People who support same-sex marriage should obviously vote No on Proposition 8, the proposed constitutional amendment on the November ballot that would eliminate marriage rights for same-sex couples. But there are a host of reasons why those who oppose same-sex marriage should still vote No on Prop 8:
(1) You're a Fiscal Conservative and the Economy is in the Toilet. People who have weddings spend a lot of money and the state treasury has estimated that the state stands to make millions from gay weddings. In addition, litigating the aftermath of Prop. 8, should it pass, will likely cost the state many millions more in legal fees.
(2) You're a Constitutional Conservative. You believe that we shouldn't muck up our constitution with initiative process amendments.
(3) Prop. 8 Won't Actually Stop Gay Marriage. The estimated 11,000 same-sex marriage licenses that have issued will not be invalidated and therefore those couples will remain married. The proposition has no retroactive effect and the State Attorney General has already gone on record with this position. Even going forward, same-sex couples can go to other jurisdictions (such as Massachusetts, Canada, and now Connecticut) to get legally married. They can even stay in California and have a rabbi or minister marry them. Sure, if Prop. 8 passes, those couples will be denied legal recognition, but they're still married and have every right to say so.
(4) You Believe in the Bill of Rights. The state (and federal) Bill of Rights, including privacy rights and equal protection, are expressly in place to prevent majority votes on minority rights. You might not like same-sex marriage, you might not even like gay people, but you can't help but think about who will be next. If put to a vote in the 1940s or 50s, the California Supreme Court decision sanctioning interracial marriage would have been overturned by popular vote. Would that make it right?
(5) You Believe in Religious Freedom. Your church or temple may not sanction gay marriages or homosexuality, but many other churches and temples do. Should the state be in the business of choosing which religious beliefs to honor and which to reject? Ultimately, state recognition of marriage is a civil matter, and regardless of what the state does, churches and temples can continue to refuse to marry same-sex couples. The misleading ads suggesting that churches' tax-exempt status is in jeopardy for refusing to marry same-sex couples is simply untrue.
(6) Prop. 8 Doesn't Protect Marriage. In fact, Prop. 8 may expedite the end of "traditional" marriage. If it passes, there will be years of litigation in state and federal courts on same-sex marriage. This will be expensive (see reason #1) and may ultimately lead to a decision under the U.S. Constitution holding all marriage bans in all states unconstitutional. The federal constitution also protects privacy, liberty and equal protection and even conservative judges have not looked kindly on majority votes taking away rights. The California Supreme Court itself -- to reconcile the demands of equal protection and Prop. 8 -- may well eliminate marriage for all Californians.
I hereby resolve that since "marriage" is in fact a legally binding contract that AS SOON AS the county clerk signs your partnership license, you are contractually legally bound, as in "married'. no other action is required, no additional signatures needed:
at this point you can do the following:
follow up with a church/temple/mosque ceremony of your choice.
follow up with a civil ceremony of your choice
follow up with a party/reception/tree planting - whatever
follow up w/ going home, back to work, on vacation..............
since we supposedly have seperation of church and state here..........marriage as
instituted by God, would therefore be outside the pervue of the state...............and the
state is only required to recognize legal instruments.......end of problem....
or doesn't anyone really want to solve this wedge issue and just keep banging the
same damm drum?
I thank you on behalf of my 14 year old lesbian daughter who just came out and who is following this vote with rapt attention.
I had no role model as to what a gay person should be like, I had no help,and or anyone I could safely turn to for answers. I had to figure it all out on my own. I made plenty of mistakes. I wish some I could 'do over" to get right. But I did survive those times and feel stronger for them.
It was not until I was diagnosed with AIDS in 1999, that I did the hardest thing in my life until then. I told my mom I was gay.
Turns out she loved me all the more for coming out to her. She still very much loves me now, and supports me and my 6 years partner I also found. We are a loving family, we wish you well. Thank you for those of you who also love and support your children who may be gay.
I did not even have sex until I was 20, and in the Navy. It was my first gay encounter,and it was then that all my true feelings came to fruition and I felt fully complete. That was when I KNEW I was gay. I have had sex since with women, only one of those encounters was I a willing participant. I do not dislike women, nor do I think the sex was in any way "icky", I was just that then and now NOT willing to have children. I have no desire to bring forth a child. I do not want to bring a NEW child here.
Is the opposition really that eager to give away their freedoms?
A point I've made many times.
If Californians are hateful enough to pass Prop 8, I surely hope it happens!
It only applies to men, of course. Men can handle any number of wives. A woman, on the other hand, is fortunate to be able to handle ONE husband. Even a shared one. Ya know - gotta devote your life to your babies.
Personally, even polygamy isn't a threat to my marriage.
The question is two fold; what is fair and what benefits/enhances society. Allowing consenting adults to join together in marriage is a no-brainer, win-win for societal stability, the raising of children (the vast majority of gay people I know have kids) and long-term human happiness and connectedness.
Moreover, no straight marriages will be harmed in any way by allowing gays to marry as well.
I live in CT, where my husband and I celebrate that our marriage is now enhanced by no longer being an instutition that is denied to our gay friends, our 14 year old gay daughter and our lesbian minister.
This is a serious civil rights issue. It is dangerous to amend State constitutions with racist agendas. I agree with poster Grada3784... who's next? Mormon's? Jew's? Muslim's?
This is 2008 people. Get over it.
Successful legislation against any minority voted by the majority of voters will set a precedent for voter initiatives against other minorities. Anti-Mormon legislation, any one? Anti-Catholic? Anti-black?
There was a Catholic saint who said that more tears were shed over answered prayers than unanswered. And believe me, she knew what she was talking about.
(2) Prop 8 correctly interprete Constitution set by our founding father
(3) Prop 8 stated marriage only between a man and a woman. Period.
(4) Sex orientation is not right but a life-style, same-sex marriage cannot be equated to interracial marriage
(5) Marriage is a civil issue and also a moral issue
(6) Prop 8 strengthen marriage between a man and woman
To me it's a simple civil rights issue. Straight people have the right to get married and gay people deserve that same right. As far as I'm concerned anyone who wants to deny the rights of people who are different is a bigot. And frankly, most of the arguments against gay marriage are just a rehash of the arguments to deny the rights of women or blacks (yeah, I know. "But this is different!!").
I donated to those opposing Prop 8 just today, partly because I was inspired by posts from people like you.
I had the good fortune of being married for more than 42 years to a wonderful husband, until he died of cancer. Both of us had the pleasure of celebrating our niece's marriage to her partner of 10 years. They now are now the proud parents of a much-loved adopted child.
How could denying happiness to this wonderful family in any way take away from the sanctity of my own marriage? The very thought is ridiculous. Our marriage was a good one because of our deep love for each other.
All couples who love each other deserve the chance to have loving marriages of their own. It is love, caring and commitment that lend sanctity to marriage - not religious bigotry.
(1) There is something that money can't buy-What are you talking about?
(2) Prop 8 correctly interprete Constitution set by our founding father-If this was the case, then there would be no need for Prop 8.
(3) Prop 8 stated marriage only between a man and a woman. Period.-The correct language is "Prop 8 States" not "stated" (sic)
(4) Sex orientation is not right but a life-style, same-sex marriage cannot be equated to interracial marriage-So does this mean anybody can chose to be gay? What about you?
(5) Marriage is a civil issue and also a moral issue-Marriage is a religious issue, not a civil or moral issue. That is why we have "civil unions"
(6) Prop 8 strengthen marriage between a man and woman-With a divorce rate of over 50%, how does Prop 8 strengthen marriage?
I'm sure this is a religious issue for you, but remember what the bible says:
"Accept him whose faith is weak, without passing judgment on disputable matters ... Who are you to judge someone elseâs servant? To his own master he stands or falls ... Each of us will give an account of himself to God. Therefore let us stop passing judgment on one another ... Whatever you believe about these things keep between yourself and God."
-Excerpts from Romans 14:1, 4, 12-13, 22