Proposition 8 and the people who support it disgust me. Want to know why? Replace every instance of “same-sex marriage” with “interracial marriage” and see how bigoted and discriminatory it is.
Here, these guys have done it for you:
I can’t believe it’s 2008, and this is still an issue. Contrary to the lies spread by its supporters, Proposition 8 is not about education, it’s not about forcing anything onto churches, and it’s not about protecting anything. It’s nothing but hate and discrimination, and it’s wrong. If you’re a fellow Californian, please vote no on proposition 8 tomorrow. In polling, it’s very close right now, and every vote is going to count.
ETA: If I wasn’t clear enough, reader swordman69 makes it crystal clear: “One thing to remember, voting NO changes nothing. It doesn’t affect a single thing. Only a yes vote changes what is currently legal here in California. Do we teach same-sex marriage in schools now? NO. Is it affecting you in any way now, NO. Only a yes vote changes anything. A Yes vote puts discrimination into our state constitution.”
One thing to remember, voting NO changes nothing. It doesn’t affect a single thing. Only a yes vote changes what is currently legal here in California. Do we teach same-sex marriage in schools now? NO. Is it affecting you in any way now, NO. Only a yes vote changes anything. A Yes vote puts discrimination into our state constitution. Vote No on H8TE.
You said: “…Replace every instance of “same-sex marriage” with “interracial marriage” and see how bigoted and discriminatory it is.”
Many, many, many (etc) years ago when I was on the vestry of the church I belonged to then there were Big Time discussions about “gays in the ministry”, and more specifically, about having a gay priest. I said, more, or less, the same thing. Replace every instance of “gay” with “black” in your argument and see if you can say it without being ashamed.
Dear, gay, Theo was one of the best priests we ever had.
I actually got in a fight (verbal) with some numb-nut over this. The way I finished went something like this:
One of your arguments is that gays will still have “same-sex unions” while straights will have “marriage”. Gay, straight, that isn’t the issue. What you’re doing here is creating two classes of people under our state constitution. It doesn’t matter if they have the same rights or not; they’re different classes of people. And that’s unconstitutional on any level and just plain wrong, so you hide it behind social fears and whispered thoughts like 12 year-old boys who’ve found their father’s Playboys.
Why do you feel the need to project your own mis-givings on other people? MY marriage is strong enough to handle this – are you so afraid that yours isn’t that you need a law to protect it?
(I tried to put in here a close soapbox tag, but typepad wouldn’t let me)
On another note, it occurs to me that one of the first marriages performed was for a couple here in San Francisco who had been together for over 50 years. Since their marriage, one of them has passed on. If this piece of shit passes do any of these people want to be the one who tells the surviving spouse that she’s no longer a widow?
We owe this woman a duty to never let this bill pass. VOTE!
“ADOPTION AGENCIES MAY BE FORCED TO PLACE CHILDREN IN SAME SEX MARRIAGE HOMES.”
Oh the horrors of making more legal homes to put children in. *eye roll*
I hate that people are still so closed minded!!!!
*applause*
It feels SO GOOD to hear a normal, sane person speaking for once. I live in stupid, conservative San Diego and there are people waving Yes on 8 propaganda signs at every street corner, Yes on 8 bumper stickers on every other car, and Yes on 8 signs in someone’s yard on every street in every neighborhood.
I had a very heated discussion with my boss about this. She is black and I thought about the interracial marriage argument after we parted. I so wish I had thought of it at the time!
It absolutely disgusts me that this is even considered close. Why was this not laughed off the table?
Oh, another co-worker likened same-sex marriage in our society to the downfall of Rome, as in Rome fell because of their own “debauchery”. I have a fucking degree in Classical Studies, and this guy now has two assholes.
It’s remarkable that in a society that has come so far, and has taken so many steps forward, we can still take such huge leaps backwards.
Thank you for posting this Wil. I am still saddened that such discrimination exists in our society and that a lot of it comes from folks who claim to love everyone.
It bummed me out to see such happiness and equality in West Hollywood on Friday night and then to see those Yes on 8 protesters up the road on Sunset near Dodger Stadium the next day. Just doesn’t make sense to me.
Just putting this out there. Replace “Same-sex Marriage” with “Polygamy”. How is it different? If all parties are of legal age, and are not forced into a polygamous marriage, and know full well that it is a polygamous marriage… why is it illegal? Why does society say “BAD!” for 1 Man and 10 Women that love him to get married? I’m sure most people reading this blog have no problem with Hugh Hefner and his concubines. Why can’t he make it legal and marry them (of course he wouldn’t because then he’d have to devorce them when they turned 25).
Conservatives are concerned about government overreaching, but think government should define marriage, and enforce that definition. Because it’s “sacred”–that’s the giveaway that we’re talking theocracy here.
Really, no government– local, state or federal– should have anything to do with marriage as a “sacred” institution, defined according to who is having sex with whom. The civil union component of marriage is all we should look to government to facilitate, and it should be available to anyone who wants to form an enduring household and raise children (or not), even if there is no sexual relationship at all (siblings or best friends, for example).
Thank you for posting this. As a California resident who is in a committed relationship with another woman, and who is raising a three-year-old son with her same-sex partner, this is an issue that is extraordinarily personal to me. I can’t explain how it makes me feel to see the Yes on 8 signs and protestors. It just really sucks to be a member of one of the few remaining groups of people for whom discrimination is openly accepted in our society.
I moved here three years ago from Michigan, where a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage was passed in 2004. One of the things that so appealed to me about California was the way the state treated its GLBT citizens more fairly. How disappointing to be going through this again. I can only hope it turns out differently this time.
Vote No on 8!
My entire extended family (siblings and mother) are voting YES and it disturbs me that they swung their votes this way.
This Proposition has nothing to do with Church or Family Values, but with RIGHTS. Rights extended to human beings.
Just a sad state of affairs that they would make such a choice in this land of tolerance and freedom and enable discrimatory practices.
I voted No and it sounds like the majority of us believe the same fundamental statement about freedom and rights.
Thank you all for standing up on voting “NO on 8!”
Bill Teeple
San Jose, CA
hey, if the religious folks want to have “marriage” as their word, give it to them. But if you want to to get state provided benifits: insurance, power of attorney, inheritance, taxation, etc., you would get a domestic contract.
1) if want state based benifits, you get a domestic contract.
2) if you want god based benifits, go and get married.
I bet that would quiet the prop 8 folks up quick. Once they realize that their benifits from the church is nothing compared to what the state gives you.
And on a similar topic … Florida voters – Say NO to Issue 2!
http://www.saynoto2.com/
Same up here in the backwater parts of central-valley California. “Yes” Signs everywhere, and I’ve had to block phone numbers to stop the flood of idiotic automated calls, mostly from a couple of local churches.
And those commercials (“Think of the CHIL-dren!!”) make me, to borrow a phrase, a little stabby.
There was a pretty sizable No-on-8 rally at an intersection last night. Mostly younger people, which restores a small bit of faith in humanity.
This fanatical quest for ‘Yes on 8’ has left me doubting humanity. Is this not 2008? I feel like the state of California was transplanted into Kansas overnight.
Yesterday I was gratified to see a large gathering of ‘No on 8’ protesters on Imperial Hwy and Beach Blvd. I’m hoping Californians vote this prop down.
I wrote about this last week, and one thing hasn’t changed for me in the interim: It’s just true that our children will learn about same-sex marriage if Prop 8 doesn’t pass.
Like they learn about other things that are legal or constitutional they will learn that same-sex marriage is normal.
Good.
Whether this happens by design of school board (which I doubt) or osmosis (like learning that jaywalking is illegal) the children (o, the poor children) will learn that same-sex marriage is not unusual.
That’s the real fear of the Prop 8 people. And frankly it’s a legitimate one. It’s true.
The real issue is whether or not they ought to have that fear in the first place. That’s where the racial analogy works best: “They will learn in schools that African Americans and Native Americans are human beings just like everyone else!” This is ridiculous on its face. It’s an irrational fear that presents itself as such immediately.
I don’t fear my daughter learning that same-sex marriage is no different in its causes or consequences than hetero-marriage. I don’t fear her coming home one day and telling me that her male teacher is married to a man. I don’t fear what her future looks like if she learns these things.
I fear what her future looks like if she doesn’t.
Hear hear. It makes little practical difference to me – hey, we have civil partnerships if not full on gay marriage here in the UK – but I have gay friends in California and every slapdown of homophobia anywhere in the world is worth a cheer.
The GLBT community thanks you for your support, Wil!
For those in Arizona, don’t forget to vote no on 102. Please.
How un-American is it to even consider voting to take away someones rights? If this country was even a shadow of what it was founded upon we would not even consider this vote. Voting NO isn’t just voting for gay rights. It’s voting for the principles upon which this country was founded. Which is a very different thing than what the YES people wish it was founded upon.
Where’s Thomas Jefferson when you need him?
I’m kind of weary about all the rhetoric for Prop. 8. The whole display of kids in peril is such an obvious ploy that I’m kind of flabbergasted more people can’t see through the propaganda. Any time you have to resort to intimating that people’s kids are in danger you know someone has gotten desperate.
Like I posted on facebook, “even if we were teach kids about gay marriage in school, I thought the idea was the more knowledge kids can learn the more prepared they are to face the world. I thought knowing more about a wide variety of subjects was a good thing and should be encouraged.”
A horrible, horrible proposition for a horrible, horrible cause. I happen to live in a state where they added an ammendment to the state constitution to legally define marriage between a man and a woman. This is the same state that thought it was ok for a man to be married to as many women as he wanted at one point…
I am sad for all those bigoted people who actually believe that their marriage means less just because two men or two women who love each other can be married.
Besides, the last time I read the Declaration of Indepensece, I believe the words “all men are created equal” is somewhere in there. Marriage is a basic human right!
I wish I lived in California right now just so I could vote NO!
As a long-time resident of Massachusetts, I can attest to the fact that the effect of gay marriage on straight people’s marriages, children’s likelihood to “choose” to become gay, the fabric of space-time, etc. has been pretty much zilch. People got all up in arms about the idea of gay marriage, then it happened, everyone realized the universe hadn’t imploded, and except for a few die-hard hatemongers, people got over it. I suspect it would be exactly the same in CA.
Thank you for posting this. I’ll be out tomorrow at a polling location in Burbank reaching out to voters. I honestly don’t know how well I’ll sleep tonight. I’m so nervous. I’m straight, but this is such a huge human rights issue I don’t know how I will continue to have faith in humanity if this passes. Please donate to NoOnProp8 if you can.
This will probably be very unpopular, and I’m sure I will check a lot of flack for the following statement.
I am LDS and believe gay marriage to be wrong. This is not part of Gods plan for us here on earth.
People may say by believing this I hate gay people. This cannot be further from the truth. I hold no animosity towards them (What did Christ always say? “Hate the Sin, love the Sinner”?).
I don’t want to sounds like I think that I am better than anyone else – because I’m not. I have my far share of faults.
What really bugs me about some people is they have two moral codes – one from their religion and one for politics. What does it say in St. Matthew? “Man cannot serve two masters”?
I urge all of you to take the time and read The Family: A Proclamation to the World; issued by the president of the LDS church 10 some-odd years ago.
http://lds.org/ldsorg/v/index.jsp?vgnextoid=e1fa5f74db46c010VgnVCM1000004d82620aRCRD&locale=0&sourceId=1aba862384d20110VgnVCM100000176f620a____&hideNav=1&contentLocale=0
*applause*
And since I bet I’m not the only WWdN reader from Connecticut:
Fellow Nutmeggers, don’t forget to vote NO on Q1 tomorrow. This whole “constitutional convention” thing was primarily conceived as a back-door way to overturn a potential State Supreme Court ruling allowing gay marriage, which we got. Let’s not lose gay marriage in CT before we even had a chance to implement it!
Top Ten Reasons to Make Gay Marriage Illegal
01) Being gay is not natural. Real Americans always reject unnatural things like eyeglasses, polyester, and air conditioning.
02) Gay marriage will encourage people to be gay, in the same way that hanging around tall people will make you tall.
03) Legalizing gay marriage will open the door to all kinds of crazy behavior. People may even wish to marry their pets because a dog has legal standing and can sign a marriage contract.
04) Straight marriage has been around a long time and hasn’t changed at all like many of the principles on which this great country was founded; women are still property, blacks still can’t marry whites, and divorce is still illegal.
05) Straight marriage will be less meaningful if gay marriage were allowed; the sanctity of marriages like Britney Spears’ 55-hour just-for-fun marriage would be destroyed.
06) Straight marriages are valid because they produce children. Gay couples, infertile couples, and old people shouldn’t be allowed to marry because our orphanages aren’t full yet, and the world needs more children.
07) Obviously gay parents will raise gay children, since straight parents only raise straight children.
08) Gay marriage is not supported by religion. In a theocracy like ours, the values of one religion are imposed on the entire country. That’s why we have only one religion in America.
09) Children can never succeed without a male and a female role model at home. That’s why we as a society expressly forbid single parents to raise children.
10) Gay marriage will change the foundation of society; we could never adapt to new social norms. Just like we haven’t adapted to cars, the service-sector economy, or longer life spans.
To Josh Crowder,
The cool thing about this country – is you have the RIGHT to say what you believe.
It doesn’t matter whether we all believe it too – but if your post were to be deleted, suddenly, then you would begin to feel discrimnated against and that your opinion might not mean as much as the rest of the grouping here.
Maybe GOD doesn’t want it, maybe he doesn’t care.
You have a RIGHT to express that opinion just as the same-sex people have the RIGHT to the same state issued benefits bestowed by the State of California – not the LDS, not the Catholic church or anything like that.
Religion is separate from Law.
thank you for the opinion.
Bill Teeple
San Jose, CA
TheLoneIguana: I think we might live in the same town. 🙂
Thanks, Wil, for being a voice of reason and compassion. I’ve said it so many times: Prop. 8 is un-American! It would be a blow to the very foundation of our country – Equality and civil rights for all!
I voted NO on Prop. 8 and I hope everyone else will search their conscience and come to the only rational decision: NO ON 8!
@ Josh Crowder: Thank you for illustrating why I’m an atheist.
Wil: Thank you. Just… Thank you.
I hope you don’t mind but I sent a link to NoOnProp8 on Twitter. Everyone, if you are not following them, you should. Oh yeah, they say “thanks” 🙂
Being a scientist, I believe people are born the way they are (gay, straight, etc). Therefore I agree with the above videos and Prop8 is exactly the same as taking away rights of non-whites, women, the handicapped or whatever group is “threatening” at the moment.
sigh…I’m glad I live in Canada.
You are right Josh Crowder, you are going to get ‘Slack’ for this.
You are the very reason I hate living in Utah.
DO you honestly believe that just because you have certain feelings about your religion, that everyone that doesn’t should? IF your daughter or son was gay, would you persecute them as if they were a jew in WW2?
Would you tell them it’s not ok to love? That what they feel is wrong?
IT IS discrimination.
I am not a lesbian. I am in an amazing marriage with my husband and wish everyone on the earth could feel the same way I do.
I have lost all my faith in humanity because people can’t learn to truly love.
To most people it’s about control. People want their religion, thoughts, way of life to be the only one.
I am a vegetarian because I believe it’s the moral and correct choice. I NEVER force my beliefs on people, although I will talk about them when appropriate. And I would NEVER have a law forcing you to choose my ideals over yours.
If your so called God doesn’t believe in Gay Marriage, then I don’t want to be anywhere near his fucking heaven. To me, it would be hell.
I cannot stand bigots and people that cannot think for themselves, they are the reason why I don’t want to bring a child into this world.
@Josh Crowder — thanks for sharing your thoughts; it’s nice to be able to talk to the “other side” without it being all yelling and flame wars. 🙂
Anyhow, I wanted to recommend you check out this site, which lists 11 scriptural reasons that Latter-day Saints should oppose Prop 8. I am not LDS so I actually don’t understand parts of it, but a friend who is Mormon was greatly moved by it. There might be something interesting for you here, too.
http://www.gaysandthegospel.org/
best
Eric
I went back and read some of the responses and it I just had to add something… This is a CIVIL issue not a religious one so no mention of God or church should enter into it IMO. Marriage is not about religion. My marriage was civil, not religious and I am very thankful that I had that option. Why shouldn’t everyone have that same option?
Thank you! I really appreciate all of you who are speaking out against Prop 8 and this attempt to write hatred into California’s constitution.
From a gay New Yorker who is looking forward to the day when it will be legal to marry my partner in our home state of New York.
Vote “No” and tell all of your friends!
And Curtis. Polygamy is not bad, it’s environment is. Children raised in Polygamist families usually are abused both physically and sexually. Many of them are either forced out of their communities(males) or forced into marriages they don’t want to be in at early ages. So, learn your fact’s before you speak. It makes you sound dumb.
That’s a bit of a lie there Wil. The decision overturning Prop 22 was 4-3, and only happened in May. Yes on Prop 8 ratifies Prop 22.
And even then domestic partners get everything except the title “marriage”.
As one-half of a marriage directly impacted by this nonsense, thank you Wil. Thank you very much.
As a Japanese-American, I’m disgusted with the No-on-8 ad that someone equates General Order 9066 with this proposition. Executive Order 9066 IMPRISONED CITIZENS AND TOOK THEIR PROPERTY. Prop 8, whether for or against, does nothing of the sort.
If Prop 8 imprisoned all gay people and took away their land and their jobs and their freedom, then it might be analogous. Until then, it is just as pathetic as the Yes-on-8 zealots.
Wake up people. Both sides in this matter are wrong.
I’m certainly hoping that Californian’s will make the right decision in saying no to prop 8 tomorrow.
I am also hoping that Obama wins the election. Not to downplay CA same sex marriage but looking at the bigger picture there is so much work that needs to be done in the US to ensure LGBT people are not treated as 2nd class citizens. The US is very much behind its main allies and trading partners and being British I can see how much was achieved under Tony Blair. Blair isn’t exactly gay friendly but at least he was a good civil servant and saw beyond his own prejudices to do what’s right for every tax payer. Can you say that for McCain and Palin? No, their policies are based a lot on their religious belief system and as Bush they don’t represent all people, just their cronies.
I’m writing this from Canada as my (American) same sex partner and I aren’t recognized under US immigration law to settle there. After years of serving in the military, being a community leader and paying taxes all his life my partner’s country lets him down just because he loves me. Shame on the US.
Wil:
Finished Dancing Barefoot. Reading Just a Geek. I’m old, Wil, so my perspective is somewhat different. I watched Star Trek (the original) before they were reruns.
I’m glad you write, and I really enjoy your honesty and point of view.
As for my opinion, I disagree and agree, both. The state has a responsibility for defining the legal aspect of life partnerships, including children, taxes, medical authority, death, divorce, and property.
Marriage–as defined by the church–is not the responsibility of the state. Neither is the state required to prove or approve “love” between the partners.
As an atheist, I would rather the state give same-sex and opposite-sex partners the same legal rights, label the partnership something other than “marriage” for legal purposes, and end the whole “marriage” battle. Focusing on this word isn’t productive, so use another word. If a church wants to bless a union, they can call it whatever they want.
Yes, I’m “married,” but not according to any church. My wife and I paid the $10, said a few nice and loving words to each other, traded rings (tradition?), and signed the form. Then we had dessert. The kids loved it.
@Josh Crowder, that is a totally valid opinion. No one should criticize you for your beliefs. However, what’s at question here is are you, or anyone, justified in making your beliefs the law. If you believe it’s a sin then so be it and good on you for speaking your mind. But let people be free to sin in your eyes.
What if we were voting on weather or not the LDS church should be allowed to perform marriages. Maybe I don’t believe as you do and I think that only Catholic, or whatever, marriages are valid. How is that different?
Very good post. Whenever this issue comes up in the States I kiss the Canadian ground I walk on.
The argument that equal marriage would force churches to bend their own moral codes is ridiculous. Women have had the same rights as men for ages, and you don’t exactly see the Catholic church being sued for not allowing female priests.
Except in the eyes of the law, the “civil union component” of marriage is labelled “marriage”. There is nothing else legally.
There are over a thousand Federal laws that pertain to “marriage”. Creating a separate institution called “civil union” for gay people simply isn’t practical and would result in two classes of rights.
The legal definition of “marriage” has very little to do with the religious definition of “marriage”. (Except in the USA, a religious ceremony results in a legal binding. That isn’t so in some other countries. In Mexico you need separate religious and civil ceremonies.)
Legally, marriage is just a set of rights and responsibilities codified into law. Those rights and responsibilities don’t really make sense if you are talking about marriage between a person and a dog. There isn’t a danger of going there.
Just wanted to chime in and show my support along with everyone else here. Wil, I’ve favorited your Tweets on FriendFeed a LOT in the last few weeks and I tell you, the boost it gives all those friended to me is amazing. So much great support, and it’s allowed many people to rally together from all over the country and the world. It’s clear that more and more people are seeing Prop 8 for what it really is…a blatant disenfranchisement of the gay community. I just wish more of those people lived in California so they could vote NO alongside the rest of us.
There’s a massive group of No on 8 folks waving signs at the major intersection I have to pass through on my way in and out of town, and I will be driving by them shortly as I head off to school. And I will do exactly what I do every time I drive by…I will honk and hoot and wave a peace sign and let them know that there’s one more person they can put their faith in. Perhaps tomorrow I can join them for that last push to the finish line…
My fingers are crossed! Good vibes from all of us, right? 🙂
Wil,
I just want to say thank you for posting this on your blog. I just attended my sister-in-law’s same-sex marriage this weekend so I am very hopeful that your message will reach out to voters.
And as I have a particular affinity for the truth, I also appreciate when it is pointed out that a No vote changes nothing. However, I also realize that California is unique and special in its position on not discriminating against same-sex couples. Opponents can spend years listing all of the ways in which these couples will be treated as equal to straight couples, yet the truth or falsehood of those claims should not bother anyone. Equality isn’t open to interpretation. The constitution is not a place to voice your personal beliefs.
Thank you, Wil.
My ILs tried to sway my vote when my family & I visited them on Saturday. To hear them try to rationalise a Yes vote…ugh.
Actually, upon reading Josh Crowder’s post, that’s EXACTLY what my ILs were saying to me.
As I understand it, polyGeek, the LDS church is a big supporter of the divinely-granted moral agency of man, and every human being’s accountability for their own sins on the appointed day of judgment.
Which makes the entire idea of trying to amend a state constitution to enforce one particular brand of moral agency…
…doctrinally suspect at best, I’d imagine.
Josh, no one will hate you for what you believe. Or, at least, they SHOULDN’T.
The problems come in when people try to force their beliefs on others. Then we get into a really crazy arena of whose beliefs/morals/opinions are better.
And Prop 8 comes down to that. Forcing beliefs/morals on other people.
—————————————
My contribution to the no on 8 campaign was six web PSAs:
http://youtube.com/VoteNoOnProp8