The Protesting Of Proposition 8

Fluffy
wrote on November 8 2008 @ 03:27 pm: [report]

If a couple gets married so that one or the other can have citizenship in a certain country, is that better than a gay couple marrying for love?

I would rather see a gay couple in love and happy than seeing a couple together that didn’t marry for love.  In order for a couple of different citizenships to have a “rightful” marriage they have to defend their marriage after a certain period of time - they have to have joint assets and prove that they have been living together for the length of their marriage.

I myself and “straight” but I believe in gay rights.  Why should a gay person’s rights be any different from my own.  We are all humans and we can all feel love, hate, frustration and joy.  Why is it dictated to us who we can marry, even if the two people have the same “parts”.  As long as there is love there, WHO CARES??

Alex V
wrote on November 8 2008 @ 03:49 pm: [report]

I guess the bigger question is why is it anybody’s business who wants to marry who? If two women want to marry it really isn’t my business or the government or anybody else’s. If two men want to get married in your church and you disagree, find another church, but you don’t get to say that they can’t marry.

Bunch of damn busybodies.

Fluffy
wrote on November 8 2008 @ 04:00 pm: [report]

Very well put Alex V.  Exactly what I think, I just couldn’t find the right words for some reason…

Happy and lucky
wrote on November 8 2008 @ 08:28 pm: [report]

Fear and hate are so ridiculous and destructive.  And please keep in mind, this is not about *granting* someone rights: At issue is not giving same sex couples the right to marry, it’s that Prop 8 actually *took away rights that were already in the California constitution*, rights which had been upheld by the California Supreme Court.  That means that anyone with enough money to fund a ballot measure and an advertising blitz to sway votes can come in and fund a constitutional amendment to take away existing rights in any state.  Who will lose rights next?  Women?  Asian-Americans?  African-Americans?  Christians?  Jews?  Left-handed people?  Blue-eyed blondes?  New Yorkers? Are you all listening?  Maybe you laugh that that’s a bit extreme, but how do you know somebody won’t try to take your rights away next?  This discrimination will need a lot of public support (and legal action) to be resolved.

Alex V
wrote on November 8 2008 @ 08:36 pm: [report]

Thank you.  I’ve been drinking, if that helps. Although I think you hit the nail on the head a bit more directly than I.

This kind of stuff really makes me angry. It is nobody’s business who I want to sleep with, as long as I am in a mutually consensual relationship and I am not taking advantage of anybody or hurting them (unless she wants a little spanky-pank).

What disappoints me is the huge number of latinos that voted for this. I am latino. I would have figured that most of them had been discriminated against enough for the lesson to sink in - I guess not. When you start to legislate freedoms and start discriminating, it is a small step from sexual orientation to race. It is very easy to start adding more categories to the “them” group, and EVERYONE should be paying attention, ‘cuz you may be the next addition. This, people should stick their noses in.

Now I’m going to go soak my head in the toilet to cool off.

abbylyn
wrote on November 8 2008 @ 08:41 pm: [report]

When, when, WHEN will Americans (and American lawmakers) remember that “separate but equal” was declared unconstitutional 50 SOME YEARS AGO?!

Janet
wrote on November 9 2008 @ 12:51 am: [report]

By this reasoning, you would then be arguing for incestuous marriage, too, right? Brother/sister? Father/ son? Polygamy? Five-way marriage with three guys and two girls? As long as it’s consensual, between two (or more) adults with no reservations, who has a right to tell them their love is not worthy? Are you for the legal recognition, and endorsement, of those relatinships, too? There is literally zero distinction, intellectually and philisophically, between the argument for gay marriage and these other relationships. The thing is, these other relationships are still almost universally taboo, so you feel safe in the hypocrisy of damning them while acting holy and righteous calling for gay marriage.

The reason black people voted in such great numbers for prop 8 is because they’re tired of the GLBT community trying to equate their agenda with the struggle for civil rights. Such equation is plain racism.

John Bisceglia
wrote on November 9 2008 @ 04:01 am: [report]

Many of us, from Charles Merrill to myself, and now Melissa Etheridge, are withholding ALL tax dollars until equal.  I have HAD ENOUGH.  This is about our FAMILY. 

What could be MORE important? 
NO TAXATION WITHOUT EQUALITY!

It is now the 21st Century - If our nation wants to be relevant in the world economy, our nation better start giving a damn about treating its citizens equally. How many Fortune 500 companies or major universities will want to be in a state where potential employess and students are treated as SUB-Americans? Will other tax payers care that a GROWING NUMBER of gays are refusing to file tax returns? Are they ready to shoulder the extra tax burden due to an out-of-control theocratic stranglehold on US law?

I seriously doubt the government will give a crap about ANY issue in our lives, from serving openly, employment rights, etc. ad nauseum, until they RESPECT our very homes and loved ones inside.

Lola
wrote on November 9 2008 @ 11:08 am: [report]

A lot of people are forgetting that this country was founded on Christian values. In the bible, it’s says that only a man and woman can get married. I think that gay people should be able to have the same rights as straight people, but don’t call it a marriage, call it something else. That way, the gay people can have their rights and get to be together and everyone else can keep the meaning of marriage the same as it was.
^-^

Alex V
wrote on November 9 2008 @ 11:09 am: [report]

Janet,

The difference between what I am supporting and what you claim I am supporting is laughable. I am arguing that what consenting adults do behind closed doors is none of your business.

If you want to worry about the sanctity of marriage, then you need to worry about your actions. You need to love, cherish and honor your partner, whomever they may be. Sanctity means that I stood before my God and I promised to Him and my wife and to everyone attending that I would be faithful to my wife as long as I live. You know, GLBT people can be faithful, too.

Racism!?! What are you talking about? Where is anything remotely racist in any of the posts or in the body? HUH? Using some else’s slogan is racism? That’s just copyright infringement. While African-Americans may have had a higher mountain to climb, we ALL belong on the plateau. Civil rights are for everyone. That’s why they are called “civil” - you know, for the whole of civilization.

Milla
wrote on November 9 2008 @ 11:53 am: [report]

Janet,

Honestly, I am really tired of this argument that suggests gay marriage is the same thing as incestuous relationships, or bestiality.

If you can’t tell the difference, then maybe gay marriage shouldn’t be your highest priority. Taking personal feelings out of it, do you *really* think that a father molesting his child is the same thing as two women living together?

Fluffy
wrote on November 9 2008 @ 12:01 pm: [report]

In my opinion, gay people do not choose to be gay.  If you ask any gay person - they will tell you that they have felt something was “different” about them since early on.  It has nothing to do with how you were raised, who your friends are etc.  They should not be punished about who they love.

As for the polygamy comment, people need to do what they feel is right for themselves.  I am not a perfect person, I won’t pretend to be.  Polygamy I don’t understand.  I don’t understand the concept of it.  If you want to be with multiple people, isn’t that why people become swingers?

Rebecca
wrote on November 9 2008 @ 12:16 pm: [report]

I’m sorry but anyone who says the founding fathers created our Constitution out of Christian values is an idiot who didn’t pay attention in history class.  Most of the people who wrote the Constitution were actually DIESTS, as in believing that God doesn’t care what we all do.  Also, using the delusional logical fallacy that equates gay marriage to incest is a bit desperate.  Gay marriage doesn’t equal polygamy or incest.  Prop 8 didn’t grant rights, it took them away.

Lola
wrote on November 9 2008 @ 12:28 pm: [report]

I never said that the people who wrote the constitution were Christians. I said that this country was founded on Christian values. As in, Christian people left England for the US to practice their Christianity. And seriously, it’s not nice to call people names.

Sherry
wrote on November 9 2008 @ 01:21 pm: [report]

Puritains left England and the Netherlands (both Christian nations) because their specific beliefs were being persecuted.  They founded some of the colonies to escape this persecution and then ended up doing the very thing that was being done to them by sanctioning that anyone living in their area follow their same beliefs.  Not all the colonies were Puritain.  At present I don’t believe that many people who style themselves Christian still follow Puritain beliefs.  There are many different sects of Christianity, and my sect may well not agree with yours.  So who’s “Christianity” is the correct one?  During the time of the founding of our country no one thought it unchristian to own slaves, and only white male landowners could vote.  Sometimes, we must change.

Janet
wrote on November 9 2008 @ 03:46 pm: [report]

You say there is no difference in the argument for gay marriage and the arguments for polygamy and incestuous ones. But you don’t demonstrate the difference. If the relationships are between consenting adults, why do you not support these other relationships? The answer is because you think they are disgusting, or wrong, or both. But there is literally no differentiation you can make, which is why you don’t try. It’s hypocrisy, or, as you would say, bigotry. If you were truly about fighting for equal rights, you would fight for these other relationships as well. The critical thinking skills of the pro-gay “rights” movement are stunningly bad.

Alex V
wrote on November 9 2008 @ 05:03 pm: [report]

And the tired rhetoric of the anti-gay movement is pathetic.

Actually, YOU said that the arguments were the same. I said that it isn’t any of your business what adults want to do. Why do you continue to equate gay and incest?  Just because YOU think that the same arguments can be made to justify each does not make it so. In almost 100% of cases, incest is hurting someone, or someone has been coerced into a relationship, which has taken their right to choose away. I am for the right to choose. If, to use your example, two men and three women want to get married, more power to them. Why do you care? Are they hurting you? Are you being denied something? All “minorities” should be vigilant against this type of legislation, because as I said earlier, it is a small step in discriminating because of sexual orientation to discriminating because of ethnicity.

Sonic
wrote on November 9 2008 @ 05:19 pm: [report]

@ Janet: 
You say supporting gay marriage is equal to accepting things such as incest, but this is a fallacy.  One of the primary reasons incest isn’t supported is because of the biological risks inherent with it and the fact that, because the participants are already involved in a different kind of relationship (maternal, paternal, fraternal, etc.), it is often psychologically and emotionally confusing and damaging to try to implement a new relationship, especially a sexual one.  Regardless of whether it is consensual, it is still psychologically harmful.  You cannot say the same of gay marriage.  I also see nothing wrong with polygamy.  It is not what I want for myself because I was not born inclined to be a polygamist, but I see nothing wrong with it if all involved are consensual adults.  You seem to assume that this is equally disgusting to all, as incest is, and that all else will view it as such, but that’s not the case and they are ignorant assumptions to make.  There’s nothing wrong with our critical skills - I use the same reasoning for gay marriage as I do for polygamy.  If it is not harmful to those individual adults involved, it is not my right to regulate how they should express their affection and love for one another.  If anything, the lack of logic behind your defenses and your reliance on how “disgusting” you feel these marriages are show that your reasons are emotion-ridden, not logic-based.  Which is fine for you, but not fine when you want to let how YOU feel impinge how OTHERS live.  I think your ignorance is disgusting, Janet, but I would never, ever take away your civil rights and I would gladly fight with you to help you keep them.  Keep this in mind when you go spreading your biases.

Jane
wrote on November 9 2008 @ 11:44 pm: [report]

I’ll second Sonic’s reply.
I also don’t see any logical argument against gay rights - just a weak attack on those who support them.  I would have at least appreciated a decent rant on how the gay agenda involves brainwashing our children and eventual liberal world domination.

Simcha
wrote on November 10 2008 @ 09:09 am: [report]

@ Lola

Read this article.

And then think, WWJD for an oppressed people?

Lola
wrote on November 10 2008 @ 09:15 am: [report]

@ Simcha
Thanks for informing me. Now I just feel plain silly…
But this just means that the government is being a bully. I hope the president can help solve this problem. And everyone can get married!!
Sorry for not researching enough ^__^;;;

Simcha
wrote on November 10 2008 @ 05:32 pm: [report]

@Lola
No apologies necessary!  I’m sure you could teach me a thing or two….
Hey, perhaps together we can change the government’s mind!

Lola
wrote on November 10 2008 @ 06:44 pm: [report]

Yeah. We could have a rally party and everything!

Janet
wrote on November 10 2008 @ 10:23 pm: [report]

Still no argument for why gay marriage is OK, but incest, polygamy, etc. are not. The reason is because there is none. The gay marriage movement knows this but sees the intense unpopularity and throws people who should be in the same fight under the bus. The assumptions made by some gay supporters here about incest are the same made by most people who oppose gay marriage. They oppose gay marriage because it’s bad for the people stuck in the gay life. Gays getting married doesn’t hurt me. But watchng someone stuck in a cycle of self destruction is heartbreaking, and I for one won’t say that it is a good thing.

Jane
wrote on November 10 2008 @ 10:36 pm: [report]

I don’t know what experiences you’ve had, Janet, but every legitimate empirical/professional source reports that being gay is no more unhealthy or destructive than being straight.  Common sense dictates it, too.  I’d be happy to dig up references if you’d like.

Erica
wrote on November 10 2008 @ 10:40 pm: [report]

@Janet

I would like you to elaborate on why a gay life is self destructive. I’m just trying to better understand others’ points of view, because so far I am baffled.

Sal
wrote on November 10 2008 @ 10:48 pm: [report]

How is it heartbreaking to watch someone be gay? Or, as you out it, Janet, stuck in a gay life? All the gay people I know have been in relationships that have far outlasted those of my straight friends. In two cases, they each have extremely successful careers and happy, healthy, well-rounded children. (These children were conceived via anonymous sperm donor, so if you go and use the anti-gay marriage argument that marriage is for procreating, then you are essentially castigating the hundreds of thousands of straight couples who also have no choice but to adopt or conceive via sperm donors.) The gay couple I know live in homes full of love, and I can honestly say that it is something I envy. I can only hope that everyone can find that kind of happiness and inner peace, and maybe we won’t be so quick to judge others.

Alex V
wrote on November 11 2008 @ 08:28 am: [report]

Janet, there is just so much in your posts that screams out “ignorance” and “homophobia” 

1. Sonic spelled out quite well the differences between gay marriage, polygamy, et.al. You should re-read her post if you still think no one has answered your particular question.

2. Along those lines, you have yet to answer my question: why is it your business that gays want to marry? Are the gays hogging up all the good men? Or maybe they are luring the good women away?

3. Self-destruction. That’s a new one. Being gay is self-destructive? WOW! Where ever did you hear that whopper? Are homosexuals around you killing themselves? If they are maybe it is because they are not being accepted as human beings and they are being denied basic human rights. All that the GLBT community is asking for is to be given (or not have taken away, in this case) the same basic rights as all American Citizens.

4. If, as you wrote, “Gays getting married doesn’t hurt me”, why are you arguing?

Ricardo
wrote on November 11 2008 @ 02:29 pm: [report]

Point 1: One of the criteria list by supporters of gay marriage is that it doesn’t harm anyone. Equating incest to gay marriage is preposterous as incest can be harmful to others including any children that come from it. Gay marriage hurts no one. Polygamy is about number of marriages allowed not about whether or not people who believe in it can be married. If polygamists are only allowed to marry one person, they still have the same rights as everyone else in the country whereas gay couples are denied that right under prop 8.

Point 2: This country was NOT founded on Christian values, but rather freedom of religion. People came here because they were tired of people from other religions telling them what they could and could not think. It’s amazing that those same people are now forcing their beliefs onto others. As for your “brainwashing” comment, who is brainwashing whom? Trying to convince others that you should have equal rights is not brainwashing (look it up if you don’t believe me), but forcing your religious beliefs on others fits the dictionary definition of brainwashing quite well. 

Point 3: Gay marriage is bad for people in it? How so? So you’re saying it’s better for them if they are told they are not worth the same as others in their society? Is that, somehow, good for them? I’d say it’s much more harmful for them if we use your method. 

I think that if people started worrying about being better people instead of spending their time trying to deny equal rights to fellow human beings, maybe this world would be a better place. I seems to recall something about “do unto others” and something else about “judge not lest ye shall be judged” but maybe I’m mistaken.