Prop 8 wasn't passed in only 3 states...

[raymond_obsessed]

You know, it doesn't matter how people might feel on the subject of homosexuality, whether people chose it or were born with it, or whether it's right or wrong...It's not for anyone to decide...the whole point is that it's the way some people choose to live their lives, just because we don't agree with it, it doesn't mean they shouldn't be allowed the right to get married...I have a younger sister that's a lesbian, and through her, know some other lesbians, I've known plenty of gay guys as well, and it never bothered me...I saw the ad to vote no on Prop 8...if you haven't seen it, let me try to describe it for you...

It begins with a woman getting ready on her wedding day, she's ready to walk out of the building, but the door is stuck, so her father gets something to try to pry the door open. When they get out, there are so many cars parked outside, that the woman could barely squeeze through, and even gets caught in the cans that are tied to the back of the "Just Married" car. She gets to this vine-filled structure, I forget what it's called, but her veil gets caught on the vine, and when she walks out, her hair is all messed up...But she still smiles, because she sees her groom not too far away...As she begins to walk, one of the flower girls grab onto her legs, and her father has to pull her away...So she starts walking down the aisle without her dad, only to have an old lady sitting by the aisle trip the bride with her cane. She falls to the ground, and the groom seeing this wants to help her, but his groomsmen pulls him back...Then they show a sentence below the bride's face, saying, "How would you feel if you couldn't marry the person you loved?"

That totally got me, somehow, in the midst of the homosexuality, morality, religion issue; we forget that homosexuals are people too. How can we deprive human beings of the right to legally be together? Even animals have rights, but we deprive humans of the right to promise to share their lives with one another, just because they love differently?

I had a conversation not to long ago with a friend of mine, saying why she wouldn't vote for Obama, and she said it was because he's evil. Why? Because he would legalize gay marriage...So equality for all people is now called evil? She said if he was willing to do that, then the whole country would go to hell...Okay, but what about the wars that we've had recently? Weren't we already in hell? She was very black-and-white on that issue...when she's not even a black-and-white person. She was willing to see gray areas for everything, but this.

I take this whole issue personally because my little sister, that I love, is a lesbian...and I even knew it before she did...But I guess our country hasn't changed much...what happened to acceptance? Tolerance? It's like not counting certain people just because they weren't white...I don't want to take this as far as comparing gays to blacks, because I don't want anyone to get riled up or offended...but if homosexuals, as humans, have rights to vote, to work, to do everything else, why can't they get the right to get married? How is that hurting anyone? Gay couples can adopt, can have children, but now they can't get married...in California, probably the most diverse state in America? I'm glad that it passed everywhere else, but so disappointed that it didn't pass in my own state.

 

[lady0fdarkness]

Very well written. Though I am somewhat a conservative, when it comes to gay marriage, I feel like gay marriages should be allowed EVERYWHERE. I have a gay cousin, so this issues does hit home for me. I believe everyone should have the right to marry whom they love whether it be black, white, asians, hispanics, gay, or lesbian. What can be so wrong about two people loving eachother? Wanting to devote their lives and love to one another? Isn't marriage about honesty, love, and commitments between two people?

Well.. eventhough Prop 8 didn't pass... now that Obama is President and he did promised changes, perhaps he can do something about this? For this is America.. and I think Americans in whatever shape or form, have the right to be humans, and that includes marriage.

 

[Liberty]

Ditto.
With all that's going on around the world, I don't think the subject of homosexuality should even be up for discussion, especially in government.
It sure as hell shouldn't be decide by the government or anyone else.
No one has the right to decide how others should live their life.
No one has the right to take someone else's right away from them just because they don't agree with the way they choose to live their life.

Marriage is just a word, it only has meaning when we put meaning to it. It's just like any other word and object, meaningless until it's been given a meaning.
It's important to gays/lesbian to be able to get "married" because they deserve the same right that's given to anyone else for doing the same thing (getting married).
There's a lot that comes with being legally married, they're just asking for those same rights.

 

[transcend89]

i hate this issue and though i have my opinions on it i don't want to say it.....sometimes freedom of speech is a crime.....like the saying goes "bricks and stone may hurt my bones but WORDS may never hurt me" that's a LIE

 

[mintwix]

^^ Interesting. I wanna hear what you have to say. ^_^

Actually. During the debate, both Biden and Palin said neither ticket supported gay marriage.

These days. There's hardly anyone who doesn't have a close someone who isn't straight... I wonder how you know someone is gay or lesbian before they themself know.


For the record, I voted yes on Prop 8. I can't say that I'm too passionate for either sides. Though, where I come from, I am a black sheep. The young ones are always "Vote No! Vote No!" Dare I go astray. Usually, common locations for ads, flyers, and such are placed in the restrooms. So when you sit down to do no. 1 or no.2 you won't miss it. And not surprisingly, the vote no flyers stayed up from last month to now, the vote yes flyer didn't stand for even one day.

I didn't do much research on this issue. But from a neutral standpoint, what I see as the real matter involves officially and legally changing the definition of traditional marriages, not depriving individuals of choosing their own lifestyles; because, well, no one is doing the latter, really. I'm not very religious so I have no real idea how real religious conservatives see the issue. But are these same conservatives who are against gay marriages also against gay partnerships and families? :huh: Marriage has always been defined as a union between a man and a woman. Family on the other hand has a broader meaning. Your family can include gay parents, straight parents, even your dogs and cats. So when I voted yes, I admit, I was shallow, I wasn't thinking about human rights being deprived (as I still am not convinced what specific fundamental human right is being deprived, since the right to marriage is not up there with the right to life, if you know what I mean) I was being technical and thinking about the definition of a word that has held its meaning for more than one millenium. Someone told me marriages should be in the hands of religious institutions and not the government. .. Really. I am either just ingnorant or disppasionate about this topic...So, though such unorthodox suggestions shall come to no avail, I hereby propose that the partnership between a man and a man or a woman and woman be given a newly created word that shall hereon be recognized by the government. And such absurdity is never heeded.

I think we can bet that marriage between GLBTs will become legalized by the end of this century. And I'm not saying that to imply any negative or positive connations. Just a matter of fact hunch.

I too hate this topic. Too polarizing.

 

[raymond_obsessed]

^There were some things that she did, the way she acted...and I just knew, like when we'd talk about boys...it wasn't the same as what I would hear from someone talking about boys...then hearing her talk about her girl friends...

 

[CTR]

+1 Could not have said it any better. B) I'm a conservative Democratic. If you vote a certain way, people will think this and that. If you voted yes, people will think you are narrow minded or being unfair. I like democracy because it gives people a voice when they vote. If you voted no, people will say you are not a supporter of marriage (traditional) and ....

What is mind bogging is that people are complaining about it after the measure has been passed. There were no threads like this before or no one was protesting in the street. I think the people who were for the "no" vote just assume that it was going to pass with a flying color. They even had more money especially from Celebs. If you are passionate about something then go out into the street and talk to people about it before referendum was passed. Get as many people out to vote and be active in your desire for that goal. Now when the referendum enacted, people are crying left and right. Like President-Elect Obama said, "don't get mad vote." As for me, I was an Obama supporter from day one and I was actively volunteering for his presidency until the end of the election.

^^ Interesting. I wanna hear what you have to say. ^_^

Actually. During the debate, both Biden and Palin said neither ticket supported gay marriage.

These days. There's hardly anyone who doesn't have a close someone who isn't straight... I wonder how you know someone is gay or lesbian before they themself know.


For the record, I voted yes on Prop 8. I can't say that I'm too passionate for either sides. Though, where I come from, I am a black sheep. The young ones are always "Vote No! Vote No!" Dare I go astray. Usually, common locations for ads, flyers, and such are placed in the restrooms. So when you sit down to do no. 1 or no.2 you won't miss it. And not surprisingly, the vote no flyers stayed up from last month to now, the vote yes flyer didn't stand for even one day.

I didn't do much research on this issue. But from a neutral standpoint, what I see as the real matter involves officially and legally changing the definition of traditional marriages, not depriving individuals of choosing their own lifestyles; because, well, no one is doing the latter, really. I'm not very religious so I have no real idea how real religious conservatives see the issue. But are these same conservatives who are against gay marriages also against gay partnerships and families? :huh: Marriage has always been defined as a union between a man and a woman. Family on the other hand has a broader meaning. Your family can include gay parents, straight parents, even your dogs and cats. So when I voted yes, I admit, I was shallow, I wasn't thinking about human rights being deprived (as I still am not convinced what specific human right is being deprived, since the right to marriage is not up there with the right to life, if you know what I mean) I was being technical and thinking about the definition of a word that has held its meaning for more than one millenium. Someone told me marriages should be in the hands of religious institutions and not the government. .. Really. I am either just ingnorant or disppasionate about this topic...So, though such unorthodox suggestions shall come to no avail, I hereby propose that the partnership between a man and a man or a woman and woman be given a newly created word that shall hereon be recognized by the government. And such absurdity is never heeded.

I think we can bet that marriage between GLBTs will become legalized by the end of this century. And I'm not saying that to imply any negative or positive connations. Just a matter of fact hunch.

I too hate this topic. Too polarizing.

 

[Khatiya]

Ahhhh this topic, everywhere I go, and every channel I turn to on TV talks about it. (I am from the Bay Area) Yesterday there was a big march/protest in SF and block traffic and it was during rush hour too (on Friday). Those people who got stuck in the car (supporters and non-supporters) were frustrated.

I have nothing against gay or les however, I (again speaking of myself only) voted Yes on 8 (to protect traditional marriage). I think that the wording on the ballot is confusing. I believe that the word marriage to be between a MAN & WOMAN. But every body should have equal rights. Maybe they should come up with another word to label same-sex couple like CIVIL UNION? But the rights for MARRIED and CIVIL UNION couples should be the same. There can be a wedding ceremony and such, but I would like to have the word MARRIAGE be reserve for Man & Women only. Just like they should have the word CIVIL UNION be reserve for only same-sex couples.

Also, like some had mentioned earlier, it's just a matter of time until the country is able to accept same-sex civil union openly. Look how many decades it took for America to accept an African American as President. Perhaps, now is not the time YET.

When I watch the protesters, I hear almost of them claim that they have a right. While it's true, the voter who voted YES to banned also have a right. A right to vote. We live in a country that respect voters rights, otherwise, why would they settle with the votes for Obama? So, the issue was brought forth of California resident. They majority has voted to ban same-sex marriage. Should their vote be respected? It wasn't that close of a race either 53% voted YES.

Again, it's just a matter of time... otherwise, maybe they should come up with another wording on the ballot. CIVIL UNION with equal rights (copy all the rights from the MARRIAGE).

 

[judyp]

ahh. this topic again, i just had this discussion with a couple of people yesterday. i have nothing against gay marriage...it doesn't even pertain to me. but the fact that it is going to be taught to kids as young as 1st graders, that i have a problem with. i think the proposition was just poorly written.

 

[ohitsnoyyy]

Gosh, I was so pissed that prop 8 passed! No one has the right to tell you who you should date or who you should get married to. It's just discrimination.

& this whole thing about teaching kids about same-sex marriage in school-- where is this coming from!? When I was going to school, no teach brought up the subject of marriage! Can somebody please tell if your school is teaching about marriage...? Because my elementary/middle & high school never taught me about marriage. So I don't know why people are saying this. Kids shouldn't even be taught about marriage in the first place! They're kids!


This whole prop 8 just gets me heated up. I need to take a deep breath....

 

[ChenrukNote]

Well Noy,

In the propaganda ads (yes I call it propaganda LOL), they were saying that if Prop 8 did not pass then kids will be taught about it in school and parents would not be able to say no to like that one instance that occurred in Massachusetts. However, the truth is in California, marriage has never been taught in schools. It's not part of the CA standards. Besides I'm sure no teacher will have time to teach about it anyways since most kids starting in 2nd grade-11th are taught to pass the CA STAR tests with a certain API score so that their district will not suffer more from cutbacks in educational expenses, during spring. And in sophomore year of high school, they have to have gain enough knowledge to pass the CAHSEE or else they take it again junior and senior year and if they don't pass, then they don't graduate with a diploma so I don't see where the teachers are going to teach about marriage. It's not like they're going to set up a whole new curriculum on "marriage" especially with the recent education budget cut backs in CA due to our billions of dollar deficit.

 

[transcend89]

this thread shouldn't have been posted b/c everyone has their own different opinions about it...and it can cause ppl to be angry...why don't we just keep it to ourselves...just curious how many states do allow same sex marriages

 

[ohitsnoyyy]

Well Noy,

In the propaganda ads (yes I call it propaganda LOL), they were saying that if Prop 8 did not pass then kids will be taught about it in school and parents would not be able to say no to like that one instance that occurred in Massachusetts. However, the truth is in California, marriage has never been taught in schools. It's not part of the CA standards. Besides I'm sure no teacher will have time to teach about it anyways since most kids starting in 2nd grade-11th are taught to pass the CA STAR tests with a certain API score so that their district will not suffer more from cutbacks in educational expenses, during spring. And in sophomore year of high school, they have to have gain enough knowledge to pass the CAHSEE or else they take it again junior and senior year and if they don't pass, then they don't graduate with a diploma so I don't see where the teachers are going to teach about marriage. It's not like they're going to set up a whole new curriculum on "marriage" especially with the recent education budget cut backs in CA due to our billions of dollar deficit.

LOL. I'm only speaking for CA schools. I know i've never been taught about marriage. Shoot, when are teachers going to have time to teach about marriage?? Our schedules for the classes are already packed as they are.

Even if teachers are able to talk about same-sex marriage in school, it doesn't mean that the teacher's telling the students to "become" gay. It's just informing. Nobody can tell you want to do or who you be with. it's an individual choice.

 

[mintwix]

In other words judyp. You fell for the political scare tactic, and if you have nothing else against gay marriage, you should have voted no on Prop 8, yes?


BTW, CTR. I commend you for your efforts with Obama's campaign. There's a lot to be proud of in this election and isn't it great to be a part of history. B)

And raymond_obsessed, yeah I think I know what you mean. I personally was oblivious to things of that nature. But a cousin of mines observed such homogeneous attractions from another cousin of mines.

 

[judyp]

^^ no, i did not fall for the political scare tactic. under the education code 51890, teachers may be required to teach kids about marriage and if the proposition didn't pass, then that would mean teaching them about gay marriage (this doesn't mean starting a whole new curriculum for marriage). i don't agree with this because i feel that this should be up to the parents. these kids are young so i believe in doing what we can to keep their innocence. i know of a family w/ a little boy who is 7 and a girl who is 6. their mom stopped letting them bathe together, but they don't understand why. this just proves how innocent they are and i don't think we should be teaching them things that would confuse them further.

 

[CTR]

this thread shouldn't have been posted b/c everyone has their own different opinions about it...and it can cause ppl to be angry...why don't we just keep it to ourselves...just curious how many states do allow same sex marriages

Same-sex marriage only has effect at the state level as the U.S. federal government does not recognize same-sex marriages as marriages under federal law, in accordance with the Defense of Marriage Act.

Here are the banned states: Legal in: Massachusetts and Connecticut

Arkansas,
Georgia,
Kentucky,
Michigan,
Mississippi,
Montana,
North Dakota,
Oklahoma,
Ohio,
Utah,
Oregon,
Wisconsin,
California, (Updated)
Arizona, (Updated)
Florida, (Updated)
ETC

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Same-sex_marr...e_United_States

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Samesex...iage_in_USA.svg

 

[dfemc]

I believe that the word marriage to be between a MAN & WOMAN. But every body should have equal rights. Maybe they should come up with another word to label same-sex couple like CIVIL UNION? But the rights for MARRIED and CIVIL UNION couples should be the same. There can be a wedding ceremony and such, but I would like to have the word MARRIAGE be reserve for Man & Women only. Just like they should have the word CIVIL UNION be reserve for only same-sex couples.

there you go (links below): CIVIL UNION do not encompass the same rights as MARRIAGES, though you say it should (as i understand). now may i ask WHY or what's ur reasoning for reserving the word "MARRIAGE" for heterosexual couples? what is so special about the love between a man and a womyn that makes it distinctly different from the love between two ppl of the same sex?

http://www.yffn.org/admin/spi/marriagevsunion.html

http://lesbianlife.about.com/cs/wedding/a/unionvmarriage.htm

 

[mintwix]

^^ no, i did not fall for the political scare tactic. under the education code 51890, teachers may be required to teach kids about marriage and if the proposition didn't pass, then that would mean teaching them about gay marriage (this doesn't mean starting a whole new curriculum for marriage). i don't agree with this because i feel that this should be up to the parents. these kids are young so i believe in doing what we can to keep their innocence. i know of a family w/ a little boy who is 7 and a girl who is 6. their mom stopped letting them bathe together, but they don't understand why. this just proves how innocent they are and i don't think we should be teaching them things that would confuse them further.

I had no idea. There may just be more to discuss on how this piece actually fits into the whole picture, [that is some rules exists but are never really exercised] but I don't wanna get into it, apathetically speaking. I do respect your reasons. Children are precious afterall. And whether the public agrees or not on what constitutes educational harm, if you're the parent, that usually comes first.

 

[Muddie Murda]

Ah, d, I love you. Let's get married. lol

this thread shouldn't have been posted b/c everyone has their own different opinions about it...and it can cause ppl to be angry...why don't we just keep it to ourselves...just curious how many states do allow same sex marriages

hmm if noone should express their own opinion, then what's the whole point of a forum?

Good or bad, sarNies have always survived all the debates

 

[Khatiya]

there you go (links below): CIVIL UNION do not encompass the same rights as MARRIAGES, though you say it should (as i understand). now may i ask WHY or what's ur reasoning for reserving the word "MARRIAGE" for heterosexual couples? what is so special about the love between a man and a womyn that makes it distinctly different from the love between two ppl of the same sex?

http://www.yffn.org/admin/spi/marriagevsunion.html

http://lesbianlife.about.com/cs/wedding/a/unionvmarriage.htm

I see the term CIVIL UNION has already been used and comes in it's own package already. Thanks for bringing this up. I would like to see the word marriage reserve for heterosexual couples because of my belief, up-bringing and state-of-mind (at least at this moment in time). Again, this whole same-sex couple thing is still new to me. I mean back in a days, yes I hear it hear and there but now, it's constantly in the media, and all around and I just haven't got up to speed yet. So, I feel that it's just a matter of time, and others might feel the same way.

LOVE is LOVE, whether it's between PARENTS and CHILD, MAN and WOMAN or SAME-SEX. There is nothing wrong about LOVE itself, it's beautiful. However, just like there is a term to define a love between PARENT and CHILD and all the benefits that come with it, rights to supervise, guide, and authorize in certain activities and so does the term MARRIAGE.

Perhaps comes up with another term for Same-Sex couple. A NEW TERMINOLOGY that includes benefits. Basically a package, just like the FAMILY LOVE package or the MARRIAGE package.