Proposition 8 Supporters Can #SuckIt

I’m really tired of dancing around this and trying to be nice.

I’ve seen your really cute church ads. I’ve heard you talk about how, in your whacky world of crazy, letting a gay couple marry would somehow infringe on your religious rights. How you’re doing it for the protection of ‘our children’ and how it’s really not about tolerance of ‘lifestyles’ but how it’s about you being ‘forced’ to accept same-sex unions.

Can I just say…YOU EVIL BASTARDS.

And I mean that with all the love in my heart.

This isn’t about religion or what you believe. This is about civil rights and your bigotry. Yes, your religion has made you a bigot. An evil, hating, horrible, bigot.

If you would like your children to not hear about anyone different from them, feel free to keep them the hell out of public schools and for that matter, public places. Because we here in the ‘public’ are not all like you and we allow our citizens, ALL OUR CITIZENS, the same rights.

I’m seeing YES ON PROP 8 signs in my neighborhood and I have half a mind to knock on their doors and ask them why they think bigotry is ok. Why they think denying rights to others is ok. Why they think their family is better than any other family.  Why, exactly, they have SUCH EVIL IN THEIR HEARTS. And where the FUCK they get off with the smiling happy stick-figure family representing them on those fucked up signs.

If your religion does not allow you to marry someone of the same sex..then don’t. If your religion allows for bigotry, perhaps you should find another religion.

Seriously. I am disgusted. Absolutely disgusted by supporters of Prop 8.

I can see absolutely NO justification for this legislation other than you implementing your evil across California.

As my husband just said, Orthodox Jews can’t work on Saturdays…do we come up with legislation making it illegal for everyone to work on Saturdays?

It’s the same thing. You get that, right?

No. You don’t. Because you’re evil, and you some how think gays being allowed the same rights as you is bad.

Perhaps you need to live somewhere that doesn’t allow rights to all it’s citizens. Somewhere where everyone is just like you and thinks like you and lives like you.

Now, many of you will be very quick to point  out the Obama-Biden take on gay marriage. And let us BE CLEAR about that record, shall we? I am not naive enough to think every candidate is perfect, and I am disappointed my candidates won’t go that extra mile for gay marriage. But let’s face it…it’s your fault.

You make up a large electorate and they can’t alienate half the country.  I get that. They want to make sure all voices are heard in American, even the evil ones.

It’s WRONG, but I get it. I’m also proud that they’ve supported equal rights for the LGBT community and will not support any constitutional amendments defining marriage.

Now you, on the other hand…what’s your excuse? Your religion says gay is wrong? Your religion also says you should stone wicked kids, but…I digress.

Get your bigotry out of my state. Get it out of my schools and get it out of my country. ALL are welcome, and that means you too, if you can stay and play nice.

Forced toleration can suck sometimes. But hey, I have to tolerate you, so it works both ways.

Oh, and by the way…years from now, when this is looked back upon like the civil rights movement in the 60’s, and people ask you what side you were on…have fun explaining that one.

*updated 10/20/2008
I keep re-reading and re-reading this post because it’s gnawing at me and won’t seem to let me go. Yes, I am angry. I am very angry over this issue, and writing this was cathartic and let me push all my anger onto a blank page. But as the debate and venom continues over same-sex marriage, I’m worried my hitting ‘publish’ did more harm than good. That I just threw out something into the world that spewed just as much hate as the what I perceive to be coming at me from those who support this measure. To be clear, and as I said in comments, I do not believe all religions and all faiths are evil or bigoted. I found more love in some Christian friends and family than can be expressed. I’ve also seen entire Jewish communities condemn this measure and other faiths rally against discrimination and bigotry. But perhaps, what I keep getting as I re-read this…is a microcosm of what’s gotten so out of hand on this issue and in this entire election: we’re all just name calling and screaming at each other. I regret adding to that, I truly do…but it’s so hard when you feel pushed there. Pushed by whatever entities are at work. So I’m letting this post stand because it’s a fair representation of how I felt when I wrote it, it does-if you can get past the venom-convey all the things I find wrong about this measure and why it should be defeated. But it occurs to me that this entire fight…this battle…is over love. Who can love. How they can love. Why they can or can not love. And the last thing it needs is more hate thrown in. So before you add to the hundreds of comments here or continue to scream and yell, please take that into consideration. Love. -ekv

Comments

  1. FeelingFree says:

    What happened to the sanctity of love? Everyone has been so busy the last couple millennia opressing others or being opressed that somewhere, the masses forgot about love. Or smushed it out of existence.

    Right now, there are many wars being fought. Here, overseas…many we’ve never heard anything about. Arguing, name calling, and derogatory comments, no matter the moral intent behind it, are only keeping us stagnant, keeping us forever at war. We can get very lost in the daily grind here in america – forget what the basics are. When is the last time you practiced unbiased love? For an hour? For a day? When you feel like it?

    Try unbiased love, every minute of every day. Let peace speak, and patience be the sound of your voice. Yelling over your foes causes them to yell louder, until you’re both red in the face. Always be grateful we live somewhere that we can express ourselves freely, and use that voice. Would you let your children argue like this?

    Do unto as you would have do. And love until your heart goes out.

  2. First off, I would like to put it out there: I support Proposition 8. I read controversial articles because I feel that to make an informed decision, one must analyze all sides, even those written by voters themselves. However, I feel that an important point has been missed. Current law is in direct violation of the Constitution. The American Constitution states that government will not and cannot interfere with the affairs of religion in the famously quoted “seperation of church and state” clause. This was put in place to protect from both militaristic dictatorship by the goverment as well as religious uprisings by the people. However, it applies to these minor matters as well. Let me make an example, one that is already being used in varying circumstances: Say a gay couple goes to their local church and is turned away because the church’s moral stand does not allow their marriage. Now at this point, in normal circumstances, the couple would then go to another sect that supports their action. However, in many cases, that couple has been, and will continue to, sue the offending church for not providing them service. With current law in place, the church being sued has no legal backing and will have to forfeit money and service to the couple. With this sort of system in place, many people have used these measures to swindle easy money out of modest churches and will continue to until the state changes or invalidates legislature. Propostion 8 could be viewed as merely the state’s way of omitting bad legislature. Current law allows the general public to attack and deface religious enitities with undefeatable legal backing. Proposition 8 isn’t about alienating people’s rights, but about maintaining other basic rights.

    Oh, and by the way…years from now, when this is looked back upon like the violent militaristic uprising of communist Russia, and people ask you what side you were on…have fun explaining that one.

  3. This is why you must vote no on Prop 8

    http://pissedoffhousewife.com

    While my nearest and dearest lay dying, his partner of 14 years had no rights. None.

  4. I Have 2 dads says:

    So I hope enough people who are planning on voting yes on 8 get a chance to read my thoughts, and take them into deep consideration. Marriage is a religious institution, yes. But as far as I am concerned, as long as your priest or rabbi or whatever is willing to religiously sanctify it, why should anybody else care. And this is nothing more than a religious argument. My dads are in a very loving relationship, and it has always been that way. If gay marriage had been taught in schools when I was younger, perhaps more of my friends would have been allowed to play with me after school. And if anybody gets on this blog to say that that is my dads fault, you are going straight to whatever depths of hell are deemed appropriate for your sin of stopping love. Any institution that wants to keep two people who love each other separated out of fear is disgusting to me. It makes me sad enough as is that I live in a world where this is even a question on anyone’s mind, let alone ballot. It is not about corrupting beliefs, or children, or marriage, it is about the pursuit of happiness, a constitutional right. And if a civil union is not good enough for you, than it shouldn’t be good enough for anybody.

  5. El Caballero says:

    I’m a mormon who served a mission in California. I love Cali and the people that live there. I have been undecided in the presidential election until recently. I’m going for McCain, for certain reasons. I just wanted to let you all know that I’m with you on this issue. To me marriage is a contract between two people to live with and support eachother forever. Religion doesn’t have much to do with it. I do believe that God has his place in a marriage and that families receive blessings for serving God, but so does everyone else. I think if you want to have your state, or country, or peers, recognize that you are with someone forever, that’s fine. So coming from a religious, semi conservative guy from GA, good luck. I don’t think God wants any hate or segregation, just modesty!

  6. Just throwing my opinion into the fray. You seemed to like the word “evil” a lot. I honestly have to say that people voting “yes” on this issue are not “evil.” At worst, misguided bigots. Evil would require them to malevolently seek for ways to make California a worse place. Evil would mean they agree with you and see that you’re right, which is why they’re supporting Prop 8. These people are simply trying to do what they think makes it better.

    That doesn’t make them right and that doesn’t mean I condone their actions. Please vote No on Prop 8 but please do so with the rational and tolerant mind of the constituency you represent. There’s no need for ad hominem ad nauseum.

  7. @That girl:

    I’m flattered, but i’m female, and if this proposition passes we will, unfortunately, not get to have our long dreamed-of marriage. Pity too, since i already have the perfect dress in mind.
    j/k
    lolz

    @Bryan Knight and others:

    I’ve heard alot of you saying that you’re supporting proposition 8 because you support the seperation of church and state and claim that the current law undermines that. However, doesn’t this law do exactly the same thing? It forbids religeous institutions from making thier own decisions about gay marriage. So, when both laws violate the same principle, how can you deem one less damaging than the other?

  8. Marriage is a religious terminology for the union of man & woman under god and is accepted by the government for the propose of legal rights, therefore same sex marriage can not fall under this religious terminology.
    Government granted same sex martial rights should be granted but under some other name that is not affiliated with religion, “Same Sex Right, Same Sex Partnership, Same Sex incorporated” that would have the same legal protection under the law.
    The manner a same sex couple is united should also not be a religious act, because the manner its being done now, could be seen as mocking the church.
    I think thats 1 of the big problems with same sex marriages right now. Why because you are trying to force your life style into the church and upon the people that believe otherwise.
    How can this be fixed, if you insist it must be called marriage, then you will need the aid of the Jewish to find the Dead Sea Gay Scrolls where Jesus has condoned same sex marriage, otherwise same sex marriage is doomed to fail with the church.
    Myself I think religion should be outlawed.

  9. jim sadler says:

    Part of the difficulty is that marriage has always been a sacrament of the church. For some strange reasons our government decided to offer marriage in a non religious context to men and women who chose not to be married in a church. How can the government hijack and neuter a holy sacrament of the church? How is it that people who live outside of the church wish to marry? They want the sacrament but not the church which created it. You see it is a bit more than a gay rights issue or a human rights issue. There is no need to marry. Frankly the economic structure of America is such that people are actually far better off if they never marry. And we have now moved away from the notions of alimony and support in many states. My only conclusion is that those of any sex or combination of sexes who wish to marry are confused puppies. Take a peek at two social security checks for a couple composed of two singles and compare it to a married couple with an identical work and contribution history. Still want to marry?

  10. Also, it should be noted that legal same-sex marriage does not force churches to sanctify same-sex marriages. It makes it legal for those churches that choose to to do so, and it makes it legal for same-sex marriages to go ahead in courthouses. It also makes it possible for a church, if any such church exists, to ONLY sanctify same-sex marriage. That’s all fine. So long as the state is concerned, churches can do what they want, and can’t be forced to do what they don’t – all that is at stake is the LEGAL right to marriage, not the religious sacrament.

    I very much doubt that anyone here will be able to find any example of a gay couple suing a church to get them to sanctify their marriage, in any jurisdiction in the world that allows same-sex marriage, who actually won the case. It doesn’t happen, and it won’t happen. Separation of church and state is maintained. All that is at issue is the state REMOVING an impediment to religious belief by allowing churches to marry gay couples IF THEY CHOOSE TO DO SO.

  11. The thing about Prop 8 and its supporters who claim they aren’t against homosexuality or civil unions and what they either don’t realize or don’t want to admit, is that SEPARATE BUT EQUAL has already been tried in this country.

    IT DOESN”T WORK!

    To the Queen of Spain: Outstanding article! I couldn’t have said it better myself.

  12. Its funny, my next-door neighbors had a yes on prop 8 sign in their yard, then yesterday, came home from church to erect two more. As if one sign doesn’t scream “i am a bigot who fears what i don’t understand,” loud enough.

  13. @Luinserke regarding Bryant

    You’re absolutely correct. Bryant’s reasoning for Prop 8 is that voting “no” implies that you would like the government to aggresively take over homosexual as well as heterosexual marriages. I can agree that this is something to avoid: the last thing I want is tax incentives for or against marriage, etc. However, he is mistaken in that support of Prop 8 does not “save” homosexual marriages from government meddling, it simply causes government to meddle in such a way that does not permit marriage to begin with. He’s created a false dichotomy in which voting for one thing is a vote against another. No, there is another issue and he seems to be missing it.

    The issue of “should the government be involved in marriage” is an entirely different matter and one that I agree with Bryant entirely. Again, a different discussion.

  14. This whole thing is enough to make me cry. If I lived in California, I would be first in line to vote NO, and I’d bring all my friends with me. I’m so tired of our government allowing the religious nutjobs to determine policy!!

  15. Bravo!
    People like you give me hope for this country even though i can’t even vote yet.
    I sent this to my republican dad, just because it was so well written.
    Fight Prop 8
    -Jonny

  16. First, my friend, if I did not love you so much already, I would most certainly love you more now. Thanks for posting this and the mention.

    Well, it took me a full day to get over the anger at some of the ignorance displayed in your comments section. I am glad to see a balance of those that are actually educated about the issue and understand the difference between the “freedom of religion” and “separation between church and state.”

    I found it rather funny that one person thought that since we are gay, our ability to have children is somehow magically removed and our reproductive organs shrivel up and disappear. Pretty much his reason for voting the way he will. Some minds are like that, logic is a complicated thing in a simple mind.

    So, I think I found a way to make equality rule and everyone will get most of what they want…. ready.

    1. Take away ALL 1,316 tax benefits for anyone legally able to marry in all local, state and federal tax codes. If you really don’t want me to marry, put your money where your mouth is… I mean, if it bothers you that much, what is a little extra cash at the end of the year? I am sure you would gladly pay as much as you can afford to make sure my partner can’t claim me as a spouse and get the same tax break you do. Pony up… This way you can protect the “sanctity of your marriage” and give me equality, plus we can get out of debt much faster if you are paying what we are in taxes, without the same breaks. This year alone was a $7000 difference.

    2. Take away all automatic legal rights made available through marriage. If you want to visit your husband or wife in the hospital, pay an attorney to draw up the papers and carry them with you wherever you go at all times, in case your spouse is sick or injured so you can make life altering decisions for him or her. NO-ONE can visit a sick spouse or child unless the staff sees that piece of paper. Simple, easy to fix solution in the name of equality.

    If you want to leave your house to your spouse, they will have to have it in a will, which can be contested by your relatives. I guess they will have to take their chances like me.

    Make sure you have a total of 5-6 legal documents outlining exactly what decisions your spouse can make for you, from medical decisions to funeral arrangements. Have them with you all the time, just in case.

    3. Make every married couple adopt a child out of the system, before they can legally have their own. I mean, if you don’t want ME to adopt a homeless child, then get off your ass and do it yourself. YOU provide them with a good Christian home, with clothes, food, medical care, special needs care, HIV care, and an education.

    See, this way you can keep your definition of marriage, provide equality and fix some of the worlds problems all at the same time. Any takers? ANY at all?

    If 1/10 of the collective energy spent on Gay Marriage issues were redirected to feeding the homeless, sheltering the poor {especially those losing their homes as I type this sentence}, caring for our elderly, cleaning up the environment or spending time with kids to teach them about life, the world would improve overnight.

    If the money spent on the commercials ON BOTH sides of the issue, the advertising, and everything else were collected and spent on starting a shelter for battered women, helping the elderly with a house payment, electric bill or two or donating it to a school to improve programs to educate our kids… the country would be a better place to live.

    Justify how stopping gay marriage is MORE important than feeding the homeless, sheltering the poor, loving God or your neighbor? I live by the words of Jesus, in my heart and daily in my life…. who’s words do some of you live by?

    It is easier to hate what you do not care to understand, than it is to simply love your fellow man and all the differences God made in them. Live and let live.

    Fiesty Charlie

  17. Luinserke says:

    @ jim sadler

    Marriage has not always been a sacrement of the church. Marriage is a concept, tradition, and legal docterine that predates christianity by 1600 or so years, first being recorded in a formal legal docterine by a mesopotamian king. This man also laid out formal laws for divorce, dowery, divorce settlements, and child care/ownership in the case of a divorce. The concept and tradition obviously predated even him and likely predated Judaism as well, but there is no proof of who came first as of yet.

  18. Luinserke says:

    Actually, i take that back. Even the torah describes Abraham as getting married, not inventing marriage. Marriage is not even a judaic sacrament, much less a christian or islamic one.

  19. Most Americans do not agree with you. Why don’t you move?

  20. No one can really explain why gay marriage is “bad.” I have yet to hear one cogent argument outlining just how gays getting married undermines hetero marriage. Not a single one. Ever. In fact, it has been legal in California for 4 months now and hundreds of homosexual couples have been married. Has anyone’s life been affected adversely by this?

    It bothers me that in this day and age, there are people who think that gays being allowed the same rights as the rest of us is wrong.

    And to the people who think they’re not against gays, but just want them to call it something different, the very notion of creating a separate institution, a separate set of laws for “these people” is akin to the Separate but Equal laws this country used to have up until the 1950’s regarding public education, public services, and public places. It essentially allowed the government agencies, and private businesses open to the public to provide separate facilities for whites and minorities. There would be signs on businesses that said things like, “No Niggers” and “Now Hiring – Irish need not apply.” Schools for white kids received all the money while inner city schools and schools in areas where minorities lived got nothing. The argument in favor of this system was that schools were provided for everyone.

    “Separate but Equal” has been tried and it did not work. It is unConstitutional to deny equal rights and protections under the law. And given that the whole basis for the argument in favor of either banning same-sex marriages or giving it a different name is founded in religion, the First Amendment, a major component of the very foundation of this country, provides Separation of Church from State so the government has no place even recognizing religious marriages, let alone defining them.

    The mere fact that anyone would want it to be called something other than marriage further proves that “separate but equal” won’t work any better today than it did in the past. They want a semantic distinction between the two in order to ensure that gay marriage is not perceived as equal to hetero marriage, that it’s different. As long as they have a separate name for gay marriage, they’ll always be able to cling to the absurd notion that their type of “marriage” is superior to the other type of “marriage.”

    Calling it something different allows it to be perceived differently, and that’s precisely what some people want.

    Why does anyone need to distinguish it? The only reason I can think of to need such a distinction is so people can know when to be prejudiced against someone, even if subtly. Otherwise, who cares if a person is in a gay marriage or a hetero marriage?

    Is it even anyone’s business?

  21. @ Doug:

    Precisely. By this point, I think further discussion is pointless. Neither side is going to convince the other of anything, here. More’s the pity.

  22. @jen

    Is that a serious statement, reguardless of who you were aiming it at?

  23. @ Doug

    Here’s a legitimate argument against gay marraiges: CANNOT PROCREATE

    Stick that in your pipe and smoke it, homo

  24. I stumbled upon this page entirely at random. I wasn’t planning on reading it, as I’ve reinforced my beliefs and have ranted and debated and poured my heart out about such issues many a time in the past. But I did, and I am glad of it.
    As a (so far ;]) gay person about to celebrate her eighteenth birthday, I’ve been thinking about my right to marry a lot these days. A straight person could run off and ruin his/her life with the person of his/her choice if his/her birthday were tomorrow. I can’t. They could run off to Vegas, get drunk off their asses, tie the knot, and get divorced fifteen hours later. I can’t. A mass murderer could get married to his/her mail sweetheart tomorrow. I can’t. You know what? WE DESERVE TO GET MAD!
    Though I understand your addendum to this post, and I understand the message of it…I liked the “first” post better. Why? Am I hate-filled, bloodthirsty capital-l Liberal who wants to deprive the Right of their, well, rights? No. I never have been. But you know what, Queen of Spain,whose real name I haven’t found on this page, so if it’s here excuse me?
    Why SHOULD we play nice? Why SHOULD we be pleasant and fight hate with love? More hate isn’t the answer, but simple anger is not usually equated with hate; you get into a fight with your husband about who does the dishes, maybe, but you don’t hate him because of his perceived selfishness or what have you. Our being kind will NEVER, reeewindplay, NEVER! change any person who is firmly against gay marriage/gay people to change his/her mind.
    The very reasons why they choose to close their minds like so are the same reasons why gay people can NEVER prove to them that they are worthy, that they are good enough or safe enough or freaking HEALTHY enough to be afforded the same rights. Because they simply do not care. They have never cared. They don’t want to change their views, and don’t care enough about it to go out there and make up their own minds.
    If we find a genetic link to homosexuality, thereby proving their “G-d hates you!” shpiel, they will say, “Great! Now we can go in there and change it!” These people do not use logical arguments. They use circular reasoning, rhetoric, and facts that have been disproven time and time again. And whatever you throw in their faces, they’ll find a way out of it, a reason why it doesn’t apply to the situation or them.So, we tried reasoning. We tried being nice. We tried having calm conversations and speaking with our inside voices. Now it’s time to get REAL, get MAD, and get OUT THERE!
    I’m not agitating for an armed revolution. I’m agitating for people to stop playing nice, call these people on their bullshit, and push past the protestors and into City Hall. Religious tolerance is wonderful, and it’s what our country was built on. And to keep our country on that course, we cannot allow a few religions to tell other everybody else, including atheists and more accepting sects, what to do. They say “separation of church and state” when legislate to get the right to marriage, and then they try to legislate marriage their-very-own-selves. Funny how the Right can twist things, isn’t it?

  25. @ Jason
    So barren women and men should be allowed to get married, then, and neither should women who are past menstruating age or men who have serious erectile dysfunction.
    Cool! You know what, let’s just skip to the next step and bring back eugenics! Since G-d said that no one mentally or physically unfit could approach the altar, let’s eliminate those who have any sort of congenital disease, have sustained serious injuries in car accidents, or wear glasses from the gene pool!
    SWEET!!! That’ll free up more government money for abstinence-only sex education, ensuring even MORE G-d-sanctioned procreation! Huzzah!

  26. @Jason

    Again, why the hostilities? If you behave that way, whatever your opinion is, you certainly aren’t mature enough to vote let alone rationally consider the situation and draw a reasonable conclusion.

    @Lucy S-P

    You’re misspelling “God” and leaving out the “dammit.”

  27. First the idiots vote away rights for people to marry, next they vote away people to not go to church. There is no end if this crap goes through. No on Prop 8.
    Bacon Vs. Sprout

  28. Cathy in Miami F-L-A says:

    To Jason: I agree whole heartidly with Lucy S-P. I have been married for over ten years to a felon who is in prison for the rest of his life. We ain’t gonna procreate anytime soon. When I can divorce him I will, but my finances are a little low considering I am the only breadwinner….. I should get a divorce right now, because I’m (thank God), childless? *Eeeeh* wrong answer.
    Thank God I met the most wonderful woman and live in sin now, because hubby told me after he got jailhouse religion, that I am “married to God!” And shall not screw anybody else if I even divorced him.
    Oh, and Jason, before he got arrested we could not procreate even if we tried. I have PCOS, a disorder that renders females sterile. Jason, according to your post I never should have gotten married to anyone!!!! We’ll if I hadn’t, hmmm….. Naw I never would have met my girlfriend that way.

    To Bacon: My girlfriend moderates a religious bulliten board. (She had to do something with that degree in Theology), so she actually has the inside scoop on what’s next: The right wing christians intend to push for a ban on divorces! Yep, even if Bubba beats the S**T out of you, you still have to stay with him and be subservient if they get thier way. Uh count me out guys. No. If I had to stay married, and lived with Mr. lure boys to the house while I am work, They’d eventually would have found him in a pool of blood. And I would provide an airtight alibi to the parent(s) of his victims, so that they would get away with it. BTW, angry? Me?? Naw.
    Here in Florida it’s Prop. 2 and the right wingers are going to town.
    What they don’t take into account is that there already is a ban in the constitution. Along with no adoptions. Some communities have domestic partnership registries set up, but they will be struck down. This Prop. 2 is designed to make it nearly impossible for anyone to challange the bans legally. The nasty little upshot to all of this? Thousands of senior citizens have entered into domestic partnerships, so that thier social security check and any pensions will not be slashed. Hey it is expensive to live here, with cat food being higher in price than some grocery items. Now this means that the partner of the other just lost visitation rights in medical situations, probate cannot be handled between the two partners, and they would be forced to lose income in order to restore those rights!
    But these riligous nutbags would have you believe that the very moment it passes, us girl and guy fags are going to flood the streets demanding to molest children, and break up marriages.

    Uh no again. No thanks. I just want to win the lotto, so I can divorce numbnuts and move us to a nice gay-friendly state. Or maybe Sweden…..

    Cathy

  29. As wrong as those people are for using their so-called “religion” to hate and discriminate against anyone, I feel you’re also wrong for blaming “religion.” There are religionists from every flavor of life who don’t hate on someone for their choices: no matter what they think of those choices. Some don’t even think of the choices, and love that person. Period. Not “love them anyway.” Just love them. So you know, when you attack the person, start out by telling them, “Hey, you know what? I’m removing religion from this argument, because you’re hiding behind it, and if I remove it then you will be exposed, and we will see who you really are. And that is what we want: to see the hateful individual who hides behind ANYTHING.”
    Love to all!
    Braja and hey, check out my blog 🙂 http://lostandfoundinindia.blogspot.com

  30. “Same sex union?” Fine. Call it a “same sex marriage” and I become offended as a person who believes that the original definition of marriage is the correct one. I’ve been bending and twisting to accommodate members of other groups who are offended by this and that. It’s time that the white christian had something to get pissy about.

  31. @Braja

    The term is “theist” and you’re right, there are plenty who live peacefully and happily away from other people’s rights. It doesn’t make them less wrong about their religion and it certainly doesn’t mean that their religion has never done anything reprehensible. And while I commend you in your methods of debate, I don’t commend your defense of the theistic. It is their religion that has taught them to think this way and that doesn’t bode well for other religious organizations, either.

  32. REMOVED by the bitch that owns this site. You betcha. #Suckit Jason

  33. [In my last post, I meant to say “So barren…shouldn’t…”, not “should.”]
    @ Alex
    Respectfully, in my view I was not mispelling G-d. The dash is because I try to venerate His name, so I never write it, which includes typing, because anything typed could be conceivably printed out and then “desecrated” or put in the trash. I obviously screw up a lot (see above) but I try. Plus, it’s a habit. (For posterity: yes, I do pick and choose what religious laws I follow. No, I don’t think anyone else should do what I do if they don’t want to.)

    @Braja
    I totally understand what you’re saying! My blame is placed on…well, I just saw “Religulous” – everybody go see it, it’s wonderfully done – so I’ve got to think carefully here…
    Like most people, theist and atheist, I take issue with certain PARTS of organised religion. I take issue with its strong connection to American politics and that of other countries in the world. I take issue with its followers who choose to turn it into a power-play and manipulate masses of people with it. I take issue with unacknowledged or thought-about hypocrisy, when people choose not think hard about their own beliefs and consider alternatives, and when people do indeed use it as a tool to do…pretty much ANYTHING outside of bringing their families closer and/or deriving personal comfort from it.
    That’s a little broad. I may regret/modify those statements later, as, unlike the vast majority of religious (believe me, not just Christian) fundamentalists, my views are ever-evolving as new information and arguments are brought to my attention.
    That being said, I do not take issue with the idea of there being a G-d, people organising their religions, or people who choose to believe what they will on a cosmic level (including someone who interprets the Christian, Jewish, Muslim, etc. bibles literally) but who choose to treat each person they meet with the least amount of pre-judgment and the most open mind possible.

    And before you say anything, Alex, “bible” is an all-encompassing word that can apply to any faith. I believe in many parts of the Jewish bible, or Tanakh. Someone else may believe in the Christian bible, insert sect or version here. Etcetera.

  34. @ Jason
    We all respect your right to free speech, but you’ve made it clear that this forum is not for you. You do not engage in anything like even RELATIVELY polite or intelligent debate, but instead result to name-calling – “homo,” “bitch,” and the like.
    Lest you get it into your pretty little head that your rights are being violated, by the way, said forum is privately-owned and -moderated. So, no, the first amendment does not apply here; QoS’s discretion does. ;]

  35. Fear. I think that’s the moving impetus behind Prop. 8 out there. My folks are out in the Inland Empire and both say, that when talking to people who are voting YES on 8, there is nothing but fear in their voices.

    It’s sad, and it’s heartbreaking.

    Erin, I appreciate your emotion and passion behind this issue. It’s unfortunate that it’s being misconstrued as venom and vile….both very powerful words, usually used to describe something that’s part and parcel of something one might be afraid of.

  36. Queen of Spain says:

    Jason was removed and moderated on this thread because he used threatening language.

    I don’t tolerate that shit.

  37. Can’t handle it can you? Can’t hadle someone messing up your perfect little gaytard life. Oh no! Wouldn’t that be an utter tragedy!?!? Let me tell you all something now that I have your attention. As a high school student I was sexually assaulted by a kid who just wanted to “experiment.” When I presented it to the school board, I was expelled for not being accepting enough. When I have kids, that kind of stuff is going to happen to them all their lives because ignorant people such as yourselves claim it to be harmless. Hundreds of children with scarred memories and lost dreams all because you couldn’t shut up and keep to yourselves. Thanks for ruining America, Queer of Spain and all your little gay supporters.

  38. So I’m wondering with all this love for gay marriage going around (I’m in favor of it, BTW), so why again are gays voting Democratic? I heard Joe Biden and Obama both say they are AGAINST a gay marriage amendment.

  39. Cathy in Miami F-L-A says:

    @Jason,

    Ya know I find it hard to believs that you were assaulted at school and the school board or the police did nothing about it? Come on Jason, an assault is an assault. It is a crime irreguardless of the sex or intent of the perpretator.

    If in Florida, vote no on #2 and yes on #8, (My school needs more money)

  40. I am from the heartland, central USA. I’m saddened to see a state that has been a leader in validating individual rights when it comes to groups seen as having less value than others (bigotry) end up in a battle such as this. If we look to nature we find same sex mates in all other species. It is not an abhoration against nature if it occurs commonly in nature. I agree that we have taken a civil union and attempted to alter it by making it a union sanctified by the church. It is a contract between two people. If someone gets divorced it is the court that severs the union not the church. Here is the history of how all of this mess came to be in CA from Wikipedia. I found it very educational. CA enacted legislation that gave every free man (person) the right to join in marriage the person of their choice. Legalizing discrimination does not make it morally okay in my book. I hope that CA can keep from falling into the fear based practice of limiting rights to groups of humans they don’t understand and are afraid of.

    From Wikipedia:
    From 1850 to 1977, California’s marriage statutes used gender-neutral language, without reference to “man” or “woman,” in providing that marriage is a personal relation arising out of a civil contract to which the consent of the parties capable of making the contract is necessary.[7] While California did not explicitly define marriage as being between a man and a woman, court decisions and some statutes dating from both statehood and the 1872 codification of the civil law, assumed as much.[8][9]

    In 1948, the California Supreme Court became the first state court in the country to strike down a law prohibiting interracial marriage. It was the only state supreme court to do so before the United States Supreme Court invalidated all those laws in 1967. The California Supreme Court held that “marriage is … something more than a civil contract subject to regulation by the state; it is a fundamental right of free men … Legislation infringing such rights must be based upon more than prejudice and must be free from oppressive discrimination to comply with the constitutional requirements of due process and equal protection of the laws” (Perez v. Sharp (1948) 32 Cal.2d 711, 714-715). The California Supreme Court explained that “the right to marry is the right to join in marriage with the person of one’s choice” (Id., at p. 715).[7]

    In 1977, the legislature amended Civil Code section 4100 (predecessor to what is now codified at Family Code section 300) to read that marriage is “a personal relation arising out of a civil contract between a man and a woman”.[9] As the legislature explained when it passed the Religious Freedom and Civil Marriage Protection Act:

    The Legislature’s express purpose for this amendment was to prohibit same-sex couples from marrying. The gender-specific description of marriage that the Legislature adopted in 1977 specifically discriminated in favor of heterosexual couples and discriminated against, and continues to discriminate against, same-sex couples.[7]

    In 1999, Assembly Bill 26 passed and marked the first time a state legislature created a domestic partnership statute without the intervention of the courts.

    In 2000, voters passed with 61% of the vote, ballot initiative Proposition 22, which changed the California Family Code to formally define marriage in California as being between a man and a woman.

    On May 15, 2008 the California Supreme Court, by a vote of 4–3, ruled that the statute enacted by Proposition 22 and other statutes that limit marriage to a relationship between a man and a woman violated the equal protection clause of the California Constitution. It also held that individuals of the same sex have the right to marry under the California Constitution.[13] The court subsequently refused to issue a stay of its order.[14]

    As of June 17, 2008, marriage between individuals of the same sex is currently valid or recognized in the state of California.

  41. marriage is a fundamental right with 1,049 benefits, fuck the yes on 8 people.

    VOTE NO ON PROP h8!

    http://www.queersunited.blogspot.com

  42. I’m sure gay people would be happy if gay marriages become legal, because then they would have successful broken the bonds between man & woman in the marriage issue and feel as an equal to a man & woman, however that would not be true.
    1- Some gay people are because they were molested as a young child
    2 – Some were drunk and fell into the trap and are to shameful to admit it
    3 – Some gay people are born that way
    And so on, but the point is in most cases its not because of natural selection people are gay.
    Why would gay people not want it to be call something else, I mean its not like they would not stick out like a scour thumb, should we no longer call you gay, then what should we call you .
    This is the problem gays think its ok to disrupt millions of religious and none religious people to use there god, there church, there way of life for your marriage rights, you people fool no one except fools them selfs.
    Why do all the people in the USA have to accept gays as equals in marriage when marriage is not a human right issue.
    Church & State, well on our money we have “In God We Trust” its our motto and will not be removed anytime soon and where as the gay issue is a constitutional right “in the pursuit of happiness” which you are fulfilling by choosing to be gay, as is marriage is the motto as a man & woman, therefore it must be called something else. Its not to identify you as be gay, its to identify you as not being sanctioned by the church, because you can not be accepted by the church under the current bible.
    Don’t get mad at me I didn’t write the bible.

  43. Listen to all the little bigots whine about something that they are so terribly afraid of, and can’t even tell us why. How will it affect your life in any way if the two guys living down the street, who have been together for 20 years, can now legally say they are married? It won’t. It will not change a single thing about your life, but will make a bunch of other people very happy. Your arguments against gay marriage are retarded – and I mean that in a most literal way. They are the kind of arguments a fifth grader would think up, and I think you all know it too. You are exactly the same as the white southerners in the 1950s – bigoted and fearful of change of any sort.

  44. Cathy in Miami F-L-A says:

    @Johnny

    I am certain that gay people will be happy when we get the right to marry. But not for the reasoning that you provide. We desearve just as much equality of who we choose to live with, who can visit us in time of need, who will get our property, our children, etcetera; and who can speak for us if we cannot speak. We do not want this proposition to pass so that we go en masse to our local churches and demand that they disbar. We have no ulterior motive other than seeking what every human being wants. companionship. And a legitimate recoginition of same. If a church does not want to allow homosexuals to marry, and it is part of that church’s charter that they will not allow it, then no court of law would allow us to marry there. But what you fail to realize that not all churches teach hatred and malevolence, and will allow us to marry within thier sacred halls. The one thing that I think most people missed is that just about every same-sex marriage I have seen on T.V. has been performed either in or at a government facility. Not a church.

    We just want the right to be recognized as a couple. That’s all. Just like the freed black slaves who were not allowed to marry more than a century ago.

    This is not, nor has it ever been, a matter of “Church Vs. State.”
    It has really very little to do with church. And you know what “Johnny”? Most churches irregardless of thier opinion would welcome gay weddings anyhow. Why? more bookings, more $$$$ to fill the coffers and I know that would certainly go over well with most denominations.
    One more rebuttal to another false argument that you give.
    Some heterosexuals are because they were molested as a young child
    Some were drunk and fell into the trap and are to shameful to admit it.
    Some heterosexual people are born that way.
    Hmm, works both ways, doesn’t it?
    None of those actions account for all of the homosexual populace.
    Nor do they for straight people.
    You logic is flawed, and you need to educate yourself as to what it really is like to be gay.
    I think that you might be surprised that the only difference between you (a heterosexual I presume), and me (A lesbian), is in whom we seek companionship with. I will make another presumption Johnny, and assume that you are young, based on your logic. You are still playing the field then. When you get older your priorities will stretch to finding a soulmate. And then maybe it will click in you that we are alike, and mean no harm to you, or your family, or your church.

    Otherwise, do your best to extend hospitality to homosexuals and get to know them. It will teach you a true lesson in equality.

    Best of luck, California. Here’s hoping both our states say “enough!” about legislating hate.

  45. There is a so-called Christian Church in our neighborhood. They own the house across the street and also a large parking lot down the block. All three – church, house, lot – have “Yes on 8” signs. It makes me sick and angry as I drive by twice a day.

    But I’m beginning to understand their point of view, I think. After all, if we let these people get married, what’s next? They’ll start to demand equal pay for equal work. They’ll want the same choice at jobs we have. Why… they may even demand the right to vote!

    Wait…. oh yeah.

    I Voted NO on 8.

  46. I’m totally with you on this one. I think people should just step back and look into their own families because I would bet that there is a gay family member there and they would want the same rights for them as they have.

  47. To be calling other people evil; yet preach compassion towards gays? Funny how these things work huh? It’s all the same, make the other side look bad then suddenly your side is right. Both sides have legitimate arguments; just because you may not agree doesn’t make those views evil. Personally I think you just sound ignorant; but since I’m sure your thinking I’m probably part of the “evil” crowd; I’ll just leave this as respect other people’s view points.

    oh for the record no religious affiliation, gay friends that SUPPORT how I feel about Prop 8.

  48. Cathy from Miami F-L-A says:

    I kinda felt betrayed today. My girlfriend and I stood in line two and a half hours to vote in Florida’s election. Everybody was nice to one another, it was a beautiful day, election workers were handing out bottles of water to the crowd. Perfect.
    Then I saw them. Not right in front of me, but a couple of people ahead in line. They were carrying the sample ballot that the poll workers had been giving out earlier, and another piece of paper. Obviously given to them from their church, telling them who/what to vote for. It had a big headline from the “Yes on 2” group on it. Here in Florida, it’s Prop. 2 that we have to worry about, but we are also pushing for the California defeat of Prop. 8, because as one reporter put it, “California is the Bellweather for legislation.”
    This couple that concerned me? Elderly and black.
    Now I know that will go over alot of heads, but consider this. They probably have experienced discrimination firsthand and know what it’s like to be called names, have people yell at them from passing cars, and lord knows what else. They have a chance to put their foot down and turn the tide on hate and bigotry but they probably didn’t. All because they are being taught by their church leaders that hate, is indeed a family value.

    I promise that I will do my part to try and turn the tide. That is why I post on a blog that has nothing to do with my state. In the hopes that if I cannot win here now, that with the help of others, including the Great state of California, that I have a hope for my future. God Bless all of you that are going to defeat Proposition 8. I hope my state shares the victory with you.

    It’s only Seven Days and Seven and a half hours, according to my local television station’s webpage, unil the polls open for the last time. Please vote, please defeat Proposition 8, and 2 in Florida. Let’s start unifying the country and heal some wounds.
    Take care,
    Cathy

Trackbacks

  1. […] is usually some very powerful discussion to be had. I would invite you to read through all the comments here to see what I […]

Speak Your Mind

*