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
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
Fran, thank you for reminding everyone what this prop 8 is all about. I have voted NO on prop 8 via absentee ballot.
Nice post, Fran. I'm not from CA, and can't believe that you all, of all the states, have this on your ballot.
U.S. Supreme Court Ruling on Sodomy
http://www
The U.S. Supreme Court’s Lawrence v. Texas ruling in 2003, which struck down state sodomy laws, seemed to indicate that the court might someday rule that there is a constitutional right of gays and lesbians to marry.
The question of marriage itself was not before the court in the 2003 case, but the majority opinion, written by Justice Anthony Kennedy, said, “Our laws and tradition afford constitutional protection to personal decisions relating to marriage, procreation, contraception, family relationships, child rearing, and education.
The Constitution, Kennedy added, demands respect “for the autonomy of the person in making these choices.” Then he added, “Persons in a homosexual relationship may seek autonomy for these purposes, just as heterosexual persons do.”
Does the “autonomy” of which Kennedy spoke include the right to marry?
So if marriage, procreation, contraception, family relationships, child rearing, and education are all personal decisions that society in general has no right to regulate, then why not recognize group marriages as legitimate? Personally, I strongly suspect that group marriages with 3 or 4 husbands and 3 or 4 wives would be far more stable and far more beneficial to children and society as a whole, socially and economically, than marriages with only one husband and one wife.
Oct 31 polling on Prop 8 via LA Times
http://www
Fran, I'm very glad you used the phrase "sexual orientation" instead of "sexual preference" in your article, but I think we (the gays) need society to understand us and marriage even better:
First - I am "homo-loving". It is my "love orientation". Sexual expression is one small aspect of that orientation and of my personhood
Second - What if we (again, the gays) had a chance to vote on whether or not YOUR families deserved the rights & protections of civil marriage? What? Sounds crazy?!
Please, no one is going to say "love orientation" so get over it. Also straight people aren't the only ones voting. Gays have just as much say as straights so get over that too.
Yes because you are the minority.
Now if everyone's parents were gay...
We probably wouldn't be here.
Biologically it's a dead end.
Thanks Fran for the support. My partner & I were shocked when our neighbors across the street from us put up a Yes On 8 lawn sign last month. We've all lived on this street together in peace -- it was really unsettling. So I put up a No On 8 lawn sign. I was talking to an aquaintance yesterday & she asked, Does this mean that Californians can put an initiative on the ballot to deprive heterosexuals the right to get married? I thought that was a good point. The initiative system in CA is pretty messed up. The SUPREME COURT of the state ruled that gay marriage is Constitutional. End of story. Why is it that our State Constitution can be invalidated by small-minded, misinformed, bigoted, intolerant hate-mongers??????? Gay people by the hundreds have been getting married in CA since June & the world hasn't ended. It still won't end WHEN Prop. 8 goes down to defeat!!! (Kain Ein Horah!) BTW, Fran, I am a huge fan of The Nanny -- I've seen every single episode multiple times & it ALWAYS makes me laugh. Thank you for that.
Apparently, PhyllisJane, you don't understand what constitutionality means in the U.S. The U.S. Constitution, as well as the California Constitution, allows for it to be changed through constitutional amenments. If the people of California decide to add something to the California constitution through the amendment process, what they add BECOMES constitutional; it does not invalidate the State Constitution. At that point, the State Supreme Court can not longer rule that it is unconstitutional. However, the US Supreme Court CAN rule it unconstitutional because the US Constitution trumps State Contitutions.
I agree with your logic - you're absolutely right. Except... what if the constitution now has *conflicting* parts. What happens if the state Supreme Court rules that 'equal protection' overrides this newest denial of rights to a minority?
To maintain 'equal protection', perhaps ALL marriages must be made illegal. Your church could still marry you, of course. But you'd get no special *legal* protections just because you were married.
How's that sound? Same treatment for all.
Romulus, don't assume that I don't understand constitutionality. I know why & when the initiative process was set up in California. The point is that I DON'T BELIEVE THAT THIS IS A VIABLE PROCESS ANYMORE. And I agree with Herders4Me -- how about we get all the signatures we need to invalidate the constitutional rights of hetersexuals to get married. How would that feel to YOU??????? Marriage is a LEGAL process for many people & does not have anything to do with religion or church. If Mormons, Russians, Evangelicals, etc. don't like gay marriage, well, it's none of their effing business. Just hetersexual marriages are none of my business. Other people's religious beliefs SHOULD NOT be used to change the CA Constitution or mess with MY life. I belong to an open, loving & inclusive church which is not against gay marriage. But what church I or you or anyone belongs to is not the point. The point is that Yes On 8 people want to take away EQUAL RIGHTS. Puts us back 40 years.
And, a comment on the African American & Hispanic voters who supposedly are inclined to vote Yes On 8. I don't understand how African Americans, who have had to fight for decades for every single right they have, cannot be compassionate to people who continue to have to fight for every single right they have or want.
Romulus, you certainly are pompous & presumptuous. But, still, Bless Your Heart.
I've noticed a connection, Fran. People who make anti-gay remarks also make anti-Jewish comments.
to think how much good the Mormon and other churches could have done with that $30 million.
to think of how many starving and suffering humans could have been helped.
$30 million to spread Hate and Bigotry is tragic and surreal.
most of the Ballot Initiatives here in CA are backed by Special Interests and not in the Public's Interest.
Follow the money.
http://www
Guess I'm an outside interest, too. I live in VA and have donated a couple hundred bucks to 'No on Prop 8'.
My hope is that California will lead the rest of the nation to equal rights for all. So, in that way, I *DO* have an interest. Outsider, still - but I do have an interest.
these religious nuts actually believe that their morals and beliefs apply to ATHEISTS.
NEWS FLASH BIBLE-THUMPERS:
WE ARE ALL AMERICANS WHO LIVE EQUALLY UNDER A DEMOCRACY, NOT A THEOCRACY.
Why does your immorality trump God's morality? NEWS FLASH: IT DOESN'T.
Which God are you referring to, please? And, why does everyone have to believe in your God? Hint: according to our Constitution, we don't have to! See the beauty in that? You don't have to believe in my God and I don't have to believe in your God and yet we each are free to believe in whatever we want. That's how the freedom of religion thing works.
Whose god? Whose morality. If one of the other religions or philosophies turns out to be "right", where will you be spending your life everlasting?
What god? Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. IF the bible thumpers want us to live under their oppression then prove that god is real and not just a creation of Man and prove the bible is true (an impossibility considering the 130+ contradictions contained within it).
Once you prove that your god creature is real and the the bible is real, tehn I would be happy to live under those oppressive rules.
The most immoral people I have ever met were all Christians. Whatever happened to love thy neighbor? What happened to Thou Shalt not Kill?
NEWSFLASH: People who don't believe in your god are not bound by his (or her) rules. Period.
Did you speak to God personally about this issue? If so... seek therapy.
Atheists have no morals?
also in Arizona!
and they are doing it "In the Name of God"
and they are USING children as pawns
and most of them here pushing for 8 are NOT Californians
Stop H8
No on 8
"rights come from God" ?
how absurd !!!
Let's not forget that a similar item is on the ballot in Florida. Vote NO on 2, which = vote FOR equal rights for everyone.
Go Fran!
Why is this question being decided by a vote? Isn't this a matter for the courts? Sorry gay people. You cant get married in California because the majority of voters hate you?
There are two ways issues can be decided by the vote of the people. The first is by passing a statutory law. Statutory laws must conform with the constitution and that is a matter for the courts to decide. In 2000, California voters passed, with of majority greater than 60%, a statutory law defining marriage as only between one man and one woman. The California Supreme Court ruled that this statutory law was in violation of the State Constitution.
The second way an issue can be decided by the voters is to propose an amendment to the Constitution. If it passes, it becomes part of the Constitution and the Supreme Court (or any court) can no longer rule it unconstitutional.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
