word marriage, and make it a civil rights issue, I think the battle becomes much more manageable.

 

[Ray Stevens]

Marriage is a covenant with God.

Mine isn't.

I'd say that the majority, vast majority, of Americans recognize that definition of marriage, which is a big part of the hangup.

You think the vast majority of Americans don't think I'm married? I've never had anyone say that to me.

That's not what I said. I said the vast majority of americans believe, without much thinking, that marriage is an agreement between man/woman and God. I bet, if you're straight, they pay less than no attention to you or your marriage...they just assume you're like they are.

What if I tell them that I'm an athiest? Then will they say I'm not married?

 

[Disco Stu]

So what you're saying is that blacks and Latinos are bigotted?

According to exit polls, whites opposed the amendment 53-47. But blacks supported it 70-30, and Latinos supported it 51-49. The polls have blacks at 10 percent of the electorate for this issue, with Latinos at 19 percent and whites at 63 percent. (Asians, at six percent, opposed the proposition 53-47.)

Why couldn't they be? Or are you confusing "bigot" with "racist"?

 

[beavers]

The evangelicals and mormons chose to put their efforts and money into denying rights to gays and lesbians instead focusing their efforts in saving lives of unborn children and terminally ill patients.

Does "terminally ill" not mean what I think it means?

Suicide, in god's eyes, is wrong. It doesn't matter why you do it, it's wrong. See Terry Schiavo.

That's fine. But would they really be "saving lives"? Temporarily I suppose...

Suicide is wrong in the Bible. If Christians truly believe in miracles, then people like Terry Schaivo should've never been 'murdered.' She had a chance to survive. And who's to say who's terminally ill and who isn't? Only God determines the final outcome. It's God's will. So why mess with God's will when that 'terminally ill' patient has a remote chance of surviving through a miracle???? INCONSISTENCY is my point.

 

[GroveDiesel]

Marriage is a covenant with God.

Mine isn't.

I'd say that the majority, vast majority, of Americans recognize that definition of marriage, which is a big part of the hangup.

So let me get this straight. You think if you asked Americans what the definition of marriage is, the vast majority would say "a covenant with God". Is that correct?

I think that God would certainly play a part of their definition, as would going to a church, and having a preacher do the ceremony.

I'm about as conservative as you can get. Well, I'm pretty conservative anyway. And I would agree with this definition. I also think that ALL states should simply change the word "Marriage" to "Civil Union." Churches can then continue to "marry" couples while states provide the ability for anyone to enter into a civil union. A civil union is really just a grouping of several contracts and legal standings. I don't believe for a second that the state has anything to do with my marriage, even though they're the one that issued me my "marriage license."

 

[StrikeS2k]

I am trying to look at the bright side of things. Four years ago, a similar proposition passed 75-25%. This one will pass 52-48. We are moving in the right direction.

Still, though, I am very depressed this morning. Bigotry is the victor here. fear and dislike of homosexuality rules the day. Nobody will be able to convince me differently. All of the ads focused on the possibility that our children might be "exposed" to gay marriage. It is so revolting. I am really angry about this.

/minirantTim,

I just want to point out that you repeatedly say in your own defense that you never get personal or call people names. Yet, anyone who doesn't agree with you on certain issues is a bigot or a racist. Let me tell you something, Mr. high and mighty, you don't know what other people's motivations are for their stances on certain issues. Unless you have PROOF that an individual is truly a bigot you shouldn't be making those types of comments and you certainly shoudln't generalize that to ANYONE who disagrees with your stance on an issue. It's one of the reasons I don't respond to your posts. You really need to reevaluate yourself and quit judging others.

/end minirant

No, you misundertand me. Perhaps deliberately, I don't know. I have said several times that many people opposed to gay marriage have reasons and intentions that have nothing to do with bigotry, and I would never accuse an individual of bigotry if I did not know their reasons. That being said, I believe that the victory of Proposition 8 is a victory for bigotry and intolerance. There is a difference between the two concepts. You yourself may not be a bigot, but you are contributing to the maintenance of bigotry. I have never once said or implied that anyone who disagrees with me is a bigot or a racist, and I challenge you to contradict this.

You misunderstand me, Tim. Maybe deliberately, I don't know. My post wasn't a rant about gay marriage. It was about this as one topic of several. In those topics you choose to generalize that your opposition is bigoted or racist. You shouldn't do that. You're being intentionally misleading when you say that "many people" this or that. You don't know WHY people make the decisions they do. And when you say many you have to mean the majority who don't agree with you because if it were many in simply numbers it probably wouldn't be enough to pass something like this. You should concern yourself with the issues and not be so worried about why other people have the opinions they do. You gain nothing by labeling those you're having the discussion with as bigots or racists. Do you want to discuss the issue with them or start a name calling contest? Please don't respond to this post. I don't expect you to "get" why this is a problem. You have to live with your own personal shortcomings and obviously you don't believe this is one of them. Nothing I say is going to change that. So be it.

 

[adonis]

Marriage is a covenant with God.

Mine isn't.

I'd say that the majority, vast majority, of Americans recognize that definition of marriage, which is a big part of the hangup.

You think the vast majority of Americans don't think I'm married? I've never had anyone say that to me.

That's not what I said. I said the vast majority of americans believe, without much thinking, that marriage is an agreement between man/woman and God. I bet, if you're straight, they pay less than no attention to you or your marriage...they just assume you're like they are.

What if I tell them that I'm an athiest? Then will they say I'm not married?

Again, they won't care about you. Are you straight? If so, they don't care about you as long as you have a ring on your finger, and are kissing a female. As long as that is true, they'll assume you had a wedding in a church, headed by a pastor/preacher, where passages from the bible were read.If it's not true, they're just wrong...it doesn't matter to them because that doesn't challenge their values.

 

[GroveDiesel]

Marriage is a covenant with God. It carries with it legal obligations. Gay people want not only the legal obligations that come with it, but also the blessing of God.

I know a ton if gay people. None of them are concerned with that. If you voted because of that, you have made a huge assumption that is pretty off base. Much as you guys keep trying to make it a religious issue, the homosexual community is interested in civil rights. It's why you and they will never understand each other. They don't get why you keep seeing things that are not religious (to them) in religious terms while you cannot see how they don't.

Gay people want to be married, because that's what they've always dreamed of and everyone else does it. I have no problem with gay people, I have gay friends, I support gay unions and even gay marriage. But I also recognize the challenges surrounding it, and I'm saying that the best way, in my own opinion, to produce the most rapid and effective change here, is to make all unions recognized by the government "civil unions", and relegate the concept of "marriage" to church services.Marriage carries with it a strong religious attachment in the minds of many many americans, and resistance comes from this group. The resistance would still be there, likely, even with civil unions, but I don't think it'd be as strong. They've fortified the idea of the word of "marriage", put all their eggs into the basket of saying "we want to define marriage as being between a man and a woman" or something like that, but if we strip out the word marriage, and make it a civil rights issue, I think the battle becomes much more manageable.

You beat me to it.

 

[timschochet]

Marriage is a covenant with God.

Mine isn't.

I'd say that the majority, vast majority, of Americans recognize that definition of marriage, which is a big part of the hangup.

You think the vast majority of Americans don't think I'm married? I've never had anyone say that to me.

That's not what I said. I said the vast majority of americans believe, without much thinking, that marriage is an agreement between man/woman and God. I bet, if you're straight, they pay less than no attention to you or your marriage...they just assume you're like they are.

What if I tell them that I'm an athiest? Then will they say I'm not married?

They don't care about you. See, this is where Adonis has got it wrong, I believe. The religious right can talk all they want about marriage being a convenant with God, but if that were the case, they would be just as violently against divorce as they are against this issue. The real issue here is homosexuality.

 

[FatMax]

Marriage is a covenant with God.

Mine isn't.

I'd say that the majority, vast majority, of Americans recognize that definition of marriage, which is a big part of the hangup.

You think the vast majority of Americans don't think I'm married? I've never had anyone say that to me.

That's not what I said. I said the vast majority of americans believe, without much thinking, that marriage is an agreement between man/woman and God. I bet, if you're straight, they pay less than no attention to you or your marriage...they just assume you're like they are.

What if I tell them that I'm an athiest? Then will they say I'm not married?

They don't care about you. See, this is where Adonis has got it wrong, I believe. The religious right can talk all they want about marriage being a convenant with God, but if that were the case, they would be just as violently against divorce as they are against this issue. The real issue here is homosexuality.

Water is wet too. At least I heard that once.

 

[B-Deep]

Proposition 9 next year should ban Hindu, Islamic, and Buddhist marriages.

heathens cannot enter into a covenant with god.

 

[timschochet]

I am trying to look at the bright side of things. Four years ago, a similar proposition passed 75-25%. This one will pass 52-48. We are moving in the right direction.

Still, though, I am very depressed this morning. Bigotry is the victor here. fear and dislike of homosexuality rules the day. Nobody will be able to convince me differently. All of the ads focused on the possibility that our children might be "exposed" to gay marriage. It is so revolting. I am really angry about this.

/minirantTim,

I just want to point out that you repeatedly say in your own defense that you never get personal or call people names. Yet, anyone who doesn't agree with you on certain issues is a bigot or a racist. Let me tell you something, Mr. high and mighty, you don't know what other people's motivations are for their stances on certain issues. Unless you have PROOF that an individual is truly a bigot you shouldn't be making those types of comments and you certainly shoudln't generalize that to ANYONE who disagrees with your stance on an issue. It's one of the reasons I don't respond to your posts. You really need to reevaluate yourself and quit judging others.

/end minirant

No, you misundertand me. Perhaps deliberately, I don't know. I have said several times that many people opposed to gay marriage have reasons and intentions that have nothing to do with bigotry, and I would never accuse an individual of bigotry if I did not know their reasons. That being said, I believe that the victory of Proposition 8 is a victory for bigotry and intolerance. There is a difference between the two concepts. You yourself may not be a bigot, but you are contributing to the maintenance of bigotry. I have never once said or implied that anyone who disagrees with me is a bigot or a racist, and I challenge you to contradict this.

You misunderstand me, Tim. Maybe deliberately, I don't know. My post wasn't a rant about gay marriage. It was about this as one topic of several. In those topics you choose to generalize that your opposition is bigoted or racist. You shouldn't do that. You're being intentionally misleading when you say that "many people" this or that. You don't know WHY people make the decisions they do. And when you say many you have to mean the majority who don't agree with you because if it were many in simply numbers it probably wouldn't be enough to pass something like this. You should concern yourself with the issues and not be so worried about why other people have the opinions they do. You gain nothing by labeling those you're having the discussion with as bigots or racists. Do you want to discuss the issue with them or start a name calling contest? Please don't respond to this post. I don't expect you to "get" why this is a problem. You have to live with your own personal shortcomings and obviously you don't believe this is one of them. Nothing I say is going to change that. So be it.

I challenged you to name an instance in which I generalized that my opposition was bigoted or racist. I did not do that in this instance, nor any other that I can think of. Were I guilty of doing so, I would certainly see why this a problem. Rather than come up with a single example, you merely repeated your accusation against me. So again, please provide evidence that I have done this.

 

[adonis]

Marriage is a covenant with God.

Mine isn't.

I'd say that the majority, vast majority, of Americans recognize that definition of marriage, which is a big part of the hangup.

You think the vast majority of Americans don't think I'm married? I've never had anyone say that to me.

That's not what I said. I said the vast majority of americans believe, without much thinking, that marriage is an agreement between man/woman and God. I bet, if you're straight, they pay less than no attention to you or your marriage...they just assume you're like they are.

What if I tell them that I'm an athiest? Then will they say I'm not married?

They don't care about you. See, this is where Adonis has got it wrong, I believe. The religious right can talk all they want about marriage being a convenant with God, but if that were the case, they would be just as violently against divorce as they are against this issue. The real issue here is homosexuality.

The religious right is against divorce, but in their eyes, some sins are worse than others. Divorce is not "disgusting" to them, or "an abomination before the lord" to them. They have a particular place in their hearts reserved for denying gay people recognition in the form of marriage. It's there. It's something that was stirred up in them based in large part on personal disgust surrounding gay sex, and what gay people do behind closed doors, and the effeminate nature of gay men....it just makes them feel icky, and they get all up in arms about it. That's most of the strong opponents, many others just don't like the idea and will oppose it.They're also supposed to be against lying, drunkeness, etc but you don't see them legislating honesty or no alcohol (anymore). They pick and choose what they want to fight...and gay rights is right up there.Circumvent the major defense they have. Don't engage on the battlefield of marriage, and a compromise can be reached sooner than later, and without all the backlash that an "activist court" would bring if the supreme court made it the law of the land.

 

[Reg Lllama of Brixton]

This thing passed with 75% of the vote in my county. Good work, dummies.

 

[GroveDiesel]

So what you're saying is that blacks and Latinos are bigotted?

According to exit polls, whites opposed the amendment 53-47. But blacks supported it 70-30, and Latinos supported it 51-49. The polls have blacks at 10 percent of the electorate for this issue, with Latinos at 19 percent and whites at 63 percent. (Asians, at six percent, opposed the proposition 53-47.)

Why couldn't they be? Or are you confusing "bigot" with "racist"?

They could be, but I think it flies in the face of a lot of the assumptions that are probably being made by most people.

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

Marriage is a covenant with God.

Mine isn't.

I'd say that the majority, vast majority, of Americans recognize that definition of marriage, which is a big part of the hangup.

So let me get this straight. You think if you asked Americans what the definition of marriage is, the vast majority would say "a covenant with God". Is that correct?

I think that God would certainly play a part of their definition, as would going to a church, and having a preacher do the ceremony.

You do realize that this cannot be the legal definition of marriage?

 

[StrikeS2k]

I am trying to look at the bright side of things. Four years ago, a similar proposition passed 75-25%. This one will pass 52-48. We are moving in the right direction.

Still, though, I am very depressed this morning. Bigotry is the victor here. fear and dislike of homosexuality rules the day. Nobody will be able to convince me differently. All of the ads focused on the possibility that our children might be "exposed" to gay marriage. It is so revolting. I am really angry about this.

/minirantTim,

I just want to point out that you repeatedly say in your own defense that you never get personal or call people names. Yet, anyone who doesn't agree with you on certain issues is a bigot or a racist. Let me tell you something, Mr. high and mighty, you don't know what other people's motivations are for their stances on certain issues. Unless you have PROOF that an individual is truly a bigot you shouldn't be making those types of comments and you certainly shoudln't generalize that to ANYONE who disagrees with your stance on an issue. It's one of the reasons I don't respond to your posts. You really need to reevaluate yourself and quit judging others.

/end minirant

No, you misundertand me. Perhaps deliberately, I don't know. I have said several times that many people opposed to gay marriage have reasons and intentions that have nothing to do with bigotry, and I would never accuse an individual of bigotry if I did not know their reasons. That being said, I believe that the victory of Proposition 8 is a victory for bigotry and intolerance. There is a difference between the two concepts. You yourself may not be a bigot, but you are contributing to the maintenance of bigotry. I have never once said or implied that anyone who disagrees with me is a bigot or a racist, and I challenge you to contradict this.

You misunderstand me, Tim. Maybe deliberately, I don't know. My post wasn't a rant about gay marriage. It was about this as one topic of several. In those topics you choose to generalize that your opposition is bigoted or racist. You shouldn't do that. You're being intentionally misleading when you say that "many people" this or that. You don't know WHY people make the decisions they do. And when you say many you have to mean the majority who don't agree with you because if it were many in simply numbers it probably wouldn't be enough to pass something like this. You should concern yourself with the issues and not be so worried about why other people have the opinions they do. You gain nothing by labeling those you're having the discussion with as bigots or racists. Do you want to discuss the issue with them or start a name calling contest? Please don't respond to this post. I don't expect you to "get" why this is a problem. You have to live with your own personal shortcomings and obviously you don't believe this is one of them. Nothing I say is going to change that. So be it.

I challenged you to name an instance in which I generalized that my opposition was bigoted or racist. I did not do that in this instance, nor any other that I can think of. Were I guilty of doing so, I would certainly see why this a problem. Rather than come up with a single example, you merely repeated your accusation against me. So again, please provide evidence that I have done this.

Uh, yes you did do it in this instance here. What did you mean when you said bigotry was the winner here? Do you have some evidence that those who voted for this were bigoted? Yes or no?

 

[dgreen]

Marriage is a covenant with God.

Mine isn't.

I'd say that the majority, vast majority, of Americans recognize that definition of marriage, which is a big part of the hangup.

So let me get this straight. You think if you asked Americans what the definition of marriage is, the vast majority would say "a covenant with God". Is that correct?

I think that God would certainly play a part of their definition, as would going to a church, and having a preacher do the ceremony.

You do realize that this cannot be the legal definition of marriage?

You do realize he's saying there should be no legal definition of marriage?

 

[GroveDiesel]

Marriage is a covenant with God.

Mine isn't.

I'd say that the majority, vast majority, of Americans recognize that definition of marriage, which is a big part of the hangup.

You think the vast majority of Americans don't think I'm married? I've never had anyone say that to me.

That's not what I said. I said the vast majority of americans believe, without much thinking, that marriage is an agreement between man/woman and God. I bet, if you're straight, they pay less than no attention to you or your marriage...they just assume you're like they are.

What if I tell them that I'm an athiest? Then will they say I'm not married?

They don't care about you. See, this is where Adonis has got it wrong, I believe. The religious right can talk all they want about marriage being a convenant with God, but if that were the case, they would be just as violently against divorce as they are against this issue. The real issue here is homosexuality.

The religious right is against divorce, but in their eyes, some sins are worse than others. Divorce is not "disgusting" to them, or "an abomination before the lord" to them. They have a particular place in their hearts reserved for denying gay people recognition in the form of marriage. It's there. It's something that was stirred up in them based in large part on personal disgust surrounding gay sex, and what gay people do behind closed doors, and the effeminate nature of gay men....it just makes them feel icky, and they get all up in arms about it. That's most of the strong opponents, many others just don't like the idea and will oppose it.They're also supposed to be against lying, drunkeness, etc but you don't see them legislating honesty or no alcohol (anymore). They pick and choose what they want to fight...and gay rights is right up there.Circumvent the major defense they have. Don't engage on the battlefield of marriage, and a compromise can be reached sooner than later, and without all the backlash that an "activist court" would bring if the supreme court made it the law of the land.

I think that the battle against gay marriage is more about fighting a battle that isn't already lost. The battle against legislating honesty and sobriety was lost long ago. The battle against divorce was lost long ago. The battle against gay marriage is still up for grabs.