California votes on same-sex marriage again

[sevfiv]

It's not hate. It's a disagreement.

A disagreement about what kind of benefits only certain couples should have? By not allowing gay couples to have the same rights and responsibilities as every other couple that decides to enter a union?

Please! People just voted away others' rights!

Not being religious, I wouldn't give a flip about what churches do - that's between the couple and the church.

But denying couples other rights and responsibilities for what? As if it personally and negatively affects another person when a couple shares an annuity, files a joint tax return, or arranges a loved one's funeral?

[BryanS]

I am saddened but not surprised at the hateful legislation passed in California, Arizona, Arkansas, and Florida. It's just hard to take in that people truly are like that

...but there is a silver lining...

...Every 20 years, starting since 1968, CT voters are given the opportunity to completely re-write their constitution by giving voters the option to call a convention - but only once every 20 years can voters make that choice.

2008 was a year where CT ended civil marriage discrimination... and was also the year where voters there, "outraged," by this act of equality, could have voted to have a convention, to re-write their constitution to include an initiative process... whereby same-gender marriage could eventually be put to a vote and overturned.

CT voters voted overwhelmingly NOT to have a constitutional convention. That means the earliest that anti-equality forces could put forward their amendment would be 2028, 2030 - provided they can convince voters 20 years from now to do so.

New Jersey is next. And anti-equality senators in the NY state senate have targets on them. Here in the not too distant future, states that border one another will issue and honor civil marriage certificates held by same-sex couples.

[VicMan]

CNN is now reporting that the California bill is likely to be defeated: http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/11/04/state.laws/index.html

[jayshoota]

It's not hate. It's a disagreement. Just because people believe that a marriage is defined as being between a man and a woman doesn't mean that they hate gay people. Please don't generalize. I firmly believe that only men and women should marry. I have nothing against gay people declaring a lasting union in front of anyone, but it doesn't count as a marriage. Call me what you want, I know the truth. I'm the most inclusive person you could meet. Christianity and religion is about accepting all people regardless or race, sex, creed, ethnicity, orientation, etc. You may have read about radicals but all groups have those. Look at HtownWxBoy above spitting venom at a group he doesn't even understand.

The people have voted, there was a majority. That's America. I guess in California more people agree with me than with the posters in this thread.

Maybe I did take it a bit over-the-top by using "hate" but I was really disappointed at the moment. Why doesn't a gay couple declaring a lasting union in front of anyone differ from a straight couple declaring a lasting union if front of everyone. I promise both will have cake and be going on a honeymoon. jk. But seriously, marriage has become a gov't institution. It is controlled by the gov't. I have no problem with keeping a religious ceremony btw a man and a woman but until the gov't gives up its control of marriage and just does civil unions, it is discrimination.

It is true the majority voted but you really agree that we should be voting on a person's rights and liberties? I am sure in 1965 if you had held a vote on the segregation of schools you would have had a majority of the vote for it but that certainly does not make it right.

[BryanS]

CNN is now reporting that the California bill is likely to be defeated: http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/11/04/state.laws/index.html

CNN is wrong/behind.

http://www.sfgate.com/election/races/2008/...alifornia.shtml

95% of precints reporting. With Los Angeles county reporting 100%...

52 to 48... PASSING.

EDIT: According to exit polls... it should have been 48 to 52... for defeat. Just goes to show that exit polls are not reliable...

[barracuda]

I don't understand why civil rights of a minority are put of for vote by the majority in the first place. And the fact that this is being perpetrated by the religious right makes it all the more disgusting. They are ruining lives and dreams across the country and enforcing their own religious beliefs on a minority that may be of a different religion or no religion at all.

Many of the voters approving of such draconian measures probably don't give such ballots a second thought. It doesn't directly affect them, so why should they care?

It's seeming more and more like the only solution is a new or amended Civil Rights Act to protect the rights of our gay minority from the tyranny of the majority.

[KinkaidAlum]

It's not hate. It's a disagreement. Just because people believe that a marriage is defined as being between a man and a woman doesn't mean that they hate gay people. Please don't generalize. I firmly believe that only men and women should marry. I have nothing against gay people declaring a lasting union in front of anyone, but it doesn't count as a marriage. Call me what you want, I know the truth. I'm the most inclusive person you could meet. Christianity and religion is about accepting all people regardless or race, sex, creed, ethnicity, orientation, etc. You may have read about radicals but all groups have those. Look at HtownWxBoy above spitting venom at a group he doesn't even understand.

The people have voted, there was a majority. That's America. I guess in California more people agree with me than with the posters in this thread.

Yes, and in your definition of America, we'd still have slaves in the South or at least Jim Crow laws. We might also not have women voting.

People should not be voting on civil rights issues. That is NOT the American way.

As for you being the "most inclusive person you could meet," I highly doubt it. Inclusive people DO NOT DENY PEOPLE THEIR RIGHTS UNDER LAW; PERIOD.

[memebag]

People should not be voting on civil rights issues. That is NOT the American way.

Kinda is. The American way is to ignore civil rights, then vote against them, then thrash about and get violent, then give in and accept them. Next comes the thrashing about.

[dbigtex56]

It's not hate. It's a disagreement. Just because people believe that a marriage is defined as being between a man and a woman doesn't mean that they hate gay people. Please don't generalize. I firmly believe that only men and women should marry. I have nothing against gay people declaring a lasting union in front of anyone, but it doesn't count as a marriage. Call me what you want, I know the truth. I'm the most inclusive person you could meet. Christianity and religion is about accepting all people regardless or race, sex, creed, ethnicity, orientation, etc. You may have read about radicals but all groups have those. Look at HtownWxBoy above spitting venom at a group he doesn't even understand.

The people have voted, there was a majority. That's America. I guess in California more people agree with me than with the posters in this thread.

These sentiments are far from unique. Many people who practice discrimination are shocked and hurt that others take offense.

I'm reminded of a saying common fifty years or so ago: "I don't dislike the coloreds. I think they're just fine, so long as they remember to stay in their place."

And now we have the uppity homos wanting to get married! As if their love were real...

[gwilson]

I am saddened but not surprised at the hateful legislation passed in California, Arizona, Arkansas, and Florida. It's just hard to take in that people truly are like that

Not agreeing with something isn't the same as being hateful. This is a tactic that has been used repeatedly in the past and it alienates on-the-fence voters who have religious or moral beliefs that oppose gay marriage, but social views that lean to the "live and let live" mentality. By calling people who disagree hateful, you push them over the fence by putting them on the defensive.

A person thinking gay marriage is morally wrong does not, in any way shape or form, make them hateful. Just like when men who were outspoken about not wanting Hillary were called sexist and whites outspoken about Obama were called racist.

One doesn't equate the other.

[gwilson]

Yes, and in your definition of America, we'd still have slaves in the South or at least Jim Crow laws. We might also not have women voting.

People should not be voting on civil rights issues. That is NOT the American way.

As for you being the "most inclusive person you could meet," I highly doubt it. Inclusive people DO NOT DENY PEOPLE THEIR RIGHTS UNDER LAW; PERIOD.

I don't give two ***** about gay marriage. I don't think the state should be involved in it at all, legalizing it or making it illegal. To me, it should be a non-issue. I have plenty of gay friends and I love them to death. I would never treat them differently than any other person, in spite of me not agreeing with one of their life decisions. It isn't up to me to judge (I'm one of those Christians who actually read the Bible and knows that even though homosexuality is said to be a sin, it isn't my place to judge).

[sevfiv]

Like I posted earlier, it seems mighty hateful to go to the polls and vote against civil liberties for a group of people.

There's a failed connection here - letting Jill and Jill file a tax return together isn't going to have any effect on anyone's religion. I promise.

Not agreeing with something isn't the same as being hateful. This is a tactic that has been used repeatedly in the past and it alienates on-the-fence voters who have religious or moral beliefs that oppose gay marriage, but social views that lean to the "live and let live" mentality. By calling people who disagree hateful, you push them over the fence by putting them on the defensive.

A person thinking gay marriage is morally wrong does not, in any way shape or form, make them hateful. Just like when men who were outspoken about not wanting Hillary were called sexist and whites outspoken about Obama were called racist.

One doesn't equate the other.

[gwilson]

Like I posted earlier, it seems mighty hateful to go to the polls and vote against civil liberties for a group of people.

There's a failed connection here - letting Jill and Jill file a tax return together isn't going to have any effect on anyone's religion. I promise.

Again, disagreeing isn't hating. Hate is a VERY strong word. Hate implies many things which disagreeing does not.

Civil unions are already legal IIRC, so Jill and Jill can already file a tax return. What these people were voting against was the amending of their constitution for something that didn't belong there in the first place (marriage -- in general).

Sure, some of them are homo-haters. But to call everyone who voted against it, without knowing their individual reasons, hateful...well, that is just another form of prejudice.

[sevfiv]

^ The ballot language used and the images of Prop 8 supporters seem a little more heated than a disagreement.

Hate is a very strong word, and these folks for Proposition 8 seem to feel very strongly against others. Maybe I misconstrued it.

I think California has "domestic partner registration" which gives state-level rights, but not civil unions

[sevfiv]

California voters approve gay-marriage ban

LOS ANGELES – In an election otherwise full of liberal triumphs, the gay rights movement suffered a stunning defeat as California voters approved a ban on same-sex marriages that overrides a recent court decision legalizing them.

The constitutional amendment — widely seen as the most momentous of the nation's 153 ballot measures — will limit marriage to heterosexual couples, the first time such a vote has taken place in a state where gay unions are legal.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081105/ap_on_...ballot_measures

[gwilson]

So sad.

[Mark F. Barnes]

[musicman]

the way the chron's spinning it, sounds like obama being on the ballot may have been a bad thing for the proposal because blacks voted overwhelming for the ban.

[editor]

I haven't read anything in this thread in a couple of weeks and don't have time to skim the whole thing, but I just ran across some interesting numbers in the Los Angeles Times about Prop 8.

Earlier in this thread, one of the posters expressed outrage that entities outside of California (Specifically the Mormon Church) were spending money to promote Proposition 8. The LA Times has an interesting graphic about the money spent for and against 8.

The part that pertains to the earlier discussion comes when you hover your mouse over the green and blue bars.

• Money raised outside California to oppose the ban on same-sex marriages: $11,895,435
  
• Money raised outside California to support the ban on same-sex marriages: $10,581,085
  

As always in politics, there's plenty of blame to go around.

[memebag]

Never mind. I read it wrong.

[BryanS]

...and now... the lawsuits:

http://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/local/Laws...on_8_Filed.html

Three legal groups filed a writ petition Wednesday with the state Supreme Court, urging the invalidation of Proposition 8, which bans same-sex marriage.

The petition charges that Proposition 8 is invalid because the initiative process was improperly used in an attempt to undo the constitution's core commitment to equality for everyone by eliminating a fundamental right from just one group

[westguy76]

From one "nut job" to the peanut gallery....

How can a homosexual claim civil rights?

Do polygymists have claim to civil rights? I didn't think they did.

I understand you guys claim you can't conform to society. I guess we all have to wait for the discovery of the ever elusive gay gene. Then we can talk inalienable rights.

I'm going to be honest, I am not trying to bait here...

Really my problem is that I am disgusted by homosexuals, by the thoughts of the things they do. I picture images from the Fulsum Street XX fests.

I'm put off by the faries that throw on their manerisms and twinky voices. To me it has been and always will be a subculture of people that for varying different reasons choose to jump the fence into a taboo lifestyle.

You have to know that tons of Americans feel this way.

I don't want you to hate me, I don't hate you. I just don't want to have to explain this ____ to my kids

Based on my beliefs on the originality of homosexuality I don't see how it can ever be considered as a people, that is without question up to the standard of

a group that is worthy of rights that are granted to those of us that are born with things that we can not control that cause us to be discriminated against.

[west20th]

From one "nut job" to the peanut gallery....

How can a homosexual claim civil rights?

Do polygymists have claim to civil rights? I didn't think they did.

I understand you guys claim you can't conform to society. I guess we all have to wait for the discovery of the ever elusive gay gene. Then we can talk inalienable rights.

I'm going to be honest, I am not trying to bait here...Really my problem is that I am disgusted by homosexuals, by the thoughts of the things they do. I picture images from the Fulsum Street XX fests.

I'm put off by the faries that throw on their manerisms and twinky voices. To me it has been and always will be a subculture of people that for varying different reasons choose to jump the fence into a taboo lifestyle.

You have to know that tons of Americans feel this way.

I don't want you to hate me, I don't hate you. I just don't want to have to explain this ____ to my kids

Based on my beliefs on the originality of homosexuality I don't see how it can ever be considered as a people, that is without question up to the standard of

a group that is worthy of rights that are granted to those of us that are born with things that we can not control that cause us to be discriminated against.

Sure your not....

[memebag]

From one "nut job" to the peanut gallery....

How can a homosexual claim civil rights?

Anyone can, by not treating homosexuality as a personal choice. I didn't choose to be heterosexual. I can't choose to be homosexual. Did you decide to be attracted to the opposite sex?

[westguy76]

Anyone can, by not treating homosexuality as a personal choice. I didn't choose to be heterosexual. I can't choose to be homosexual. Did you decide to be attracted to the opposite sex?

I am definately straight but there may have been a time where I decided to choose to like girls yes, I think we all were there. I also had experiances around this time when I was molested and was ignorant to what was happening to me and how I felt about it. I could have chosen a different path of course. I also learned what I was expected to do with girls and I learned my attraction to some degree from popular culture and other natural ways.

So you agree that If I view homosexuality as a choice than my conclusion of not attibuting civil rights to them is correct?

[sevfiv]

Really my problem is that I am disgusted by homosexuals, by the thoughts of the things they do. I picture images from the Fulsum Street XX fests.

I'm put off by the faries that throw on their manerisms and twinky voices. To me it has been and always will be a subculture of people that for varying different reasons choose to jump the fence into a taboo lifestyle.

You have to know that tons of Americans feel this way.

I don't want you to hate me, I don't hate you. I just don't want to have to explain this ____ to my kids

If that painted all gay people (men and women), it seems you don't get out much. I guarantee that in everyday activities you run in to gay folks all the time, but you just don't know it.

[RedScare]

From one "nut job" to the peanut gallery....

How can a homosexual claim civil rights?

Do polygymists have claim to civil rights? I didn't think they did.

I understand you guys claim you can't conform to society. I guess we all have to wait for the discovery of the ever elusive gay gene. Then we can talk inalienable rights.

I'm going to be honest, I am not trying to bait here...

Really my problem is that I am disgusted by homosexuals, by the thoughts of the things they do. I picture images from the Fulsum Street XX fests.

I'm put off by the faries that throw on their manerisms and twinky voices. To me it has been and always will be a subculture of people that for varying different reasons choose to jump the fence into a taboo lifestyle.

You have to know that tons of Americans feel this way.

I don't want you to hate me, I don't hate you. I just don't want to have to explain this ____ to my kids

Based on my beliefs on the originality of homosexuality I don't see how it can ever be considered as a people, that is without question up to the standard of

a group that is worthy of rights that are granted to those of us that are born with things that we can not control that cause us to be discriminated against.

I'm not trying to bait either, but this is why I left the GOP 14 years ago. And for the record, I am unabashedly straight.

[Daniepwils]

I don't want you to hate me, I don't hate you. I just don't want to have to explain this ____ to my kids

So we should deny civil liberties to a group of people because you don't want to have an awkward talk with your kids? (I don't hate you btw)

I understand you guys claim you can't conform to society

So what? Have a gay woman marry a man, or a gay man marry a woman? That hardly seems fair. Why don't you marry a man for a year and tell us how you feel.

Really my problem is that I am disgusted by homosexuals, by the thoughts of the things they do. I picture images from the Fulsum Street XX fests.

Don't think about it then?

I'm put off by the faries that throw on their manerisms and twinky voices

They annoy the crap out of me too! But so does the loud person on a cell phone in an elevator.

[editor]

From one "nut job" to the peanut gallery....

How can a homosexual claim civil rights?

Do polygymists have claim to civil rights? I didn't think they did.

I understand you guys claim you can't conform to society. I guess we all have to wait for the discovery of the ever elusive gay gene. Then we can talk inalienable rights.

I'm going to be honest, I am not trying to bait here...

Really my problem is that I am disgusted by homosexuals, by the thoughts of the things they do. I picture images from the Fulsum Street XX fests.

I'm put off by the faries that throw on their manerisms and twinky voices. To me it has been and always will be a subculture of people that for varying different reasons choose to jump the fence into a taboo lifestyle.

You have to know that tons of Americans feel this way.

I don't want you to hate me, I don't hate you. I just don't want to have to explain this ____ to my kids

Based on my beliefs on the originality of homosexuality I don't see how it can ever be considered as a people, that is without question up to the standard of

a group that is worthy of rights that are granted to those of us that are born with things that we can not control that cause us to be discriminated against.

While this post is probably very useful for illustrating how a particular segment of the population feels about another particular segment of the population, it's pretty close to getting this thread closed.

Let's keep it on topic.

[memebag]

I am definately straight but there may have been a time where I decided to choose to like girls yes, I think we all were there. I also had experiances around this time when I was molested and was ignorant to what was happening to me and how I felt about it. I could have chosen a different path of course. I also learned what I was expected to do with girls and I learned my attraction to some degree from popular culture and other natural ways.

So you agree that If I view homosexuality as a choice than my conclusion of not attibuting civil rights to them is correct?

No. Just because something is chosen doesn't stop it from being a civil right. Religious affiliation is a civil right, and in many cases that's a choice.

But even if choice negated civil rights, I know gay people who were physically attracted to the same sex at 5 or 6, the about the same age I was first aware of my attraction to females. They weren't molested and they weren't encouraged to be gay by any aspect of our culture. They never made a choice. Would you deny civil rights to these people because some other people chose their sexuality?