CA Prop 8 Reeks of the Stench of Hate and Bigotry!

When did it become okay to discriminate? What country are we all living in anyway? I thought this was America, am I wrong?

Wake up folks before it's too late! This country was founded on the premise of separation of church & state. And why do you suppose that was? Because back in the day of our forefathers, (ya know, the dudes who fought and died for our freedoms) life under an oppressive British empire was more than they could take.

Living in a "my way or the highway" nation sucked! Dictation, Denial and Discrimination was the name of the game until our founding fathers decided that they'd had it!

"Let freedom ring!", they shouted. And a HUGE part of that freedom was of course separation of church and state. If you are truly an American, (and not some closeted fascist) you are part of the privileged few on the planet who get to live in a country that supports tolerance of diversity. Heck we celebrate it! We can be who we want to be, pray to whomever we choose to pray and live as equals regardless of gender, race, creed or sexual orientation.

To think that in this upcoming election there is actually a proposition to add an amendment to the California Constitution to legalize discrimination! Shame on us! This proposition is not about gay marriage; it's about hate, discrimination and intolerance of diversity. It is wholesale, unadulterated hate-mongering and it MUST be snuffed out in a dramatic fashion at once to illustrate to those behind it that in America we embrace the neighbor who might be different from us and are proud of it!

So to all you TRUE Americans, get out there and vote on November 4th, and let's reject hate.

Get all your friends, co-workers and relatives to vote too and make sure you vote NO on proposition 8.

Freedom Fighter,
Fran Drescher

Comments

[MarkInEugene]

This battle will never end until Fundamentalists stop trying to legitimize hatred and oppression of people they don't like through the justice system.

And, of course, gays and lesbians won't stop defending their families and loved ones and fighting for equal treatment under the law. After all, this is a Democracy and not a Theocracy.

[MagisterLudi]

MarkInEugene posted: "After all, this is a Democracy and not a Theocracy."

Great, so let the democratic process take its course!
Proposition process is the most direct form of democracy available to Californians. Vote on your beliefs and let others do the same.

[kellygrrrl]

the first 3 words of Prop 8: "ELIMINATES the RIGHTS"...

Red Flag!

[MagisterLudi]

OK, here's a solution. Replace with: "...Provides all Californians the right to decide on validity of gay marriage."
Problem solved!

[RG5626]

That was something our old governor (now our attorney general) got put on the description. I say good for him. It's nice to see truth in how these propositions get worded. In the past, deceptive wording made it tough to know what you were voting for.

Simply making it clear that this proposition will be taking away rights may be enough to defeat it.

[abbeyroad]

FZliveson:

"marriage is a religious union".

then what exactly do you call it when atheists get married by judges at city hall ?

is that NOT marriage ?

[MagisterLudi]

Marriage is whatever society decides it is. this not some kind of Platonic universal ideal. Basic anthropology course will help you to understand this notion.

[Retrofuturistic]

Yes, it does legalize discrimination. You are correct. I hope America is still better than that.

If you want to live by your principles, then you have to let other people live by theirs. It's that simple.

I still don't understand why "Christians" think that gays are a threat to marriage. I really don't get it. And, if they are working on their own marriages or relationships, how do they have time to control everyone else's?

[kellygrrrl]

next up:

a Ballot Initiative to Eliminate the Rights of all Adulterers to remarry
and
a Ballot Initiative to Eliminate the Rights of obese people to be seen in public, lest the children be exposed to the sin of gluttony.

[Badbone]

I doubt, very much, that the founding fathers meant to allow gay marriage when they broke away from the British empire.

The polls are running 50-50 on this. Are 50% of Californians facists? Are 50% of Californians full of hate and bigotry? Or could it just be possible that they have considered the issue and simply disagree with you?

[frenchie25]

yeah, and national polls have
Obama 55%
McCain 44%

IMHO: half the people - in California and nationally - are just plain stupid

[RG5626]

Hey! You can support McCain and not be stupid. Ill informed perhaps, but not stupid.

[kellygrrrl]

I doubt very much that the Founding Fathers meant for Americans to vote to ELIMINATE the RIGHTS of a group of people

I also doubt very much that God hates any loving family

[BalancedEgg]

Interesting use of illogic. I doubt the founding fathers intended this issue to be debated in cyberspace, send a man to the moon, build an atomic bomb or have indoor plumbing. Evolve already. The rest of humanity is.

[brokerthanu]

The H8ers have run a very misleading campaign based on misinformation. Yesterday they sent out a mailer saying Obama supports H8, the exact opposite of the truth. The main lies have been that a no vote will cause the churches to lose their tax-exempt status and that children will be indoctrinated about gay-marriage in grade school. This is the kind of stuff that's tipped scale.

[Lance734]

Well after Perez v. Sharpe (1948 CA Sup Ct ruling that antimiscegenation laws are unconstitutional) the polling showed that around 90% of people thought interracial marriage should remain illegal. And after Loving v. Virginia (1967 SCOTUS ruling the same thing) the national polls against such marriages were still north of 70%. Heck, just in 2000 when Alabama repealed their constitutional text banning interracial marrige about 40% were still in favor of the ban. Did that make the 90% of Californians, 70% of Americans, and 40% of Alabamans racists & full of bigotry? Uhm, yes, at least on that issue. So why the hesitance to call people out now? Just b/c they claim to have gay friends/family? (Yeah, we've heard that before.) There are levels of bigotry and one can be cool with people on certain levels and express/harbor prejudice against them on other issues. It's called cognitive dissonance. Sad, but true.

The amazing sea change in public discourse that's taken place since the Civ Rts Mvmt is that being a bigot is now considered an insult, whereas many decades ago people were lound & proud about it. That's why you hear/see so many people screaming to the top of their lungs that they're not bigots, & hold no hate or prejudice towards LGBT folk, while their actions (supporting Prop 8) make a mockery of their proclamations.

[abbeyroad]

SonofLiberty1:

what an ignorant statement you just posted.

there are straight couples who do a HORRIFIC job of raising their kids.
they fight, cheat on each other, beat their kids, basically ignore their kids, etc etc.

and YES, this happens ALL OF THE TIME in the homes of church-going families.

just because a child has a "mother and a father", doesn't mean they're being raised properly, or being loved.

it's astouding to me that someone has to explain this to people like you.

[SonofLiberty1]

Abbeyroad,

The only hate I see is from folks who WANT the word "Marriage" to replace domestic partnership or Civil Union.

For you, I have to guess, it really is "My way or the Highway".

No, it's not religious folks Christians who are hating, it's those who aren't.

We are just trying to point out how historically inaccurate you are.

But I'm afraid that "Those who do not remember the past are compelled to repeat it".

There must be a reason that Ancient Greece didn't survive?

Many folks talk about the "Tyranny of the majority" but few remember that there is also the

"Tyranny of the minority".

[FrugalbutFabulous]

Please, please, PLEASE watch this music video for NO on 8 and share with friends and spread the love

http://www.kingsfoolvideo.com/

or on youtube -- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dQL2HIuF3CY

Thank you

[Jkairi]

I'm not a Rebublican or a Democrat, liberal or conservative. However I think gay marriage is wrong. My biggest problem with the gay marriage movement is that those who advocate it want to teach it to young children in school. There is a childrens story book called " King and King" that being taught to kids in schools that promotes the acceptance of homosexuality. I think that's wrong. If its wrong to teach religion and prayer in schools than its wrong to teach the acceptance of homosexuality.

[kami-kz]

In a free country, one may choose to be religious or not. Homosexuality, like race, eye color, height, and other biological differences are not choices offered to us.

Is it wrong to teach children to accept differences in their fellow humans? Should a brown eyed child be shunned by children with blue eyes? Should a child be taught that something beyond their ability to control is so bad, so sinful that they should be ashamed of themselves?

[rpr]

>My biggest problem with the gay marriage movement is that those who advocate it want to teach it to young children in school.

How would Prop 8 change that? (Answer: Not at all.)
Isn't it more probable that once gays have equal rights there's no reason for gay activism left? Have you seen any black activism lately?

[pinkcrickets]

wow, no no no no and NO

Religion and prayer are choices. If you think people are *choosing* to be homosexual because its so great you're out of your mind. Homosexuality is not a religion.

Teaching kids about homosexuality is important, if only that they know what it is and it exists. Whether you like it or not, it's part of our society (always has been, no matter how hush hush). If you want to teach your child to hate and shame homosexuals, then do it on your own time, don't expect the public education system to do it for you.

[FZliveson]

Marriage is a religious union.
Let the same-sex/trans-sex folks have a legally binding civil union which would
allow hospital visitation, inheritance, insurance and other civil benefits.
This is like wanting to put girls in the Boy Scouts or on varsity football teams.
Me too is not right in many cases. This is just a stick jab in the people's ribs who
have strong religious beliefs and traditions. Nothing more.
It is not Bigotry or hateful unless that's the way you choose to observe it.

[SonofLiberty1]

I agree.

I can even see these unions for folks who are NOT GAY.
When next of kin is like 1,000 miles away or they are deceased.
What about old ladies...sisters...many old, never married sisters will live together but they aren't married.

What about that?

[pinkcrickets]

FZliveson, I can agree with you. Marriage IS a religious institution. But if we're going off of that, then the government has NO RIGHT to legislate about it. ALL unions, same sex or hetero, should be labelled civil unions, and if you want to get "married" you have to go to a Church or Synagogue to do it, because, as you said, it's a religious union. The government has no bussiness making religious unions.

That way, the people who can't help but whine about everyone else around them, instead of worrying about their own lives, can find churches who refuse to saction same sex unions. Likewise, same sex couples will have no trouble finding accepting institutions who are happy to marry them. The government can slap a nice big CIVIL UNION label on all of these - and avoid discriminating.

If its truly a religious institution as you say, proposition 8 shouldn't even exist.

[Lance734]

"Marriage is a religious union."
--Uhm, no it's not. This struggle is about the right to get a CIVIL marriage. No one's trying to force any religious institution to marry them. In fact, any religious institution can turn away any couple for any reason at all. It's always been that way and that will never change.

"This is like wanting to put girls in the Boy Scouts or on varsity football teams."
--Actually, in your examples the previously favored class (male scouts/players) is forced to interact & associate w/the previously disfavored class. But here, each couple gets its own marriage license & that's it. An opposite-sex couple isn't forced to share its marriage w/anyone else & is free to never associate w/any same-sex couples. Sheesh, there are enough marriage licenses for everyone - it's not a competition "unless that's the way you choose to observe it."

"This is just a stick jab in the people's ribs who have strong religious beliefs and traditions. Nothing more."
--No, again, since no one's forcing U to change your religious beliefs. You're free to believe whatever you want. The Court only ruled that the government could not discriminate in issuing civil marriage licenses. I really have a hard time understanding why any rational straight person would react so strongly against marriage equality since heteros don't lose any rights & could go on completely oblivious to married same-sex couples if they wanted to.

[AdamX]

We should NEVER discriminate against gays or antone else. That has NOTHING to do with wanting to redefine the WORD "marriage". Give everyone EQUAL benefits. ALL RIGHTS. But, guess what? Marriage has nothing to do with rights. It is a WORD with a meaning. I understood what it meant when I got married. If gay folks can't come up with a word to describe their relationship, it isn't my problem. They can not borrow mine. I like the definition as it stands.

YES on 8.

Now, you want to call me a hater and bigot again? Get real. I don't hate my gay friends, I am not a bigot, and I am against discrimination. I can't say it loudly enough! However, the WORD "marriage" is taken. Get a new word!

The real hatred is coming from the folks who want to falsely accuse me to meet their own political ends. Too bad! I can see you frothing at the mouth, and just about ready to kill me! I, on the other hand, am ready to EMBRACE YOU FULLY. I do not embrace your desire to redefine a word. You should get all your benefits with out this redefinition. I truly hope 8 passes.

[frenchie25]

I love these "I'm tolerant ,but" posts. Kinda reminds me of the 60s and 70s when we used to hear: "some of my best friends are black, but"

Now AdamX wants to vote to discriminate because marriage HIS word, and I quote " If gay folks can't come up with a word to describe their relationship, it isn't my problem. They can not borrow mine."

Well now we know how AdamX behaved in the kindergarden playground.

Fact is, folks, that same sex marriages - and yes, they used the word marriage, were commonplace until the mid-4th Century until religious zealots started to create and re-creats laws in accordance with their religious views. Soind familiar.

Why do you think that so majy peope are for "civil unions" and not same-sex "marriage?" Because the word marriage for most people has a religious connotation. And that is the crux of the problem here: religion. You know, the ideology over which most wars are fought...

[SonofLiberty1]

Adam X right on man , right on!

This is NOT discrimination, it's all about trying to change a DEFINITION.
And if WE don't like it, then we are termed BIGOTS too or worse.
I say, you are right, we aren't bigots and we aren't discrimating but there are those here that
are ...

FROTHING AT THE MOUTH

and are ready to come at us with guns, knives or whatever.

I pray that folks vote YES on 8!

[kami-kz]

Unfortunately, Prop8 provides no "equivalent" benefits, it only limits benefits of marriage to heterosexual couples. Prop 8 would also take said benefits from homosexual couples who are now married.

Is protecting the definition of a word more important than defending people's rights?

[pinkcrickets]

If this is truly the case, that this is all about a word, don't you find this all a little bit ridiculous? You're fighting about the definition of one word. This should be going on in the Merriam Webster's offices, not the California legislature. Don't you think its a waste of time to legislate the meaning of a word? Aren't you strong enough to know what it means for yourself and not be obsessed with defining for everyone else?

[Dots]

Gay Marriage or Abortion...the answer is very simple.
If you don't believe in it, don't do it.
It does no harm to you if others make a different choice on these difficult matters.

But to put this "anti" stuff in our beautiful constitution is not American.

[pinkcrickets]

Couldn't have said it better Dots! Precisely!

[syryn22]

I live in Sacramento where prejudices run a little rampant from time to time. It was pouring down raining yesterday and guess who was out and about, spewing their hatred? Yep, you guessed it, the
"Yes on 8" folk. Across the street was a small group of what looked like young college kids protesting against the Prop 8 Yes folks. The No kids were outnumbered and it really ticked me off. I have friends that are voting yes for prop 8 when their own children are telling them that it is wrong to discriminate. I am not confident that on Tuesday, we will see this thing losing and I want so bad for it to lose. I am hoping that many Californians will recognize how discriminatory this is and vote No, however, my confidence in the general public lately has been somewhat diminished by how gullible they seem to be when it comes to many issues. I am a Christian, but you will not catch me voting for 8. I believe God teaches us to love everyone and to not judge others. It is really that simple, love everyone like they are truly your brother and sister, wanting the same for them that you want for yourselves. How can God fault YOU for that? Leave the judgements and condemnation for God to do -- that's his job, not yours.

[Libsmasher]

Discrimination is wrong, but homosexuality isn't? Stop pretending you are a Christian. You don't understand even basic morality.

[pinkcrickets]

Discrimination hurts and affects others - often on a mass scale. Homosexuality does not.

If you have some obtuse argument as to how it does, I'd love to hear it.

[MagisterLudi]

Strepsi posted:"The purpose of a civil society is to protect the minority from the majority."

True AND vice-versa.The society decides ( here democratically) which privileges and rights a minority is entitled to.
Fact:Societies regulate sexual behavior of its members. ALWAYS.
Fact: Homosexuality is ever-present deviation from the norm. And throughout history ALWAYS been regulated by societies. Sometimes tolerantly, sometime savagely.
Fact: Homosexual minority in California already possesses a great number of protections and privileges (most of which I support). GL has complete political control of at least one city: W. Hollywood. And politically dominant in another ( S.F.) Just like Mormons are in Utah.
Fact: the same Mormons failed to protect their right to marry multiple partners. Utah decided that bigamy is wrong. Californians may ( or may not) decide that gay marriage is wrong.

[Dram5780]

You used the words ALWAYS. Well just because something has 'always' been that way does not mean it right or just, and your quote at the top of your post compleatly negates your argument. Currently in America the minority are the homosexuals who are seeking their 14th amedment rights ("equal protection under the law" ironiclly the same argument that was succesfully used by BUSH to stop the recount in Florida and make him President) and the majority are those who wish to stop them from doing so. Think before you type!

[Dram5780]

Ooops I know see that your quote was in fact a reference to another post. Perhaps I should read before I type! But my point is, eventually the SCOTUS will repeal all those bans as uncostutional. Sure people will try to use a "community standard" argument, but they will not stand.

[pinkcrickets]

Well - there's a lot here - but I'll respond to one thing in particular: the polygamy comment about Mormons.

I follow the same logic on this that I do on same sex marriage: I don't care because it has nothing to do with me! If 8 consenting adults all want to marry each other at once and do their thing in their own house with their 50something children, more power to them - as long as I don't have to be one of them!

If you'll notice, this is actually the trend with enforcing the ban on polygamy - polygamists don't get arrested for having multiple partners, they get arrested because some of those partners are underage, and were forced into a marriage.

Just don't legislate who people can love by trying to limit their rights because its not the exact same choice as you wold make!

[Dram5780]

6- 8 monthes ago I actually heard Chris Matthews agree with himself that being anti-gay marriage wasn't bigotry. Ofcourse it is. Just substitute the word african-american or any of it's derivatives for gay/homosexual. It is hate directed at a group of people. Homosexuality is part of the human condition not a abhorrition or a 'lifestyle choice'. I'm a glass half full person and I think 40 years from now most American will be as ashamed of the treatment of gays today as most of us are ashamed of the treatment of african-americans 40 years ago.