proposition h8te
I am not gay. I am a woman, engaged to a man. However, other than the Presidential election, the matter that means most to me for Nov. 4 is the California Proposition, Prop 8, which would eliminate the right for homosexuals to get married.
--I am disgusted that anyone supports this Proposition....
--I find it ironic, and yet even more disgusting, that the majority of opponents to this Proposition are those who call themselves "family-oriented" people or who are extremely religious, something I thought was suppose to teach tolerance and compassion....
--I am grateful that President Clinton, Senator Feinstein, and our Govenor, have publicly stated their opposition to it....
--Most of all, I am confused why people cannot let others be who they are, especially when that includes entering into a committed, loving relationship.
If this Proposition passes, I can still marry a man and nothing about our marriage, our rights under that legal contract or other benefits such as insurance coverage will change. So why are people, who will enter into man-woman marriages, who this Proposition will not, or barely, affect, so concerned with it? If you are one of those people, please feel free to explain that to me. Please explain why with so much hate in the world, you are concerning yourself with someones LOVE.
Please vote NO on Prop 8.
[if you choose to comment, which i openly welcome, you may benefit from reading the comments and ongoing discussion already posted. thanks]
--I am disgusted that anyone supports this Proposition....
--I find it ironic, and yet even more disgusting, that the majority of opponents to this Proposition are those who call themselves "family-oriented" people or who are extremely religious, something I thought was suppose to teach tolerance and compassion....
--I am grateful that President Clinton, Senator Feinstein, and our Govenor, have publicly stated their opposition to it....
--Most of all, I am confused why people cannot let others be who they are, especially when that includes entering into a committed, loving relationship.
If this Proposition passes, I can still marry a man and nothing about our marriage, our rights under that legal contract or other benefits such as insurance coverage will change. So why are people, who will enter into man-woman marriages, who this Proposition will not, or barely, affect, so concerned with it? If you are one of those people, please feel free to explain that to me. Please explain why with so much hate in the world, you are concerning yourself with someones LOVE.
Please vote NO on Prop 8.
[if you choose to comment, which i openly welcome, you may benefit from reading the comments and ongoing discussion already posted. thanks]
posted by Jessica F at 10:22 AM
20 Comments:
i agree with you. i can't imagine this will pass, and i'll be extremely sad if it does.
i don't want to take away a person's right to CHOOSE what they vote for (yes or no) because this is what AMERICA is all about, no?
in the same sense, why would a person want to take away another's right to CHOOSE who they marry? illogical. too much hate in the world. i like how you spread the love.
i know there are a lot of scrappers in the public eye who oppose gay marriage.. a LOT. catholics, mormoms, etc. i highly doubt any of them will comment about their hatred and judgement on your blog.
Thanks Amy. I don't necessary feel that everyone needs to understand or support gay marriage, though in my ideal world they would. I know a lot of people are uncomfortable with the idea or believe in religions that do not support such unions.
But to OUTLAW it, to strip someone of rights the rest of us have... that to me is what is unfathomable.
To me it is a step back that is not far from saying that women shouldn't vote and that African Americans should be segregated. It is discrimination, plain and simple.
I dont agree agree with gay marriage.. and being a Christian, I go by what God says about homosexuality.. he says its an abomination. He made Adam and Eve.. a man for a woman, and its unatural any other way. So that is why so many Christians are against it. I dont believe in any way hating or being cruel to those who chose this lifestyle.. as Christians we should also not judge others lifestyles.. but we also have to believe what God says about it. I think its a choice, not that they are born that way..
Hi Anon. Thank you for your comment as I welcomed all opinions on this.
First off, I completely understand that people do not agree with homosexuality or gay marriage. In my ideal world, everyone would accept everyone regardless of race, religion or sexual preference, however, I am not telling you that you have to. You can feel in your mind or heart that it is wrong.
However, what I don't understand is why you cannot just let others live that way. I don't see how a man marrying a man affects your life in any day-to-day way. *That* is what I don't understand and which I asked in my original post.
You can believe in your religion or what the Bible says, but why do you need to push it on others unwillingly or pass laws that force your beliefs on others?
woot! i totally agree with you! its really frustrating what people who want yes are saying- they don't even understand what this is all about. its about rights. not that hard. religon has absolutely nothign to do with it. what about seperations of church and state? and i agree w/what you said- it doesn't mean that you have to agree with their decision, but to understand that everyone in this country should have the same oppurtunities and rights.
i feel like i could go on and on. but i'm with you- No on 8!
i think for a lot of people (including me) the opposition comes from their definition of marriage. i believe marriage is between a man and a woman. this doesn't take away from anyone's freedom to chose who they are in a relationship with or love who they want. Lots of people are in committed relationships and aren't married. Even obama said in one of the debates that he doesn't support gay marriage, but he does support civil unions. I really understand where you coming from. I think your definition of marriage is different from mine.
Jill, it still comes back to me wondering why you need to outlaw it though?
Some religions don't believe in eating meat, getting tattooed, letting women show bare legs, driving on Sundays, and so on, but they don't attempt to outlaw people not of that religion from doing so.
[side note: while Obama is not for gay marriage, he publicly opposes Prop 8, calling it "divisive and discriminatory."]
I agree. Plain and simple.
There is so much that I want to say about this issue….so I’ll try to keep it short. I don’t quite understand why people find another’s sexual preference, their business. I may not agree with every person’s decisions, beliefs, or lifestyle. However, I also don’t choose to interfere in their daily lives. Whose to say one person’s way is right and another is wrong? For us to judge individuals is absolutely incorrect. If it does not affect us, does not harm us in any way, why should we be the reason someone is unhappy? Why are we choosing for them?
As a teacher, I teach my children tolerance. To accept everyone no matter what they look like, how they sound, and what they believe. To be in this society, we need this. We are a unique country with many differing values and nationalities. No other country has the diversity of the USA. And although this is what we pride ourselves on, this is also what causes strife and discrimination.
Whatever happens, I hope that my children grow up in a world that accepts them as what they are. Not what other people want them to be.
I don't live in CA so i don't even know what the proposition is exactly.
I believe marriage is between a man and a woman. I believe it is a sacred thing. I believe that children benefit from having a mom and a dad. Does this make me hateful?
I believe everyone has a fundamental right to get married, as do you. BUt since our definitions are different, that right means different things.
If I don't vote according to what I believe in (my faith), how am I supposed to vote? According to what other people believe in? According to what people tell me is right? Everyone is allowed to vote according to what they believe, it has nothing to do with the separation of church and state. The separation of church and state means that the government won't have a national religion.
I know you don't think I understand where you're coming from but i do. Really. the great thing about america is that if the majority thinks I'm wrong, then they get to make the rules.
Jill, I don't think you are hateful. I think you are actually a pleasure to talk with because you speak calmly and clearly. But the Anonymous commenter above said that they didn't believe in being cruel to homosexuals. To me, denying them of rights and privledges that the rest of us have *is* cruel.
Again, I'm not debating the value of same-sex relationships. I'm debating supporting or not supporting a proposition which changes our state's Constitution, to specially rid a group of their rights.
I still have yet to find someone who can tell me how homosexuals having the right to marry affects their life, their marriage or their family in any way.
CA has allowed same-sex marriages for a few months now. Other than maybe creeping some people out or going against their belief system, they can't tell me how it has in any way changed their world, their community, anything related to them.
For THAT reason, I see people supporting this Proposition as doing it only to push their religious beliefs on others.
In fact, it has made millions of people happy, generated tourism and travel to our state, generated not just tourism dollars, but money from marriage licenses and venue rentals and jewelers... and all that money can go to support our state's needs.
***
Also, you said that you would like children to have a mom and a dad. I'll admit that is what I feel most comfortable with and what my future children will (hopefully) have. Perhaps I am traditional in that way too.
However, homosexuals are allowed to have children, they are allowed to raise children as having two mommies or two daddies. Just like people can have single-parent families, blended step-families, kids raised by aunts and uncles or grandparents. This Proposition has nothing to do with the family structure. Same-sex couples can still have the children, have the family in any shape or form they so desire.
Its a slippery slope (which by definition is illogical) argument to say, "If we give them A than X, Y and Z will happen too."
***
Last, you should let your faith guide your decisions in life, but I also think it is important to think outside of yourself.
Because I believe we are all connected and supporting those who have less opportunity or rights or money than me, will help me in the end.
I 100% agree with you. You can bet that if I lived in cali I would be heavily campaigning to oppose Prop 8. I'm keeping a close eye on it today. I'm just disgusted that people put so much energy into hating others and wanting to persecute them. Put that energy into something GOOD. Spread love, not hate. Equality. I hate that these people think that taking away a human beings basic right just because they don't agree with their life choice is ok.
People should try to be more like Palin and "tolerate" them. *shakes head in total disgust*
Look, I'm not trying to take away any basic human rights. I don't care if they want to have a civil union and i think they should have priveleges that married people have if they are in a committed relationship. But by allowing gay marriage, you would be changing the definition of marriage, right? I don't agree with changing the definition of marriage.
This reminds me of the big garden girl debacle at two peas. You remember when people got access to the private message boards? The next day people discovered that they could put the title "garden girl" under their name, just like the real gg's. Well there was discussion about what to do. Some said that we should just let them do it, it wasn't hurting anyone. Personally it didn't really bother me. But my whole point is, that even though they had the title under their name, they weren't a garden girl. I know that is the most trivial stupid analogy, but that is what it reminded me of.
I don't understand how someone could say that they don't believe in gay marriage, and they do think marriage is between a man and a woman, but they won't vote for a ban of gay marriage? It sounds like a politician to me...trying to please everyone.
Because gay marriage hasn't been around for very long, no one has any proof of whether it is good or bad.
I think society should seek for the ideal, and in my mind the "ideal" would be a family with a mother and father that are married. Obviously this isn't possible to achieve. My parents got divorced when I was in high school and it took me years to recover. Children thrive in the balance that is found when they are raised by a mother and father.
I guess this is my point. Call an apple an apple. I think it would be silly if suddenly people were trying to change the name of an orange to "apple." I suppose you could call an orange an apple, and perhaps it wouldn't make any difference. But the fact remains that the orange is an orange and the apple is an apple. Marriage is the committed union of a man and woman, not the committed union of a man and a man. Where is the hate in that? Where is the hate in not wanting the definition changed? I'm not taking anything away from their relationship. I'm not telling them their love isn't valid. It has nothing to do with hating them (which i obviously don't).
I don't see how this is stripping anyone of any rights. They still have a right to get married, but they don't want to make a commitment to someone of the opposite sex. So come up with a new name for their relationship. Civil union. Give them visitation rights in hospitals. Health insurance benefits. whatever. but i just think it should be called what it is. Do you understand where i'm coming from?
Jill, I appreciate your response and don't want you to think I'm ignoring you- I just want to give it the time it deserves and will come back to it soon.
To me, "married" means any two people who make that legal commitment to each other, some of whom believe it is a spiritual or religious commitment as well.
To you, it means any man and woman who make that legal commitment to each other, some of whom believe it is a spiritual or religious commitment as well.
I would rather *expand* the "definition" of marriage to include same-sex couples, while you would like to *exclude* them and give their union a different name.
To me, that is like saying, "Here is a drinking fountain and we'll mark it for 'Whites' and here is a separate one for 'Colored'. The two fountains are equal, since they both provide water, so where is the problem?"
If is the same thing, why can't it be joined as one??? What is the need for the separation? It is a measure of inequality and promotes segregation, fear and punishment for being different. It doesn't promote tolerance, love, acceptance or change.
You say that same-sex couples can have a legal union, they can get all the same rights as man-woman couples, but you just want to call it something else. Calling it something else only serves to separate them, just like those two drinking fountains.
***
Also, while your "civil union" with all benefits afforded to married couples, sounds great, unfortunately that isn't an option here. This Proposition didn't say, "Choose between the word 'Marriage' and the word 'Civil Union' and regardless of the name, they'll get equal benefits."
They don't get equal benefits.
A gay coworker of mine does not get insurance coverage for his partner of 12 years, yet I can get it for my partner of 4 once he becomes my husband next year. My company will probably never expand that coverage for same-sex partners until the law considers them the exact same as traditional marriages. So this isn't just about what to call it, its about everything that comes with it.
***
Obama said he didn't believe in gay marriage but also that he didn't support Prop 8. I am okay with that. Actually, I appreciate that. Because to me, that doesn't sound to me like a politician lying. To me it means that THIS speciifc Proposition was not the right way to achieve what he believed in.
He wasn't saying, "I'm against gay marriage and I'm going to approve and support any measure that gets us to where it is banned." Nope, he said, "I'm against gay marriage, but I will wait until the appropriate law comes along that handles this situation properly." (<-- that is not an exact quote, I'm paraphrasing)
You can be against gay marriage but think this specific law, the way it was written, what it tried to do, was the wrong way to go.
Governor Schwarzenegger is a Republican who does not support same-sex marriages and he opposed the Proposition also because of its language and purpose.
For example, I'm all about parents providing discipline to their children, but that doesn't mean that I would choose a law that allowed parents to physically beat their children. You can say, "I agree with the concept, but not this law" due to its severity.
This law made people chose between Option A (Yes on 8) or Option B (No on 8). Some may not want gay marriage, but realize that Option A was not the right way to achieve that and therefore could vote for Option B and work on a new, more appropriate law.
I have to reply to this because of what the original anon poster put. I understand, just like you do Jess, that it has to do with someone's religion and what God originally said.
But what I do not agree with is what anon said..."for those who CHOOSE this lifestyle." No one chooses to be gay! Anyone who is educated about the homesexual community knows it is not a preference or a choice...they are born that way. That to me is one of the worst misconceptions about the gay community outsiders can have. ARGGGGHHHH!
Being that here in Arizona, a new amendment was just added to our state constitution last night to ban gay marriage...I feel your pain there in CA (where I originally am from). I am appalled and upset to know that many of my friends do not have the right as my husband and I and it outrages me that other people can govern how someone else lives in their own home inside the ideals of marriage. Why should anyone care if those people are happy and are creating the life that many who are straight cannot!
I also want to add that gayness (if you will) has been around since the days of Ancient Rome. Look back in history and you will find that men would sleep around with each other all over the place.
It wasn't until Catholicism came around and told them it was not right that it "stopped."
Fine, religious people say it is the definition of marriage that causes them to ban gay marriage. To me, the definition of marriage is that of an official union between two people who consensually love each other and are willing to spend the rest of their lives together.
One could ask any of my gay friends (men and women) that their partners are people they truly in love with. Sure, they can have a civil union like many straight people have, but how is it fair that they cannot choose to make it legal in order to obtain a marriage license, be covered under their partner's insurance, etc.?
Just like having the ability to be able to choose not to go to church or to not stand up each morning my students say the Pledge of Allegiance, so should the gay community have the ability to choose to be married as a legally loving couple.
It is okay for religious people to think that the definition of marriage means between a man and woman, that is their right. But it should also be permitted for those who think the definition should be for those who love each other to get married. This is what is not fair, and this is why I agree with what Jess says that no one has the right to ban someone in doing what is their personal right. To me, the bible does not rule everyone's world and that should include the gay community.
Jill, your example of the 2Peas title is a good one. But when you say that someone being able to give themself a title that is not official to outsiders does not mean those who have it cannot feel official. It is my friends' right to have that opportunity, whether it may seem fake to outsiders or not.
Sorry about the bad grammar above, my brain was thinking faster than my fingers. I tried to fix it but was too caught up.
Hey, I just came back to say that if anyone wants to continue the discussion with me they can just email me. jillthornby@gmail.com. I just can't keep checking back all the time to see if a new comment has been added. But I've liked reading your comments. It definitely made me think but in the end hasn't really changed what i believe.
i saw some girls holding these signs that made me tear up. they said (the day AFTER prop 8 "passed") CAN I VOTE ON YOUR MARRIAGE?
i agree with you and have been saying this all along, how does it affect YOU when 2 gay people decide to get married?
there are plenty of man/woman marriages that are a JOKE. but they are still allowed to marry. plenty of abusive marriages, cheaters, they are still allowed to marry JUST because they are man/woman. but 2 people who love each other and want to marry won't be allowed just cuz they're the same sex???
i'm shocked that this passed, but there are still votes to count. i hope it doesn't.
as for kids having a mom and dad, what about when one parent dies? should the other parent lose the child? should single people not be allowed to adopt then? what about kids who are raised by a grandparent? you can't say that marriage is for people to procreate and have 2 parents. tons of hetero families aren't even like that.
i was so disappointed in ca when i found out prop 8 passed.
Post a Comment
<< Home