What do you blame proposition 8's passing on?

[Puzuzzu]

it passed?!?!?!?!?
OMG
.......................

 

[Puzuzzu]

Last I knew they were still going the "every last vote hasn't been counted yet so don't assume"...

...but yeah, it passed.

I don't understand why people even have the right to vote whether we an marry whoever we want.

 

[star-warrior]

The people to fight against are those who propogate lies and ignorance, whether they be religious or not. I think the youth of today are far more tolerant than their parents, as shown by the voting yesterday.

You have youth on your side. They will be the ones who will change the face of gay rights in the future, just as they helped usher in a new era in American politics with the election of a black african american.

It might take another 40 years, sadly...

 

[maxpowr9]

You can be gay and happy (redundant?) in MA. Come up here! Much love around.

In 29 days, you can have less than an ounce of marijuana on hand and get only a $100 fine also.

Democracy is thriving here. Won't you come join us?

 

[davy]

I blame gays for not having enough conviction to demand marraige and settling for civil unions five years ago.

This put it in breeders' minds that civil unions were good enough and made them confused why we're suddenly bothering with full fledged marriage now.

This also made us reliant on a breeder politician to spark off what we should have had the balls to do in the first place.

 

[scream4ever]

40 years? I'd say more like 10-20 years.

 

[ColorSlaughter]

I blame a distorted, unrealistic, unjustified, and unhealthy sense of masculinity amongst all men across the country, most especially black men.

But theres not much you can do about that!

 

[davy]

We can be angry all we want but fact is DEMOCRACY has spoken in California and Florida on issue of gay marriage. Majority ruled just like they did for Obama.

Our constitution functioned as it is designed. Americans have become too disillusioned about what the constitution means and the history behind its blue prints. We are too quick to scream "my constitutional rights" when they are not there. We are not a totalitarian regime where we rely on Federal Government and Federal courts to dictate our social mores and to rule our lives.

We can't put faith into government by demanding it to force gay marriage through the legal system while at the same time criticize the same government when it passes something like the PATRIOT ACT. People can't have it both ways, or else government loses its point.


There isn't a single bill of right that was violated because marriage is not a federal right. The states had traditional control over issues such as criminal, civic and health laws through the 10th amendment. The modern age stretch of 14th amendment incorporation is borderline dangerous to our dual constitutionalism and federalism.

Gays wish for liberal Supreme Court so the judges favor their agendas, but at same time we are pissed when conservatives have their judges represent their agendas. Who says one is right or wrong over the other. Both use the constitution to justify their claims and personal beliefs.

Citizens of California objected a few judges to impose certain legal precedences. I support referendums on social and economic policies because that is how Democracy should work, not allow interest groups lobby their ideas into the judicial process. California always used referendums on legalizing certain drugs, tax policies and now gay marriage. The majority voted and don't support it.

Constitutions whether Federal or State are compacts between people with common goals and beliefs; constitutions are not universal divine laws with Taliban like force over will of majority.

the right this law is violating is the implied right to equality because "all men were created equal" ; not the "right to marriage" (which we both agree is not a right).

by singling us out from a privilege, they're curtailing that implied right.

though it's not an actual constitutional right; it does carry the same weight as the "right to privacy" (which we both probably know is not an actual right but is respected as such in any court because it's heavily implied in the actual amendments).

 

[Críostóir]

There are lots of people who are to blame for the majority of California's electorate deciding to be stupid, narrowminded, bigoted assholes.

The particular target of my rage right now is the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (the CJCLDS). They mounted a huge campaign for Prop 8. As far as I'm concerned, they're a hate group, just like the Westboro Baptist Church.

Next time I see Mormon missionaries in Hoboken, I'm going to tell them "Boys, I know you're just doing what you're told to do, but recruiting for hate groups is really frowned on here. Please get your skinny Mormon asses the hell out of my town!"

 

[davy]

Honestly if you were to argue that in court and I were a gay judge I'd say it's a weak argument.

says you.

"All men are created equal" is not part of constitution but part of the Declaration of Independence letter which predates Articles of Confederation and our Constitution. If our glorious forefathers who framed the constitution cared about "all men are created equal" they would not allow slaves or slavery to continue until the Civil War not laws and judges changed that.

forgive me; i always transpose idea that "all men were created equal" in the preamble; with the "promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty" in the constitution.

..... they both seem the same to me

Privacy laws are semi explicit in the 4th amendment unlike marriage. Remember that marriage in early America was NOT regulated by the government but by CHURCH and religion. Past societies went to Church to get married and not the mayor's office or the courts. Local governments slowly took over marriage regulations for health and economic reasons.

the present is where the matter is and where it should be decided; not compared to how it was then.

judging things now from the perspective of how things were in the early united states would take away the ability for women vote and prevent interracial marriages from happening.

There is a reason why people are still not comfortable to idea of same sex marriage it is because nowhere in ancient or 20th century societies did people even have it in their minds to rationalize that 2 same sexes could join a "holly matrimony."

what?!?!?!

you got meso american cultures whose priests performed gay marriages dating back to 300BC

you got middle eastern cultures that formally recognized the bond between a young male adult and an older patron male adult from the time of the persian empires.

you got the the japanese samurai who, during the renaissance, formalized their relationship with other male friends into "partners for life."

and in modern times you got canada, spain, the netherlands all accepting same sex marriages.

For many societies of any religion, race, custom, ethnicity, marriage is just that---between a man and a woman, and not between 2 same sex people, not between man a dog, woman and a cat, or man with a car.
May sound ridiculous by stretching the example but that's how it is.

for some of the native americans within the united states a marriage is a love between two entities. so some see a marraige between two mean as perfectly natural.

it's funny, from a inexperienced or sheltered perspective; but a man can, indeed, marry the (mother) earth in fewer native american cultures.

Time needs to pass to see if society is ready to redefine millennium old traditions.

i can't help you if you've been protected from learning about strong examples of gay marriages from antiquity and the present. but if you're serious about your position; i think i've just now understood why some gays are opposed to gay marraige.

 

[davy]

Democracy has spoken... Hmm...

Tell me something, what were the total votes by the American public when it came to granting equal rights for women to vote?

How many votes were made by the American public when it came to banning discrimination to black Americans in regards to voting, selling and renting houses and employment?

Tell me, F-22, how your arguments regarding how it isn't the government's or the court's place to enforce equality for all when the people are too blinded by prejudice to see can be true.

Can you?

as he and i both pointed out; equality is not a right in the united states.

it's a perceived and well defended practice; but not a right nonetheless.

 

[mike_n_herrin]

Personally i think the single stupidest things that occurred was that school trip to a lesbian wedding. no on prop 8 was telling people it had nothing to do with schools, but then some moron thought it was smart in the middle of this campaign to send school kids on a field trip to see a lesbian wedding?

this should be a wake up call to every minority out there or anyone who has ever had to fight for equal status, your rights can be taken away in a moment, through a simple majority vote by the public at large.

 

[hotdog1846]

I blame it on America (even California) not being quite there yet. The strides that have been made have been extremely significant, but there's still further to go. I'm confident that within a decade or so, we'll be there. If we keep the visibility up, if we show those who voted "yes" that we're "just us folks", I think they'll eventually come around.

Lex

Me too.

The issue is the word "marriage". Most straight men just can't imagine themselves ever wanting to marry another man (and so for women too). It's an emotional issue, and a deep and powerful set of emotions too. They assume a gay relationship is something sick, 'cause that's all they can imagine it as for themselves.

 

[davy]

The irony is that what we traditionally identify as minorities i.e. blacks voted against gay marriage. So this issue is complex, while pro gay activists might identify themselves as a "minority" group, minorities and others of all backgrounds do not see sexual labels as individual identity as race and nationality is. The courts have not identified gays as some unprivileged group, so I don't think it will sway people with "minority rights violations" arrangements on the issue of gay marriage.

technically, hispanics aren't an unprivileged group either. (but that's not the point i want to make)

another interesting irony is that our gay activists see ourselves as a minority; but we don't identify with each other as a minority in a way that a minority would self identify.

so it makes you wonder if we really are a minority.

 

[Jory]

I don't understand why people even have the right to vote whether we an marry whoever we want.

They used Section 3 and 4

CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION
ARTICLE 18 AMENDING AND REVISING THE CONSTITUTION


SEC. 1. The Legislature by rollcall vote entered in the journal,
two-thirds of the membership of each house concurring, may propose an
amendment or revision of the Constitution and in the same manner may
amend or withdraw its proposal. Each amendment shall be so prepared
and submitted that it can be voted on separately.



CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION
ARTICLE 18 AMENDING AND REVISING THE CONSTITUTION


SEC. 2. The Legislature by rollcall vote entered in the journal,
two-thirds of the membership of each house concurring, may submit at
a general election the question whether to call a convention to
revise the Constitution. If the majority vote yes on that question,
within 6 months the Legislature shall provide for the convention.
Delegates to a constitutional convention shall be voters elected from
districts as nearly equal in population as may be practicable.



CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION
ARTICLE 18 AMENDING AND REVISING THE CONSTITUTION


SEC. 3. The electors may amend the Constitution by initiative.



CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION
ARTICLE 18 AMENDING AND REVISING THE CONSTITUTION


SEC. 4. A proposed amendment or revision shall be submitted to the
electors and if approved by a majority of votes thereon takes effect
the day after the election unless the measure provides otherwise. If
provisions of 2 or more measures approved at the same election
conflict, those of the measure receiving the highest affirmative vote
shall prevail.

 

[Jory]

Personally i think the single stupidest things that occurred was that school trip to a lesbian wedding. no on prop 8 was telling people it had nothing to do with schools, but then some moron thought it was smart in the middle of this campaign to send school kids on a field trip to see a lesbian wedding?

this should be a wake up call to every minority out there or anyone who has ever had to fight for equal status, your rights can be taken away in a moment, through a simple majority vote by the public at large.

What I heard about the wedding is I think it was the teacher who was getting married and one of the parents thought it would be a good idea for the kids to go but it was not mandatory for the student to attend

 

[terry751]

I don't post here too often but the prop 8's passing still upsets me. I have to point out that not all people of color voted for prop 8; you have to understand that Black, Asian, and Latinos can be just as conservative as whites, in some cases more so. The fact they voted for it because of religious convictions doesn't surprise me, it saddens me. But some posters on some other boards seem to blame people of color for its passing. I'm ashamed to admit it but I was thinking of going to the Castro street this weekend but was wary after reading some nasty posts, especially against Asians and Latinos. I know that not all white gays think that ethnic communities are responsible but no one is pointing the finger at all the white evangelicals that helped its passing. I hope one day that we will have the right to marry the person we love but that day is still a long way off and pointing fingers at each other isn't going to help. Anyway, just my thoughts. By the way, to the poster who started all this, dude, I completely understand. You should have heard me in my car the other night as I was driving home from work!

 

[smoothebottom]

I heard this very interesting piece... I think I agree with it.

The LGBT community is to blame!61%+ of Californian's voted for Obama a Democrat and a Liberal. With a number like that, had you asked me beforehand it Proposition 8 would have passed I woulda replied, "no."
Yet, 48% voted -No on Prop. 8- 52% Pro Prop 8.

The passing of proposition 8 was a consequence of the LGBT's attack on the issue. i.e. calling supporters of the ban -bigots, idiots, hypocrits, etc.- Resorting to insulting the opposing side is not a way to win the argument. I have heard this alot. In fact, in San Diego alone, there were a few fights at polling places regarding the issue.

The community needs to rethink about the way its going about this.

 

[josher]

^^The California legislature had nothing to do with this. In fact they voted twice to approve marriage equality, but it was vetoed both times by the Republican governor.

This was a popular proposition, that is, it emerged from the electorate, the general public, which the California constitution permits.

 

[scream4ever]

"The California legislature had nothing to do with this. In fact they voted twice to approve marriage equality, but it was vetoed both times by the Republican governor."

What do you mean? The Surpreme Court of California declared it to be unconstitutional (made up mostly of Republicans). Also, from what I understand Arnold S. seems to be much more open to gay marriage now.