Why Does America Still Hate The Idea Of Gay People Getting Married?

Kiki T
wrote on November 5 2008 @ 10:39 am: [report]

It makes me ill thinking there are laws putting limits on how people want to love.

John K.
wrote on November 5 2008 @ 11:00 am: [report]

Amelia, I’m afraid you don’t understand.  These supposed religious people have absolutely no understanding of what love is.  All they know, apparently, are hate, and arrogance masquerading as humility.  They’re right, everyone else is wrong.  Inflicting concrete harm on people is ok, and in fact encouraged, as long as it is done in the name of spiritual righteousness.

Terry C.
wrote on November 5 2008 @ 11:23 am: [report]

Amelia, thanks for a great piece. Sadly, the same people who voted for the ban on Gay marriage would probably stand up for interracial marriage, and miscegenation laws took centuries to eliminate.  Attitudes don’t change easily, but they do change. The battle for legal gay marriage will be a long, hard, nasty, brutal struggle, and bigotry and fear are not easy things to overcome.  But the fight is far from over.

whostolemyhamslice
wrote on November 5 2008 @ 11:56 am: [report]

Amelia, your comments are dubious at best, and straw men and worst. First off, citing the “religous” arguments are always an easy way to refute those opposed to gay marriage, but rather, if you look at many of the laws passed in the fifties and sixties you can see the great effects any attempt at redifing marriage has done to the institution thereafter. These laws (child support, welfare, no fault divorces) gave insentives for men and women to not marry (men mainly), thus leading to the 50% divorce rate of today. If those were only laws slightly changing the nuances of marriage, imagine the effects of completely redefining it by allowing those possesing the same gender to engage in it. Thankfully, you and many of the women who made the above posts are most likely not married (once again, a result of those harmless laws passed years ago, wink, wink,) and as a result your worried genetics will not be passed on to subsequent generations.  Yeah Californians! We did it!!!!!!!

Amelia
wrote on November 5 2008 @ 12:00 pm: [report]

I would bet my effing ham slice that gay marriages would have a far greater success rate than straight marriages.

joy
wrote on November 5 2008 @ 12:24 pm: [report]

I voted no on prop 102 in AZ and am in utter disbelief that it passed, especially considering that state laws already existed that prevented gay marriage from being legal.  Great article Ameila.

@whostolemyhamslice: Are you insane?  Do you really think people should stay in unhealthy relationships and that marriage is a magic bullet for happiness?  Also, many unmarried women do have babies and pass on their self-reliant, independent, “worried” genes.  Also, child-support, welfare, and no-fault divorce legislation has nothing to do with why people do or don’t get married.  Many of us just don’t want to be married, and some people who do just aren’t there yet.  Why is that so wrong?

shana
wrote on November 5 2008 @ 12:44 pm: [report]

I think as one of the many people here who just doesn’t quite get why people are so against this (yes, I’ve heard their reasons but I still don’t get it), I don’t think I ever really will.

Jennifer
wrote on November 5 2008 @ 01:44 pm: [report]

It’s sad that more people don’t see this as a huge civil rights issue.

Along the same lines and almost worse, is the passage of Arkansas Initiative 1 - a ban on unmarried couples (which would be all gay couples in Arkansas) adopting children:

This measure would prohibit unmarried “sexual partner[s]” from adopting children or from serving as foster parents. The measure specifies that the prohibition applies to both opposite-sex as well as same-sex couples.

belinda
wrote on November 5 2008 @ 02:03 pm: [report]

You said you don’t understand why America is so against gay marriage.

Our forefathers who wrote the constitution were of the Christian religion.  Remember.  You know, “In God we Trust”, and all that.

I’m sure most of them read the Bible like I do, and you should as well, to learn why men and men (or women and women)together is a sin. 

I’ts not just our Christian forefathers who beleived this, but most Christians, Muslim, Jews, Native Americans…

Those of us who believe there is a God, One God and only one God.  We do not trust in ourselves, our spouses, or our worldly possessions.
Those of us who beleive there is an after-life of treasure that is indicative to the way we behave here on Earth.

Those are the Americans who are against gay marriage.

Keep up the Good fight!!!!  God Bless America.

California girl
wrote on November 5 2008 @ 02:20 pm: [report]

It makes me sick to know that my state is full of such hateful people.  Prop 8 is discrimination, and I as a straight female who believes in marriage, think that it is unbelievable that we can elect an African American president, but can’t let same sex couples be together as they choose.  It’s one step forward and 10 back.  Jesus said “love thy neighbor as you love yourself”.  That means treat everyone equal.  It’s the not only the most important commandment according to Jesus, but it appears the most over looked by over zealous homo phobes. 

But on a good note, attorneys all over California are challenging the proposition, and it will get to the US Supreme Court, probably be found unconstituional, and turn into national policy. I guess there’s the silver lining of it all…

Erica
wrote on November 5 2008 @ 02:25 pm: [report]

Belinda: Giving same sex couples the simple OPTION of marrying one another does not mean that every gay couple will race to the alter, nor does it mean that it will inspire children to become gay (as so many Yes on 8 ads imply). Allowing people to have the right to express their love equally to one another will not in any way effect your place in line to claim your after-life treasure. You can go on living your Christian virtuous life, and let those silly heathens pay the consequences later.

and hamslice: The 50% divorce rate exists because people are getting married for ALL THE WRONG REASONS. If it is such a so-called sacred institution, why are all these straight marriages failing so easily? Here we have a group of people who are fighting to show that marriage CAN be meaningful, empowering, and solely about two people’s love for one another. I wholeheartedly agree with Amelia when I say that gay marriages may be more successful than many straight marriages. I’ve never met a straight couple who fought half as hard to try to stay married.

joy
wrote on November 5 2008 @ 03:09 pm: [report]

@Belinda: Uh, where are you getting your info from that Native American cultures join the hatefest of believing same sex relationships are wrong?  It is common among Native American cultures to historically REVERE, not condemn, homosexuals as “two-spirited” people who manifested both masculine and feminine traits as a third gender with special spiritual connectedness.  And these Native American cultures are not alone, ever hear of ladyboys in Thailand?  India’s culture also accepts a third gender. 

The concept of a third sex is actually older than Christianity.  Get your facts straight and ditch the hate.  Don’t like gay marriage?  Don’t hook up with someone of your own gender.  Live and let live.

afp
wrote on November 5 2008 @ 06:43 pm: [report]

@belinda

A marriage license is issued by the government. Our government, and our very purpose for immigrating to this country, was separation of church and state. There for its is against the very nature of our country’s founding to make religiously based laws. It is strictly forbidden in the Constitution. Religious bias is no foundation for laws. You have to see outside the views of your church when it comes to worldly matter. It’s called fairness and I do believe it is one of the 7 virtues.

Obie
wrote on November 6 2008 @ 09:16 am: [report]

@Belinda:

Actually, the forefathers of our country were mostly deists, not Christians.  They believed that, while there was a God that created the universe, he could be understood through reason, not revelation.  Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin, and many other men responsible for the creation of this country were actually very wary of the Christian faith - and all religions, for that matter - and actively opposed any influence of religion in government matters.  (I’d also be willing to bet that they’d reason that gay marriage wouldn’t be a bad thing.) 

“In God We Trust” and “under God” in the Pledge of Allegiance only came along after the huge “Christian revival” that began in the late 1800s and didn’t become official until the ridiculous Red Scare of the 1950s.  They had nothing to do with what our country was REALLY founded on, which was simply freedom and liberty for ALL people.  Please, do your homework.

eb
wrote on November 6 2008 @ 09:33 am: [report]

Actually, both old testament and the new testament state men lying down with men as disgusting in god’s eyes and they would not be allowed in heaven, along with other sins that are considered disgusting.  This type of statement is located in multiple places within the bible. 

You should read the bible to understand why Sodom and Gomorah were destroyed.

I personally believe each person will be responsible or their own action but I am against love that is against god’s desire.  You can claim the bible is wrong - but then the complete bible is wrong not just the part(s) you don’t like.

Your choice.

Erica
wrote on November 6 2008 @ 09:43 am: [report]

@eb:

I was born and raised in a Catholic, but I believe that God’s overarching message is to love one another. The Bible is rife with parables that greatly contradict modern day’s morally correct norms.

Remember Leviticus 25:44-46? Exodus 21? I suppose you believe slavery is also okay.

Obie
wrote on November 6 2008 @ 10:13 am: [report]

@Erica:

I completely agree about the overall message of the Bible.  I come from a spiritual family - Christian by default, but no one really practiced - and I do believe in a God of some variety.  My problem is that each religion is based on a particular text.  Those texts are all so old that some parts don’t apply anymore out of modern ideas of right and wrong (keeping slaves, eating shellfish, wearing cotton-poly blends).  Other parts have been so distorted by the men who have “edited” these books over the past millennium-and-a-half that it’s hard to say what is accurate, for lack of a better term, and what was slipped in by King James or whomever so everyone would follow the “correct” dogma.

Aside from all of this, we get so wrapped up in the little details that we forget the real message of the book at hand.  I think we’d all agree that all any religion wants us to do is take care of each other and remember that there’s something bigger than us that loves us, too.  I don’t understand why some people believe there are standards on who can be loved by God and who cannot.

atlgirl
wrote on November 6 2008 @ 11:17 am: [report]

This is a civil rights issue. I’m positive that gay marriage will be completely legal in the US in the next 10-20 years. And I agree with the comments above: people will someday look back on this hate-driven legislation and feel ashamed. Amelia, great analogy on the water fountain.

Janet
wrote on November 6 2008 @ 12:26 pm: [report]

I posted this somewhere else already, but I’ll put it up here, too. I think there is a difference between tolerance and endorsement. I don’t think homosexual behavior is healthy for those who get into it, so I don’t want to send the message, especially to children, that I think it’s OK, or even good.

No one knows exactly where homosexual orientation comes from, but you’re being dishonest with yourself if you say that nurture has nothing to do with it.

To create new life through an act of love is the most powerful thing I’ve ever experienced. All the things that are wonderful about sex are based on that. Without it, sex becomes empty. As you continue to engage in an act that can have no results, you get damaged psychologically, in my opinion. It’s like eating your favorite meal, but never being able to swallow it, having it actually feed you.

In the end, everyone has, and can enjoy, heterosexual relationships. That’s the way your body was built. That’s its purpose. To direct your life to thwarting that purpose can never lead to a happy result. We’re a free country, so if that’s what you decide to do, fine. But I won’t say it’s a good thing. Hope I haven’t offended anyone, but that’s why I voted against gay marriage. No religious reasons here.

Janet
wrote on November 6 2008 @ 12:28 pm: [report]

Sorry, in the last paragraph, I meant to say everyone has, and can enjoy, heterosexual ATTRACTION.

Obie
wrote on November 6 2008 @ 01:07 pm: [report]

@Janet:

I’m not sure if I’m quite understanding.  Are you saying that homosexuality is wrong because it goes against our natural instinct to have children?  If so, what do you think of heterosexual couples that do not wish to have children, but still have sex, or have oral and/or anal sex exclusively?  Do you view that through the same lens?

Ashley
wrote on November 6 2008 @ 01:45 pm: [report]

@janet
i completely enjoy having sex knowing that i will NOT be creating children!!! i’m sorry for YOU if you think that the only reason that sex can be enjoyable is because you’re “creating life.”

gay, straight. it doesn’t matter. love is love. the fact that some people like you are so self-righteous in thinking that their love is the only kind that matters disgusts me.

i hope that my generation will be like our grandparent’s generation and force changes that will rock the world of civil rights. separate but equal is NOT okay in my books.

robf
wrote on November 6 2008 @ 02:14 pm: [report]

You know, if you religious people think homosexuality is a sin, fine.  Work with your church to not recognize gay marriage.  Fine.

But when the GOVERNMENT takes a role in legislating your moral code on others, you’ve crossed the line from personal beliefs to bigotry.

That’s all that a state-sponsored ban on gay marriage is: bigotry, plain and simple.  It’s as reprehensible as racism, and some day it will be seen the same way.

afp1
wrote on November 6 2008 @ 08:52 pm: [report]

@ eb
So I suppose then you believe the part of the Bible that says women who go near men on their periods should be stoned to death. Hey after all you have to take the whole Bible. And if Jesus heard what you people are using his name for he would be embarrassed. He said that the golden rule was the foremost important commandment. The one that would get rid of the hate and division. Christianity is supposed to be about God loving everyone. Not God going, “Ewwww! Fags are gross!”

@ Janet
So do you not use condoms? Do you or your husband/boyfriend never masturbate? Are you never fingered? And no, not everyone can enjoy a heterosexual relationship. Gay people generally find the sexual organs of the opposite sex as revolting as you must find your own.

Also studies have been done showing that homosexuality and transgendered individuals actually have different brains to heterosexuals of their same sex. There is actually an area of the brain that is a different size. SO yeah, it is nature. If it were nurture, there would be no gay people, because then everyone would grow up in heterosexual homes and be “influenced” to be straight. Being gay is not contagious. It won’t rub off on your precious children.

Coupling
wrote on November 7 2008 @ 09:06 am: [report]

Oh, quit dramatizing it. It’s a marrige ban not a relationship ban. The majority vote isn’t saying who they can love. Just that they can’t cheat for the legal marrige benefits provided by ...the majority! . I wonder how many gays support polygamists’ ‘civil rights’ or why not incest too. A few having sexual deviencies doesn’t force everyone else to support it.
Marrige is just a human concept so yeah it is what the majority says it is. Individuals can’t bend it to fit their fetishes.

HarlemGirl
wrote on November 7 2008 @ 10:17 am: [report]

LOL @ afp1 “Are you never fingered? ” 
I am straight and I LOVE sex!  As a matter of fact, I even *gasp* use birth control so that I don’t get pregnant so that I don’t have to srop having sex whenever I want it!  And I am PRO-GAY MARRIAGE!

So send me right to hell with all of my good, honest gay friends so that we can have a ball laughing at all of the uptight people who have never been fingered.

Interesting fact
wrote on November 7 2008 @ 11:39 am: [report]

I thought that it was interesting that on a night of great “change”, 69% of African-Americans voted for Prop 8 in California.

HarlemGirl
wrote on November 7 2008 @ 12:35 pm: [report]

@ Interestingfact,  why is that interesting to you?

Marco Luxe
wrote on November 7 2008 @ 01:46 pm: [report]

“Coupling”  1.  we ALL contribute to social benefits, as gay folks are part of the “majority” too.  2.  You think the majority get to absolutely define marriage.  I bet I can get the white majority in Utah to outlaw interracial marriages. That would fit your political philosphy, so let’s go further:  how about criminalizing interfaith marriages too, as religion is a choice, and children do better in low conflict homes. 

See:  the majority has to adhere to overall principles in our constitutions or else even YOUR minority status puts you at risk?  Not a minority?  You are a member of some minority that could be legislated against by some majority.

afp1
wrote on November 7 2008 @ 04:00 pm: [report]

@ Coupling

Perhaps you don’t remember this from government class:

The 5 basic ideas of the American concept of democracy

1) Worth of the Individual
2) Equality of ALL PERSONS
3) Majority rule, MINORITY RIGHTS
4) Necessity of compromise
5) Individual Freedom

I hope that clears up the confusion. The majority may vote, but it is the responsibility of democracy to protect individual rights & joys and those of a minority.

Carol
wrote on November 7 2008 @ 10:58 pm: [report]

Let’s see…I was married for 23 years, brought up two children, now teenagers. My husband died of heart problems at the age of 39.  I have found love again, but this time with someone of my same gender. I loved my husband, I love my partner though just in different ways. When I see attempts at analyzing gay people (which I may or may not be—I for one could care less what I’m labeled) I just shake my head.  Holding a marriage certificate or not is not what makes a relationship, but to have a choice taken away by those who don’t know me, never will know me, will never walk in my shoes or understand what is in my heart…is pretty disgusting.  I am not a slave, yet these people who fight so hard against what they can never understand, yet try to rule my life as if I am one and those don’t deserve basic rights…how can you do that to another human being??

Watching a video of some of those championing Prop 8 was incredible to see—the hatred! The VICIOUSNESS! It broke my heart to see hate in the name of so-called righteousness.  Why they can’t see that, I don’t understand.  I really don’t. 

As my wise daughter told me—the God she loves does not hate anyone for what they do. That’s the God I believe in.

Me
wrote on November 8 2008 @ 10:32 am: [report]

Marriage is a union between a MAN and a WOMAN. PERIOD! Anything other than THAT is NOT a marriage. It’s as simple as that. Same sex relationships are not married. They can be called a union or another similar name, but not a marriage.

Andrea
wrote on November 8 2008 @ 03:44 pm: [report]

@ Belinda

You say homosexuality is a sin, but did you skip the parts in the Bible that says you should be submissive to men? Or that slavery is okay? Doesn’t sound like you really follow the Bible, just the parts you like.

Supporter of equal rights, opponent of gay marriag
wrote on November 8 2008 @ 04:08 pm: [report]

Conditions on a privilege: drivers, doctors, marrige licenses does not constitute a civil rights infringement.
Just because I want to earn a Dr’s salary doesn’t mean I can force the govt to recognize me as one unless I meet the qualifications to become licensed.

We have equality, gays have the same rights as anyone else. They can marry anyone of the opposite sex! I’m straight and I can’t marry a man either. Exact Same Rights Period. The failure by a vote to add something new to change the meaning(same sex) is not persecution of a group.
No same sex, no animals, no relatives, no children, no robots, no $, no imaginary leprechauns. Definition of marriage is a husband and wife. It’s not up to the govt to change the definition.
This is like me saying,” The govt took hetrosexuals’ right to be gay away. They should change the definition of gay so I can be hetrosexual and gay.” It can’t be done, they are oxymorons as are gay and married.

It’s not the govt preventing gays from getting married they are doing it themselves by trying to marry someone of the same sex.

People can be so selfish
wrote on November 9 2008 @ 03:35 pm: [report]

that made absolutely no sense what so ever. Yet in still you don’t care you cannot marry a man because you don’t desire to. If you had the desire to, and that choice is not there, then you would cry its not fair. We DONT have the same rights, take the religion out of it, I pay for my insurance(s) health care and car…I work hard for it why can’t I put my partner on my insurance? Im paying for it. To Arkansas what if I am a woman who is with a man, not sure I want to marry him, not even sure I want to be with him but I want a child. I want one NOW. I make enough money to take care of one, I have time. Women have biological clocks when they want to have kids. I’m also barren, so you mean to tell me, I have to marry my boyfriend who I am comtemplating breaking up with and bring a child into a hostile enviroment? Are you serious? I mean to be responsible, say he and I break up, I find someone ele, Im sure someone is not gonna want to become daddy on the first date. Relationships takes time. and that should be MY choice how to go about it.

You guys complain about incest and animals. Animals aren’t fighting for rights, totally irrelevant, they don’t have to fight for seperation, and child support and so forth, Incest has nothing to do with me, I think its disgusting personally but wasn’t there a time where they wanted to keep the family blood line strong? I bet my brother and I can get married. He’s male, Im female. I love him. He loves me. He wants kids, so do I. We would never have sex though. Polygamy…again I PERSONALLY dont agree with it, Im monogamous, but if these people agree to marry one man, so be it, it’s THEIR CHOICE. Not mine. Im not polygamist, don’t understand it, doesn’t disrupt my life.

See people have a problem with gays and SEX, thats all, if no one would focus on how we have sex, then it wouldnt be a problem. There’s so many things people do in the bible that it says not too, like marrying after divorce? Lust? Glutteny? LIE??? Covet? KIlL?

people say Marriage is between a man and a woman, my question is why? like a three year old child why? if you say it says so in the bible…why? wasn’t the bible translated plenty of times an then re-written by King James, who was a homosexual himself?

you talk about people stealing under marriage what about the countless people who marry to gain citizenship status? I know someone who was paid 1500 to get married, thy barely knew one another no love at all, but they could get married and you talk about the sanctity of marriage

one last senerio before I go. My girlfriend just came out. She is in college, her moms did not agree with her lesbianism so she cut off all ties. She has no type of funding to go to school. She is my girlfriend. She lives with me. I work with benefits. My girlfriend gets sick, she has no health coverage. We cannot afford another bill, with her schooling and me paying bills, she needs an operation that cost like 7K normally would be covered. if she were allowed. Fast forward 40-50 years later Im sick, on my death bed, my parents are deceased, I have no siblings, family was estranged. I die, Lover is not allowed in the ICU, nor able to make any type of decisions in my death, o yeah I forgot to make a will.  So my next of kin is contacted, never knew me, or hated me while I was alive, creamates me and takes all my possession and sells them off including the house my lover and I purchased together 20 years ago.

All this can happen without marrage…#&@$% marriage, I want my civil union rights…there are so many senerios where us gays need protection too.

jwms
wrote on November 9 2008 @ 08:17 pm: [report]

@ Janet. In your reasoning older couples who are not trying to have children should not express their love for each other through sex, and anyone who cannot have a child should not be aloud to marry. In your reasoning fertility tests should be admisisted at the marriage bureau.

Jason
wrote on November 9 2008 @ 08:18 pm: [report]

Sorry, this was a terrible article, and I agreed with everything in it.

An article which gives no credence, credit, or validity to the opposing side will never change anyone’s mind.  I hope that this article got your bigoted opinions off your chest about people who are different from you.

a systematic, NEUTRAL debunk-ing of the other sides arguments is indisputably the way to, if not convert, remind the other side that they are not the only people who care about society, not the advancement of their egos.

the reason’s i disagree w/ prop 8 have already been listed, and speak for themselves.  Don’t compare gayness to totally irrelevant, and perverted unions.

vegdumpling
wrote on November 9 2008 @ 08:51 pm: [report]

i’m sure it will never happen, but if “marriage” is a sacred institution then perhaps it should cease to be a legal arrangement.  they we could all have our unions with the partner(s) of our choosing for legal reasons and be “married” in a (insert place of worship of your choosing here) if that was what was important to us. 

i know, it’s wishful thinking… if only it was that simple.

Grafton
wrote on November 9 2008 @ 10:14 pm: [report]

Why do people continue to fight for social acceptance among those who will never grant it to them?

This is not a legal issue, but since homosexuals continue to appeal to government to force people to respect their views, opponents of homosexual measures will spend their time $$$ and energy to defeat them. The law cannot make people accept homosexuality, just as it does not make people accept anything they do not believe in. Prop 8 is a reminder that you can be outvoted, that’s all. I’m sorry that people still refer to hatred as some human quality that can be overcome…have you learned nothing from recorded history?

A Christian generally believes that God that does not accept homosexuality…so I’m not surprised when they turn out in high numbers to defeat gay marriage. Gay people who believe they can compete with God in a Christian’s mind are fooling themselves. They used to be fed to lions, sawn in half, and crucified for their beliefs - their religious icon is an ancient instrument of Roman torture and death…do you think they’re scared of some gay folks trying to mess with their beliefs?

Really?
wrote on November 9 2008 @ 10:58 pm: [report]

Here’s what AZ added to their constitution: “Only a union of one man and one woman shall be valid or recognized as a marriage in this state.” That sounds simple enough. If you didn’t have activist judges who ignored the proper use of the law and made up their own legislation from the bench, state like AZ wouldn’t have bothered.

The issue is not love and hate, it’s legal and illegal. The MAJORITY VOTE did not legalize gay marriage, so some CA judges used their judicial power to attempt to override the legislative branch of government. Gays benefited from it temporarily, but that is bad news to scared voters. Can a judge overturn Roe v. Wade from the bench? What about the right to bear arms? What about free speech? What about spanking? And then the paranoia begins…fear is a great way to get people to vote.

We don't want Religious acceptence, though we beli
wrote on November 9 2008 @ 11:09 pm: [report]

to Grafton, you first paragraph was answered on 11/4…Blacks have been fighting for years for whites to accept them, give them equal rights, so you saying people should have just given up because whites weren’t going to allow them to do things like one be a president??? No gays will not stop.

Again I think most to all gays will accept the fact that you heteros want to keep your already laughable marriages in tact and “holy”...we want our rights in cilvil unions, we’re not asking for your acceptence in religion. I pay taxes in this damn country, I should have the right to bear arms, freedom of speech, religion, marriage, children..etc… If a church doesn’t want to marry a my lover and me, then so be it.. but I want my lover to get rights in the case I am disabled, or we’re both raising kids…

Judicial powers
wrote on November 10 2008 @ 02:03 am: [report]

@ Really?

The judicial branch has the same level of power as the legislative branch.  California Supreme Court judges did not override the legislative branch.  Rather, they amended the California constitution when they were presented with a case that compelled them to do so.  Prop 8 reversed the amendment.  And yes, judges can overturn Roe v. Wade from the bench.  McCain and Palin made it clear that if they were elected they would appoint anti-choice judges to the US Supreme Court.

Its Okay By Me In Ok.
wrote on November 10 2008 @ 03:07 am: [report]

When I was a child… 8 years old or so, my uncle had a “roommate” named Jim. I caught them kissing and asked my mom what they were doing. She sat me down and told me that sometimes two men can love each other so much that they kiss and hug just like mommies and daddies do. And sometimes women love each other so much they hug and kiss as well. I remember mulling this over and decided that it was fine by me. I was Baptist. And I thought this was great. Everyone was loving each other and it was a happy Christmas. It wasn’t until I was much older, around Junior High, when I realized that people out there actually hated them. They hated my two uncles for loving each other that way. Hated the special love they shared that made me feel happy.

It occurs to me that this hatred is nurtured, not nature. Children are born innocent. Free from such discrimination and bigotry. And it’s the parents that teach them the hates and misunderstandings that cause such Propositions to come to fruition.

And just so you know, my uncle and his mate has been together for 40 years. And when I asked him if he would marry Jim, he laughed and said that as long as there was this bigotry and hate in the country, it will never happen in his lifetime. His relationship has lasted longer than any Hetro marriage has. Including my parents.

sabotagekatt
wrote on November 10 2008 @ 06:10 am: [report]

yay! thank you so much. This was an enlightening read x x x

Paris
wrote on November 10 2008 @ 06:47 am: [report]

I am not from California. I am from a notoriously right-wing state (Texas). That being said, I also live in a very “progressive” city (Austin). I am a christian and as such there is doctrine that states that a man should not engage in sexual relations as one would with a woman. This is simply part of the creed. As a rule, I have made my peace with homosexuality. To me God will deal with it when the time comes.

I’m not sure I agree with The State mandating who should be able to enjoy the civil liberties that come with marriage. I think it is strictly an issue of semantics with most of the people that went to the polls in CA. Most who voted yes on Proposition 8 probably feel that by no means should a homosexual marriage take the same connotation as their own heterosexual marriages. Should they be able to vote on that being made law? Probably not.

However, it is here and it is up for a vote. The very nature of democracy that we cherish is the majority vote. Yes, the purpose is to defend the minority against a majority that would oppress them. However, in this instance I think that people (even the non-religious ones. Not everyone who voted yes is religiously affliated. That would be statistically impossible) had the right to vote as they choose, and should not be criticized for exercising their civil duty. I don’t agree with them personally.

I think that the state should make allowances for homosexual couples to obtain the same rights and priviledges that heterosexual couples get when they marry. I would not go as far as to call these allowances marriage. That word is too loaded with religious significance for most and as such someone should appoint something else. I have yet to come up with a satisfactory description myself, so I’m not claiming to have all the answers here. If homosexual couples in California (and other states) would like to achieve equality they will have to do so under a different heading. It would be a way to have something versus nothing.

One thing I will say is that just like a homosexual person can’t deny the integral part of themselves when they go to the polls (it is who they are and therefore they will make decisions utilizing their point of view and situation in life. It is only natural)that a heterosexual (or any other person) religious person should not be asked to deny those beliefs that are dear to them and define them when they vote. Its like asking a poor person to ask for more taxation. They simply won’t vote against what works for them.

My vote is to come up with something equivalent that is a State institution performed by a JP. The couple can then decided if the want to proceed with a religious ceremony of their choosing in a church that will accept them.

I lived in Europe for many years and that is how they do it there. It seems to work fine. *shrug*

Asking people to be open-minded is fine, but asking them to compromise their beliefs (even if you think they are warped) is not fair, and as such I think that the homosexual communities should accept defeat on this one instance of popular vote. That is the nature of Democracy. If they want to change that they need to take legal measures. Short of that there is no way to change the core beliefs of so many people.

My twin brother is gay. My adopted father is gay. If they wanted to “marry” their partners then I would gladly attend. It is not up to me to proclaim what God wants. I can only try to live by the rules He has set for me. This does not mean that I have to abandon my family, but simply take the hit within my religious community for supporting them. It is a price I am willing to pay and ask God’s forgiveness for that. Unless I start having visions like Joan of Arc I will let God decide when to put it on his followers’ hearts to vote otherwise.

Just thought I’d put that out there. Great post.

Paris
wrote on November 10 2008 @ 07:11 am: [report]

I also wanted to point out that originally the law that was enacted was made law without popular approval. In legal terms that is an abuse of power and as such the issue came up for a vote. This would happen in any instance (not just gay marriage).

So in strictly legal and academic terms this was a democratic exercise that affirmed the popular vote rules. It is simply unfortunate that it dealt with an issue that is so dear to so many.

Another thing that occurred to me after I posted is that upon reflection we’ve all had to swallow bitter pills that we believe violate the rights of others. For example, those pro-life people who believe that abortion violates the rights of the unborn have had to deal with abortion. They don’t LIKE it but it was a legal decision passed by many majorities so they had to suck it up.

Sure they protest, but more power to them. I think that homosexuals are doing the right thing protesting. Speak up.

One thing that I believe is a basic human right (that is NOT being withheld from homosexuals per the first amendment) is the right to disagree openly. So do so if you disagree, but realize that you will be battling a formidable foe.

I have read other posts here about hatred. I think that is a little dramatic to classify every single person who voted yes on 8 as bigots or haters. They simply evaluated the situation and disagreed. Mature adults can agree to disagree on any given issue free of drama and juvenile emotions associated with hate etc. I won’t say that there aren’t those out there that say hurtful things. To me that is the person not living their life according to the “judge not lest ye be judged” mentality. However, it is equally unfair to judge every person who voted in this manner as consumed with hate. To each their own when they vote.

Once again we may not all AGREE with what gets voted on, but we have our chance to vote and openly disagree with it. After that there is not much more you can do except continue to speak up. I strongly encourage those who feel the need to do so to continue. With both sides I commend them for findng something meaningful and sticking to their beliefs. It is your right and I applaud you for sticking to your guns.

Jamie
wrote on November 11 2008 @ 03:41 am: [report]

The pro-prejudice comments on this thread are a good example of why organized religion should be outlawed.  All it does is promote hatred and oppression.

Frank
wrote on November 11 2008 @ 10:48 am: [report]

Because it’s not marriage.  Marriage is an institution upon which families are built, and two same sex people are physically incapable of starting their own family.  Bastardize it as much as you want, but that is a fact.  If a same sex couple wants to live together then that’s fine, good for them, but to calling that a ‘marriage’ is just plain wrong.  I’m sure I’ll be called a homophobe or bigot, or any other variety of names, for saying this but it still doesn’t change the fact that marriage is, and always has been, the union of one MAN and one WOMAN.

Jessica
wrote on November 11 2008 @ 11:09 am: [report]

For all you people pushing the “Bible says no” argument:

The Bible has a ton of rape, homoerotic situations, murder, child slaughter, infidelity, slavery, etc etc etc,

And that was just the stuff hat made it into the Bible, let alone what was left OUT!  You sure you want to infer that “in the Bible=good, out = bad?”  Seems to me that the religious argument is the least moral of them all.

I’ll take equality for ALL, thank you!

Define Family
wrote on November 11 2008 @ 11:58 am: [report]

Frank, not all marriages produce kids..there are sometimes two people of the opposite sex who can’t start families as if they were the same sex *gasp* have you heard if infertility?...some desire not to have kids, others adopt. A family in today’s society is not always a mom and dad and two kids, sometimes its just mom and kids, sometimes its just dad and kids, sometims its mom, aunt, grand ma and kids, my cousins were raised by their mom, uncle and grandfather (and each other)...a whole array of combinations, and not all families are related either, some of us GAYS form families with friends because we were alienated by our own BLOOD, marriage now a days aren’t always about starting families, some as stated before are about business, mistakes, and pressure from society

Alabama
wrote on November 11 2008 @ 11:59 am: [report]

@Frank Are straight couples who are “physically incapable of starting their own family”—as in, unable to conceive and reliant on surrogate mothers and adoption—also “bastardizing” marriage?

Pick your argument and stick to it; either it’s about science or it’s about morals, but it can’t be both if you’re willing to make exceptions only for some.

J
wrote on November 11 2008 @ 12:08 pm: [report]

http://rm.livejournal.com/1499744.html

I wish everyone would watch this, both ‘sides.’ 

And btw Frank—well, I am 46, and have two teenagers already…if I were to marry a man, I wouldn’t want kids with him, either.

Frank
wrote on November 11 2008 @ 12:18 pm: [report]

You can all call it what you want, but two men or two women living and sleeping together is not a “marriage” no matter how you try to twist the language.  Get over it.

Marriage is a religious institution anyway, so why are gay people so adamant about wanting to get “married” when their very lifestyles show that they care little for religious norms anyway?

Whats it to you I bet you sin daily
wrote on November 11 2008 @ 12:30 pm: [report]

How do you know who lives righteous? people in glass houses should not throw stones. Im gay and I dont drink, don’t smoke, I wanted to wait until marriage to have sex but…yeah thats out, but I don’t have sex unless I am in a COMMITTED relationship, I don’t steal, I rarely lie we all do lying is lying even telling your girl she doesn’t look fat in those jeans when she do is a lie. Hmm what else, I live as close to God as humanly possible, Im not perfect but Im not the devil either. I pretty sure you as hetero like to explore difference sex positions with your significant other. Do you realize that anal sex was ILLGEAL??? I pretty sure lots of people have tried it. except me. ha ha. anyway but thats personal. I believe in God, I believe its on God for the world but we as human all interpret God differently, we are all right AND WRONG. how can you say God is forgiving but then say he’s jealous in one sentence? How can God hate when God the son taught people to love? Just because one is Gay doe not mean we hate God, alot of us struggle and lead misleading lives because we don’t want to anger God, but to me God and anger is an oxymoron. I pray, I try and do right, yes I curse, yes I lust (what human being doesn’t) I have tried things here and there but now as an adult, I live right. You can’t tell me anything that Im doing wrong except the obvious of eating shrimp, occasional white lie (i.e. are you sad? my reply no but truth is I am <lie>) but I have compassion, I treat people with respect, and I do unto others as I would like done to me

J
wrote on November 11 2008 @ 01:52 pm: [report]

Curiosity got the better of me, so I decided to go on an internet hunt to see just what the origins of marriage truly are. Except for sites that are of the uber-religious variety, I found generally this sort of answer:

From Wikianswers.com http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Origin_of_marriage:

Sorry to say, but the origin of marriage predates recorded history. It is highly unlikely that the basic concept of holding a ceremony to commemorate a life partnership began in any one culture. For instance, marriage existed amongst tribes native to the Americas long before Europeans reached their shores (and, naturally, also before they were named Americas). This, and other such examples, indicates that marriage developed in different ways in different cultures before those cultures were able to interact with each other, ergo eliminating the possibility of a single origin of marriage. Marriage has played a variety of roles in a variety of cultures ranging from the mundane purposes of alliances or selling daughters as currency to the more romantic purposes of raising a family or for love.

The argument that ‘marriage is a religious institution’ has never held water for me.  It’s just not a good argument. And, as has been argued—I really don’t understand why gay marriage is so threatening as compared to, oh, say, divorce.  The divorce rates are FAR more damaging to ‘the sanctity of marriage’ than gay marriages could ever possibly be.  And in hetero divorces? If the partners are ‘obedient’ and procreate ‘as they of course must in a marriage’ (according to so many arguments), I can’t help but feel sorry for the children involved. 

Far sorrier for them than for my two kids who lost their father young, and their mother has found happiness with her partner who just happens to be the same gender.  Dammit—how dare my kids be happy, well-adjusted, compassionate, empathetic humans?  (Even without a father around? GO ME!)

Alabama
wrote on November 11 2008 @ 09:01 pm: [report]

The argument about gays being so disrespectful of religious norms always raises the same question in my mind—if gay people are so uninterested in following religious tenets, how do you explain all the gay priests?

lisa
wrote on November 11 2008 @ 09:20 pm: [report]

Marriage is an institution created by God, and God doesn’t approve of homosexuality because it is a sin and God hates sin, and God wans people to stop sinning, and God may be a God a some variety as we can see His world is occupied with diverse persons and animals, etc. but God gave us in His word, the bible, guidelines for living and the bible clearly expresses that God disaproves of homosexuality.

laila
wrote on November 11 2008 @ 09:38 pm: [report]

@ Carol, God doesn’t hate homosexuals/lesbians. He hates sexual immorality, God wants people to repent of their sins and accept His son Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior, whoever does this will inherit eternal life and go to heaven, those who in ignorance think/believe that God will receive them in heaven on their own terms are mistaken the bible doesn’t teach that. The bible tells us repeatedly to repent and to stop sinning. Carol, I can only think that you believe in God because you care to please him and find favor with him and if you believe in heaven you should read your bible and see for yourself what God says about him self and about sin and what it says you need to do to get into heaven.