Another Marriage Petition Cleared For California

SACRAMENTO — The sponsors of a second ballot measure seeking to repeal California's ban on same-sex marriage have been cleared to start collecting signatures.

The secretary of state on Friday gave the group Yes on Equality until Aug. 17 to collect the nearly 700,000 signatures needed to qualify its initiative for the 2010 ballot.

If approved by voters, the group's proposed constitutional amendment would rescind Proposition 8, which passed last November. The California Supreme Court is expected to rule soon on legal challenges to the voter-approved measure.

Earlier this month, two Southern California college students got permission to start circulating petitions for a separate initiative that would end all marriage as a state-sanctioned institution and instead make couples _ gay or straight _ eligible only for domestic partnerships.

Comments

[PhilipB]

http://www.yesonequality.com/petition.html


found it on page 3
Thanks

[PhilipB]

Where do i sign the Yes on Equality petition.
I do not want to end marriage for everyone, personally. i just want to get married myself. More importantly, I want be treated as an equal citizen with civil rights.

[sumguy49]

History of homosexuality:

Up to last few decades--h­omosexuali­ty was considered an anomoly; unnatural; ...unacceptable

Mid-20th century--p­sychologis­ts perform in-depth studies on what was then considered a deviant behavior; conclusions drawn on studies of a only couple hundred subjects that are to be applied to approximately 1 Billion humans; homosexuality removed from deviant behavior list as a result of a few isolated studies; gross statistical error dismissed as conservative conspiracy

60's & 70's--push for tolerance begins in Hollywood / entertainment industry; "queer" becomes synonomous with "homosexual," while Webster's definition of " DIFFERING in some odd way FROM what is usual or NORMAL" remains

80's to present--
(1) the term "sexual preference" becomes common term
(2) realizing "preference" indicates choice in the matter, it is replaced with "orientation"
(3) gay pride events start making news on regular basis, resulting in desensitization;
(4) Information age allows rapid distribution of misinformation; any self-proclaimed expert is published instantly
(5) common name-calling that we all endured as children now considered "hate crime" activity
(6) CA State Bill 777 removes adjectivial definition of "sex" and replaces it with "gender";
(7) movement to include gay relationships in the marriage category under the guise of "tolerance;" liberals preach tolerance, but outwardly intolerant methods (ridicule) to silence opposing views
(8) to FORCE the radical-liberal agenda, a fundamental constitutional right--voting--is now regularly challenged whenever an issue that was voted upon does not work to the favor of the loser

2009 and beyond-- ???

[StevenKeirstead]

Your history is incomplete, at least, and very slanted in my opinion.

You omit the fact that almost all ancient cultures regarded homosexuality as normal, natural behavior and did not distinguish it from heterosexuality in moral terms. Though different from today's recognition of gay, lesbian or bisexual, homosexual relationships were celebrated in classical Greek and Roman culture, ancient China and Japan, and many Native American tribes. The biggest exception to ancient tolerance was ancient Hebrew culture. It was not until the mid 6th century that the Byzantine Church began to condemn homosexuals and punish them, adopting the Jewish laws against homosexuality. From then on Christian churches began to spread intolerance of homosexuality. Islam joined this tradition, which is not surprising since they adopted many Jewish myths. Many countries adopted the death penalty for homosexuality.

All reputable psychological professionals have accepted the 1978 APA change in diagnosis from disordered to a variation on normal sexual behavior. Why? Numerous psychological studies from the late 20th century to the present have shown that most homosexuals are well, adjusted functional people. The main stress on gays, lesbians and bisexuals has been identified as social and religious intolerance.

You are free to disagree with me and the APA and most people under 30, and you can say whatever you like.

[StevenKeirstead]

This is actually a far more fundamental redefinition of marriage than just allowing same sex couples to marry. As it is now marriages are all civil contracts registered by the states, and some people choose to have the marriages performed in a religious ceremony, while others have a civil ceremony only. By making the term marriage only religious, this petition would overturn 400 years of US marriage history. In Massachusetts the Puritans only had civil ceremony marriages, and priests and pastors were not allowed to perform marriages until later in history.

This petition would also raise legal conundrums. If all marriages in California were suddenly declared domestic partnerships, what would happen to the status of these couples as regarded by other states and the Federal Government? Not all states have a legal category for domestic partnerships, and the Federal Government does not recognize them. So Californian DP couples would not be able to file joint tax returns with the IRS, would not be able to claim spousal social security benefits, and many other Federal benefits would be denied, regardless of the sex or sexuality of these couples. Other states might not regard DP couples as married. The US Government and all other states would have to change laws so DP=Marriage.

In short, this is a much more complex route to marriage equality than simply allowing same sex marriages, which would need fewer law changes. Once DOMA is repealed, at least.

[JohnBisceglia]

Finally some folks are talking sense! - Best Idea Yet - EQUALITY & RELIGIOUS FREEDOM ACT (OMNIBUS EQUALITY BILL) : http://www.equalitygiving.org/Blueprint-for-LGBT-Equality

[ScandalousCandice7]

What is the status of the lawsuits against prop. 8?

[i approve this message]

The CA Supreme Court is expected to decide by early June.

[Pippen]

About time. We've been discussing this issue here for months and JUST now the student body is catching up ? C'mon you slow moving Cali people !!

I can't believe Mass. is ahead of California on this issue. It's a def shift in liberal forefront power.

[inorbit]

Let's have civil unions for all., gay or straight. Churches can then administer the "Sacrament" of marriage to whomever they choose.

[CricketGirl]

Yes! Marriages are about two things - the legality of the relationship (children, pensions, estates, etc.) and the spiritual or religious part of the relationship. Two ceremonies are the norm in many parts of Europe (like France) where, if people want to be married in a church, they cannot do so until they've been married in a civil ceremony. This should be the law for EVERYONE across the board.

[useyourbrain]

As it is now, all marriage is "civil" since you need a license from the State to get married and even if a minister performs the ceremony, he or she has to sign the license or some document when the marrieds do -- I've seen it after church marriage ceremonies.

So what's the big deal. Make them all civil. Period. If you want the church thing and they want to marry you -- go for it, but better yet, put a deposit down on a house instead.

[carsntrucks]

I really hope this fails.

[yoshi99]

I really hope it succeeds.

And, after that, I hope California abandons the premise that they can amend their constitution based on a simple majority vote.

[oldcliche]

I agree. Can you imagine all of the children that will catch the Gays if this is allowed. Won't someone think of the children. Also just think about all the cited evidence of societal breakdown when gays are allowed to spit on the santity of marriage. Whats next black people marrying white people? Now if you'll excuse me, I have board a plane back to Utah. I'll tweeter some updates when I can.

[carsntrucks]

Was that supposed to be humor? I couldn't tell.

[IrishDem06]

I have watching theses court cases a long now. And it seems the LGBT lawyers have found a great legal way of handling this using the separation of church and state to get the same rights for everybody. I have always said if you want the marriage defined as it was way back when. Then you deserve no legal rights that come along with it because that how it was. If you want the rights you will get the status of domestic partnership that everybody can have. You can call it marriage if you want but the government should not because of separation of church and state.

[AdamX]

Not bad.

[Lady Rose]

sounds like a very reasonable solution, and the separation between church and state that there is the better off we all will be

[CrittersRTasty]

Just out of curiosity, what specific "separation of church and state" are you referring to? All I've ever been able to find is a prohibition against the establishment of a state religion.

[HHarvey]

I'll sign! Come to the wine country LGBT community just like the Prop. 8 supporters did. Hang out in front of the grocery stores. That's where the best petitions are signed.

[afgail]

I've been married for decades and can not think of one thing in my heterosexual life that would be threatened, damaged or changed by the marriage of two gay people to each other. What are the right wingies so scared of?

[LeftLeanWing]

That their kids won't be like them or heterosexual people will ditch their spouses and end up in a gay relationship because gay people appear to have more fun.

[yoshi99]

And have better fashion sense!

[mercury613]

They are afraid that *absolutely nothing* will happen, and that as a result, they will have no choice but to re-examine their shaky belief systems.

[aercolini]

If I were gay and living in California, I would stop paying state taxes. I am sure gays in California generate a significant amount of tax revenue, so why pay taxes to a state government that treats you like second class citizens? I can't imagine the state police arresting all the gays in California. Well dressed, articulate and succesful men and women being man-handled into the back of paddy wagons, dragged from their homes? It would be a public relations nightmare. With the state budget crisis, I'm sure the state legislature would pay attention real quick.

[wdw505]

no jail just of few.......everyone else will fall in to line quickly

[JohnBisceglia]

What is hilarious is that so many people think their government is sooo efficient when it comes to finding tax resisters and prosecuting them (or getting a dime). LOL. Have you ever BEEN to the D.M.V.?

[DMHopper]

Owing tax money to the California Franchise Tax Board is much closer to owing money to the mafia or a Mexican drug cartel than it is to owing tax money to the IRS.

[JohnBisceglia]

Total tax non-compliance has been quietly spreading in both the 'war tax' and 'gay tax' movements. BEST IDEA YET - Gays working in the wedding industry - cash only; the ones who can withstand the bitter irony are able to do this kind of work.

[PhilipB]

I am not so sure about not paying taxes. I agree we are treated as a second class, denied equality. I am not personally comfortable with not paying taxes. Is this the only way to change opinion?would it actually force laws to change?
What do you think? I really want to know as I keep hearing about not paying taxes.
Thanks

[SPQR1052]

Why do we support gay activist when they (international community) stands by and allows something like this to happen to our own by or own?

Read article here:

http://www.gaylife.pl/artykul.php?id=1080

You'd be surprised how many International froups knew about this , I personally contacted many. And now the Gay Pride is a few months away - one wonders WHO will ignore the fact that the guys running this are proven liars and thieves.

Yes, I supported the governments investigation - - Politics makes for strange bed fellows.

[TheBlackCat]

Gay marriage has been legal here in Massachusetts for several years now and there's been no discernable difference in life here. No breakdown in the community or family, no rise in gay culture or rates of homosexuality, no people trying to marry turtles or their sisters or minors. Pretty much nothing the religious right said would happen has happened.

Why isn't this discussed more? Why don't people just look at Massachusetts, see that the ONLY thing that has changed about life in Massachusetts since gays have been allowed to marry is that now gays are allowed to marry. That's it.

[wdw505]

and now none of your states documents are accepted by many businesses in the mid-west

[aercolini]

That's a great point. Under the Full Faith and Credit Clause of the Constitution, other states are required to uphold those legal documents.

[aercolini]

As a fellow Masshole I agree, but I don't think the Christian right uses the "liberal lifestyle" of those living in Massachusetts as the standard of how they want society to look. To them, we are a bunch of secular, Harvard-educated elitists, "eating Belgian endives out of a can." A modern day Sodam and Gommara, complete with Wholefoods and Starbucks.

[carsntrucks]

"Gay marriage has been legal here in Massachusetts for several years now and there's been no discernable difference in life here..."

Except one of the state's largest adoption agencies closed its doors after 100 years, and they teach gay marriage in schools. But yeah, other than that, no discernible difference.

"No breakdown in the community or family, no rise in gay culture or rates of homosexuality, no people trying to marry turtles or their sisters or minors. Pretty much nothing the religious right said would happen has happened."

Like you'd acknowledge those things anyway.