Proposition 8

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/deadlineus...6/usa-gayrights

California have voted yes to Proposition 8. All gay marriages are effectively null and void. What are your views? Why is it possible that this discrimination still exists? Would you have voted yes or no?

Of course I would have voted no. I feel almost sad I live one state above California, because I would have liked to vote against it. I'm disappointed in California, but they are winning back my respect because I'm hearing a lot about protests. Tegan Quin of Tegan and Sara was in California yesterday to help protest.

As I told a friend of mine who lives in California,

"The way I think about it... We have to make sacrifices. Democrats are owning the House and the Senate too. As a gay person, I am willing to wait a little bit longer for my rights, there are more important things going on. As much as I really wish Prop 8 wouldn't pass, if it does, I think in the end we will be better off because of the way big government is looking. Even though I don't live in Cali, if this was going in my state, I would feel the same as I do now. Hey look on the bright side, this is an amazing point in history and all we can do is think about the future. More chances will come up to overturn Prop 8."

I said this before it was official though. But I still feel the same.

Sadly the messege it's clear,discrimination still very much a life in this country ! but at least I'm proud of the city that i live in ! read the link!

this is how people voted in San Francisco !

link
http://www.sfgate.com/webdb/prop8results/?...=76146188684214

I live in California and I am going to be honest with you, I voted Yes On prop 8. Why? you ask, because it's not their right to be married, if God would have wanted women to marry women he wouldnt have made adam and viceversa. Marriage is sacred and it should only be between a man and a women.

Also, because When i have kids, I dont want the school system to say that it's madatory to teach them that they can marry the same gender. What I teach my child is up to me. Children need a father and a mother, a girls look up to their father, which i may add that the father is the first male figure in her life that she will look up to, who will giver her the conifidence that she needs and raise her self-esteem. While a boy's first female figure in his life is his mother.

And the third reason, this was forced upon us. We didnt get to choose until now what we want for our state. Obviously, Cali has spoken.

BTW, I know you're going to be bashing on me. I dont hate gays or lesbians, and it's not even about discrimination. IT's about what's morally right. You may also say that I'm closed minded.

It's my opinion and my beliefs and I'm entitled to them.

no bashing from me ! that is your opinion and I respect it ! i do believe strongly in equality and freedom for all ! besides who the hell are we to tell anybody who they can marry or who they can't not ? and what it bothers me a lot is why people have to put god on this issue, sounds kind of prehistoric to me ! but to each his own ! this is just my opinion! Paz

Tbh I don't think you will get any bashings on this forum, even from me You're right, everyone is entitled to their opinion.

I don't know if you're missing this whole part of the want for gay "marriage", but it is actually about the legal rights. It doesn't have to have anything to do with the church, but not allowing two partners to see each other in the hospital, or get the same tax benefits, or the right to adopt a child, is discrimination. As far as I know, it's each individual church's right to marry a couple under God, or to not, but it's the state that decides the ability to grant the same legal standings as a straight couple.

I apologize in advance if this doesn't make sense, I'm in the middle of an online match on Xbox Live

Sad times for California.

Good times for stupidity.

If it wasn't for the "activist judges," I would never get to go to any other college but a historically black college. I never would have been able to attend a school with white kids.

Frankly, I don't care what you teach your kids. But to deny me the right to marry someone that I love, because of your outdated views on homosexuality and marriage, is insulting. If I have kids, I should be able to raise MY kids in a stable environment in a marriage that is state-sanctioned, only because then, I'd have the rights given by the government to not have to give up my kids in case something happens to my wife.

This isn't about morality at ALL. This is about equal rights under the law. Giving me the right to marry, has nothing to do with your church or whatever. I don't WANT to get married in your church. You can have those. This is about the GOVERNMENT not denying rights just because I love someone of the same sex.

how about that !

link to the article
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?.../MNH413UTUS.DTL

It amazes me that a country that calls itself the land of the free...Is more backwards in that respect than some European countries that we consider backwards...And those countries have same sex marriages.

Frankly; to pass a law; an actual law, to ban it's own citizens from doing exactly what any other citizen can do; simply based on a fact of nature's selection of who they are...Digusting.

I feel ashamed...

Not agreeing with another person's choice of "lifestyle" or whatever you want to call it, is perfectly okay with me. You can ignore them all you want, cross the street to avoid them, tp their house on mischief night, fine. Using the government and the law to force them to act the way you want them to is monstrous. The law is not supposed to be used to make us all alike, think the same way or make us all best friends and like each other...it's to keep as many of us alive to see the end of the day as possible. There should never have even been a vote on this subject, nor a law against it or for it. The only marriage any person in this country has a say in, is their own. To demand that they have a say in another person's marriage, that you disagree with what they are doing and that the big bad government should force them to stop on your behalf, is evil. I hear people saying that, this is not something that God would have wanted (says so right in the book). Let me tell you what I believe; God loves all of us, his teachings are not meant to divide us, to be used against one another, no person living or dead has the moral right to tell another how they should live if they are truly living as their heart tells them to do.

I think my position on this will be clear. I think it (Proposition 8) is stupid, outdated and highly discrimanatory. As Madam Tampini said earlier, this is about legal rights primarily. In the UK, same sex marriage is allowed. It's called a civil union, if i remember rightly, but it allows couples to have the same rights. This is what the majority of people want, just the right to be seen as a couple in a committed relationship who love each other and not having to worry that if they're in an accident, they will need to leave their loved one with nothing.

The way I see it is that straight couples can marry with no problems, pop down to Vegas and you're done. Yet so many people just crap on their vows, divorce after x amount of time. Where is the sanctity in that? How is that making marriage sacred? At least give gay couples the chance to be married, to have that security. It's not asking for kids to be taught that gay marriage is the done thing, just that people can make choices. When I have children, if i am blessed to do so, I will teach them that the world is made of different individuals and that all are equal.

It is narrow minded views like yours that can escalate into hate crimes. There would be uproar if a black child was killed by a white child or a Jewish child was killed by a Christian. But when Lawrence King was killed by a classmate, there was barely a rumble. It may seem unrelated, but by not allowing gay couples to share a norm given to the rest of the population, they are seen as outsiders and deviants, making them prime targets for discrimination and abuse.

As for your argument about God creating Adam and Eve, whilst I respect your beliefs, I do feel that you are picking and choosing your faith. Whilst this is supposedly true, that God created Adam and Eve, in the bible it also says "Love thy neighbour" and "Do unto others as you would have do to you." Basically be nice, tolerant and accepting. Your views are discriminating against another group. You may not believe their way of life is right but it is a life that they lead. In my eyes, no one is born homosexual or bisexual, why would someone choose to be in a group so regularly discriminated against?

I'm afraid your argument about a child needing a father figure who is actually their father is pretty redundant as well. I know many single mothers who have raised their children to be well adjusted and capable people, without the direct need of a tradition father figure. Whilst some may argue that this is the "norm", that every child should have 'daddy' in their life, how can you justify that to someone who lost their father when they were young? Same applies for children raised by a lone father.

I accept that this is your view and yes you are entitled to them. I also doubt a few people on this public forum will change your mind. However, it's worth thinking whether you have substantial reasons for disagreeing with something that doesn't directly affect you.

This post has been edited by BekI on Nov 7 2008, 06:03 PM

Ok hold up a sec. Hopefully I can provide some balance here. HOPEFULLY, lol.

I agree with the majority here's perspectives and I would have voted No on Prop 8 were I a voting Californian, but let's not call others' perspectives stupid. Calling someone else narrow-minded b/c they feel differently than you is just as narrow-minded. Also, to judge someone as un-Christian b/c they don't fit the bill of what YOU find Christian is JUST as bad as them judging you for what THEY find un-Christian. So do you see the hypocrisy there? A wise man once said "Be the change you want to see in the world." so while it's frustrating to be open to someone who may not be open to you, it's the right thing to do if you truly stand for what you say. Also, saying she HAS to give you a reason that's not religious based is unfair. Why does it matter if it's religious based? You have no more right to infringe on her freedom of religion than she does your freedom to marry if you are gay. See my point?

I think we've reached the point where courts and elections now decide who's "rights" are more important. Take slander vs freedom of speech. Pro-life vs pro-choice. And so on. But at the end of the day, it's all the individual. And it's all a matter of opinion. That's what makes this country great after all. Saying "I disagree with your lifestyle and won't support it." is far different from saying "You disgust me and I want you to die." As long as no one says the latter, which they haven't in this forum, then we're all good here and should avoid namecalling or else it's just a complete hypocrisy. I know it's hard, I've been there....fighting what I perceive to be negative people, but to fight negativity with negativity solves absolutely NOTHING. Defending is one thing, attacking is another. It's taken me hitting my head against a metaphoric wall many times to finally learn that.

Seeing each others' sides is key to unity, even if you never agree. You CAN co-exist peacefully with people you disagree with. Heck, you can even love them. Shocking I know. Just remember that and keep the peace. Carry on.

L.

P.S. Again, BE THE CHANGE YOU WANT TO SEE IN THE WORLD. If you hate judgment, then don't judge. Do what you feel they refuse to do. If this perspective is embraced, then perhaps someday there will be true peace and love.

Leigh, I get what you're saying. But I wouldn't have even responded to this thread if this lady/guy didn't actually TAKE PART in denying my right to marry who I want if I decide to live in California.

I think that this is a completely different ball-game. It's not just her saying "homosexuality is bad, mmkay?" She VOTED to deny a whole GROUP of people EQUAL rights under the LAW.

And she based this vote on a LEGAL matter using her RELIGIOUS views. I mean, she just used her "right to religion" to DENY someone else EQUAL rights.

Of course she HAS to have a non-religious reason for voting no on this. That's because the US is supposed to have Separation of Church and State, but clearly this person doesn't realize that or doesn't care. This Proposition had NOTHING to do with her freedom of religion. No one ws gonna force any church to recognize gay marriage. But she chose to help violate the Constitution by basing this legal matter on her religious views.

Agreed Leigh, I may have stepped a little over the mark and it has been amended. It's just an issue that I feel strongly about and having spent time researching how Christianity can be used so negatively towards the LGBT community, it grates a little when people use this reason. I fully accept your right to your opinion, Isa_Nicole, I just don't agree with it. Reading back it would appear that I was calling your view stupid, this isn't the case, it was just poor quoting on my behalf. I was merely calling the actual proposition stupid.

See if it's the individuals choice, then surely such a proposition shouldn't exist as it takes away the individual choice. Obviously I realise that allowing the individual to choose everything they do, be it good or bad, opens a whole can of worms. However, marriage isn't a bad thing.