How dare the voters of CA let their voice be heard! The shame.

I forget, this is still a democracy right? Where votes and constitution are the ruling factors along with statutes and precedent. I just think it’s funny that those asking for equality are looking for an exception. Interesting.

The voters of California also picked Arnold Schwarzenegger. Anyone with half a modicum of sense knows that Prop 8 had nothing to do with reaffirming so-called “traditional” marriages and everything to do with imposing discrimination on one group of people. The only marriage anyone should worry about is their own. Kudos to Slash, Melissa, and Jack for standing up.

The introduction of the bill had nothing to do with democracy and constitution. All you need is a certain number of signatures to introduce a bill. Then it becomes an issue of how afraid can you make the population? kinda like when Bush was reelected.

Are you serious man? For real? It had nothing to do with constitution? Do you know what Propostition 8 is? It was an amendment to the California state constitution. It was not a bill dude. And Joe, I just think it’s great that you think Slash is a hero and you think Schwarzenneger is an idiot. Wow. It certainly seems like you’ve reseearched the opposing point of view too.

First of all, the population wasn’t afraid, they just don’t want gays to desecrate the institution of marriage.

But speaking of fear, let’s talk about the intense boycotts, vandalism and disruptive protests. THAT has nothing to do with democracy or the Constitution.

Registered domestic partners already have the same rights as spouses (Family Code 297.5).
For same sex couples to claim they don’t have rights is flat wrong.
However, the laws that assure them equal treatment are relatively new and need time to work, just as desegregation did. They should focus more on changing the applicable tax codes and contract laws that are in conflict with the benefits they want to receive.
It seems the majority of same sex couples argue about tax and health care benefits. Why not focus on those issues instead of using marriage as a tool for tax benefits?
Also, even if California did allow same-sex marriages, the federal government still defines marriage as being between a man and a woman, so they still would not get to make the tax claims they want.
There are better ways to handle the problem that don’t involve changing marriage.
California already offers more rights to same-sex couples than most states do. This current battle may take a giant step backwards for gay rights activists.

I cant believe that 49% of California is gay.

“Desecrate the institution of marriage”

Already done by wife-beaters and adulterers. but its OK if they are straight

What is the definition of the institution of marriage?

Prop 8 was clearly a revision of the constitution. It was found Unconstitutional to deny gays marriage and the response was to try and change the constitution. … ridiculous in its own merits, but fine. Take that stance. but do it properly. If you want to make a change of this proportion, you make a revision. You go through legislature and get the 2/3rds votes. That’s how it’s done. Not through a campaign of lies and misinformation to scare barely a majority of voters into passing a revision while calling it an amendment. [ 52%? .. really? You think that's enough to deprive rights of a protected class of citizens? because first line of it says "take away the right" ..]

Other points of interest: the California Supreme Court RE:Marriages case pointed out 9 differences between Marriage and Domestic Partnerships currently.

Separate but equal Isn’t. [ segregation 101, read your history boys and girls!]

Marriage has changed through history already. Women aren’t chattel anymore. They have rights, they can’t be raped in their marriages, they can give testimony, they retain a legal identity. omg world is ending! Marriage changed! oh wait. it didn’t.

Religious marriage remains where it was. In church. Churches can marry who they want and not marry who they want. Catholic church has a way stricter definition for marriage. They can keep it.

Civil marriage is historically a wider definition for marriage.

As long as it’s consenting adults and not hurting anyone then why are we legislating against it?

PS: No on 8ers have been doing widespread PEACEFUL protests. That’s legal. And constitutional. If we want to boycott someone? .. so? That’s legal. I can choose to spend my money where I want. Why would I give my money to someone who actively oppresses me? Use some logic. and vandalism, stealing, etc, has happened from both sides. And the parties at fault for those acts are responsible for them. Not the entire group. Just because your friend steals a candy bar, doesn’t mean everyone they know is a thief. Use some logic, Please!

Hear hear, Heather.

I just think it’s funny that Mormons and Evangelical Christians are able to strip Americans of their civil rights based on the bible and outdated traditions– AND NOTHING MORE. There’s supposed to be a separation of church and state in this country. Gay marriage is going to be a reality very soon. Get used to it.

Heather:
How is Prop 8 “clearly” a revision? The court has says a revision is something which significantly changes the way that the government operates. Prop 8 leaves things they way they have always been. It added 14 words and is a simple amendment that leaves the operation of the government alone.

The language about “eliminating the right” was conveniently added by Attorney General Jerry Brown, who opposes Prop 8. The original petition signed and supported that brought Prop 8 to the ballot did not have that language and should not have been altered by Brown.

You are right, there are differences between marriage and domestic partnerships, most significantly the gender of the people involved. Legislation in this area is new and needs time to work.

Marriage has not changed as significantly as you claim, however individual rights have. You blur two different topics to support your case.

Until a court declares that homosexuality is not a choice, the separate but equal argument will not hold water. Prop 8 defines marriage and does not prevent anyone from marrying… it does prevent individuals from calling same-sex partnerships “marriage”, because by definition it is not.

You say that “Civil marriage is historically a wider definition for marriage”. What are you referring to? Until the last several years there has been no argument, so you must not be reaching too far into history.

Why are we legislating against it? Because the majority of people in this state believe it is morally wrong. Marriage is rooted in religion and the state has no business tinkering with it. The state is only involved in the first place because way back when they decided to regulate it and incorporate it into taxes.

The state has created something for same-sex couples that is the legal equivalent of marriage and comes with all the benefits. Domestic partnerships are totally apart from religion and there is nothing churches can do about it. The disparity in the rights is evident, and working on the legislation involved, primarily at the federal level, is the best way to reach the goal. The Federal Defense of Marriage Act is the biggest obstacle that same-sex couples have. The marriage issue is a giant leap too far. Most same-sex couples say that they aren’t terribly concerned with a little piece of paper that says they are “married”… they just want equal treatment when it comes to tax benefits, health care, property rights, etc. Every bit of that can be addressed by enforcing current legislation and rewording the appropriate codes in a gender neutral way.

Leave marriage out of it and you reach the same goal with a lot less fight.

Did you know that as a heterosexual male in my 30’s I can not register as a domestic partner with my girlfriend? Discriminated against by both sex and age, what a world! We are not terribly religious and would marry with a JP rather than a church. I could care less if it is called a marriage, civil union, or domestic partnership so long as we had the recognition and rights as other couples. So the point… focus the effort on the rights rather than the label, because marriage is not the goal.

K2:
Your statement seems ill-informed as more and more states are enacting legislation preventing same-sex marriages. The federal government has insisted that it is a matter for states to decide, and most of them are deciding it before it gets to the point that California has. Had Prop 22 been an amendment or the Constitution it would have been left in tact, as have other state Constitutional Amendments. Challenges to the amendments have continuously failed in various states, and the argument in California is nothing new (and already doomed to fail if Kennard’s dissent on hearing the case is any indication). Activists pursuing marriage are pushing the cause further backwards, and in the end will be left with the few states that offer domestic partnerships.

Furthermore, the voters of California are composed of more than Evangelical Christians and Mormons. Whatever their individual beliefs, the voters of California approved Prop 8, and surely there are many more denominations as well as plenty of agnostics.

If you truly believe in the separation of church and state then you should want nothing to do with marriage since it is a religious ceremony regulated by the state. You should instead be a supporter of state sanctioned civil unions for everybody or for domestic partnerships as they have no religious connection.

The entire thing is pointless. I agree for the most part with James’ comments. Government should stay out of “marriage”. I say give a union certificate to both heterosexual and homosexual partners and let them call it what they may. I have a religious right to believe that a union of a same-sex couple isn’t a marriage, but the said couple have a right to equal rights and the pursuit of happiness. The inequality that is being complained of is ridiculous and can’t be fixed on a state level and needs to be fixed on a federal level.

James:
Your right about not getting married if religion is not on the person’s mind. Here is my take I posted on a couple of other sites:
Honestly speaking from a neutral standpoint, you cannot separate state & religion in the Prop 8 issue. Literally the argument cannot hold….why? Where do you go to get married? Church. Who is responsible for the marriage of 2 people? A priest/reverend. So if 2 people of the same sex get married, of course other religions will take note and go against it since it strikes a chord. The equality issue may make an argument, but the separation of religion and state is hard to hold up.

Yeah well the way I see it, one second gay marriage was allowed, the next second it was ripped away by prop 8. If both sides are going to play this back and forth let them. The gays are eventually going to win out for good, and the people opposing them are still, and will continue to be, bigots.

how long did these religions agree that mixed marriages weren’t allowed based on their books?
bigotry is bigotry.
marriage has evolved many times over the centuries and it’s time for it to evolve again.

There are surprisingly misinformed people being quoted left and right in this article and speaking up on this thread. If Melissa Ethridge doesn’t pay her taxes, send her to jail. That’s what we do with criminals.

Prop 8 is as constitutional as any law that has ever been passed. Does “We the People” ring a bell? That’s something that no amount of rainbow waving at crying foul at the will of the people will ever change.

Now, to the bigots: Shame on you for bashing Mormons, Evangelicals, or any other human beings who have stood up for what they felt was right. By doing so, you set yourself firmly in the place of those inflammatory voices you would oppose. Bigotry never fixed anything.

Now, for the issue of separation of church and state: It is a myth. That’s right, a myth that is not aligned with reality at all. Laws are established based on values, and values tie directly to religious beliefs. Therefore the underlying, core religious beliefs of the majority will always surface as values, then ultimately as laws. So by contending the passing of Prop 8, you stand on a foundation that is not aligned with the will of the people (values based on religion). No wonder gays are attacking religious groups. The religion of homosexuality is a base form obsession with a sexually confused misuse of genitalia. Nothing more. It is the unnatural, amoral value of wanting what is not possible: Long-term happiness in doing what is wrong.

Those who seek to alter the voice of the people on Prop 8 may be better suited with living in a communist country. Then they could really cry and whine about inequality.

Now, to the issue of tolerance: This is not about tolerance. It never was. Tolerance is not a virtue, it’s a flaw. If you embrace everything, you become nothing. That goes for America, too. If we embrace and legalize prostitution, thievery, murder, and homosexuality, then our country will tear itself apart within a generation.

Now, to the issue of equality: Individuals who have chosen the path of homosexuality already have individual rights provided by the Constitution. They have freedom of speech, worship, and the pursuit of happiness. And, they have the right to marry anyone they want as long as that person is of a different gender. In the same way that they aren’t allowed to legally marry someone of the same gender, they are not allowed to marry their mother, sister, or pet horse. Bottom line: Stop whining about equality and start appreciating the freedom you have to actually be responsible and live a life that actually can achieve true happiness. And, yes, that is based on the will of the people. Welcome to America!

Excuse me, “The Truth”, please consider your privileges before criticizing the fight for ours.

Oh wow. Since blacks and women have equal rights (supposedly) America has one more group they can expel their hate on. It’s ALL based on religious beliefs. As long as you can hide behind the Bible (or whatever other book you have) then you are justified. The BILL OF RIGHTS states you can practice freedom of religion (or FROM religion) without reprisal. Guess that aint the case. I really feel sorry for everyone that is so afraid of homosexuality. I know your parents and your pastors beat it into your head that its wrong but I can guarantee you that the issue has not affected ANY SINGLE ONE OF YOU PERSONALLY. I am confident enough in my own relationship and sexuality that a million gay couplescan get married in my front yard and it would not affect me or my children in any way. Sorry that you all arent.

The Truth I would like a quick chance to offer a rebutal to your argument.

1. Your first point is that prop 8 is as constitutional as any other law. If the state makes a law regarding marriage it must treat all citizens equally under that law as clearly stated in section one of the fourteenth amendment. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. If you want to argue that the 14th does not apply then you must argue that the individual must not have the right to determine who they want to marry, because prop 8 clearly limits individuals choices in terms of who they can wed.

2. I couldn’t agree more that bigotry never solved anything, however justifying support of prop 8 based on a biblical interpretation raises many more questions that it resolves. If the quote from leviticus justifies limiting gay marriage, why can’t we use the bible to justify prostitution, slavery, and of course my favorite a ban on wearing garments of multiple types of thread.

3. The last half of your statement seems to revolve around two ideas tolerance is bad, and democracy is about the will of the majority of people nothing more nothing less. First off I won’t argue whether or not tolerance is a virtue that is certainly a complex philosophical issue that I am unqualified to answer. I will just say that it is always easy to criticize tolerance when one is already being tolerated.

The second half of this section is your argument that democracy is about majority opinion. In fact virtually all democracies contain safeguards for minorities. In this country we have the bill of rights as well as constitutional oversight by justices, and a 2/3 rule for changing the constitution.

In short one can believe whatever you want about what marriage means, but the state interfering in that meaning is questionable. No church or organization should be forced to condone or practice gay marriage, on the other hand for a majority of people to limit the ability of the minority to participate in a ritual so fundamental as marriage in my opinion crosses the line. Maybe the solution is to do away with all state sponsored legal marriage so that we all can have civil unions and let churches, temples, mosques, and other groups what marriages are appropriate for them.

First of all, fighting for your rights is not something that happens just because you ask for it or demand it. Keep fighting, that’s all…and stop whining. Did you really think it was going to be that easy? This is what it feels like to be a minority:assholes making decisions about your life. Remember how this feels.

First of all, getting your rights is not something that happens just because you ask for it or demand it. Keep fighting, that’s all…and stop whining. Did you really think it was going to be that easy? This is what it feels like to be a minority:assholes making decisions about your life. Remember how this feels. Where is ACT-UP when you need them?

the only marriage people should worry about is their own

you actually have the gaul to liken homosexuality to murder and theivery? that’s the most ridiculous thing i’ve ever heard. they’re not committing a crime by having a partner who’s the same gender as they are.

Apparently celebreties are the experts and voice of reason among California residents. Why doesn’t California just let celebreties vote and then the right outcome will always occur? Why doesn’t Rolling Stone quote some voters who actually voted, other then Pete Wentz and Perla? No one is hiding behind the Bible. It’s a matter of what people want. Don’t worry, very soon Prop 8 will be overturned. People will get their way eventually. Hopefully, once marriage is legal for gays, that will be the end of it and we won’t have to hear from these celbreties.

Anonymous on 12/5 @ 1:35am –

Let me clear up a couple of false statements in your post –

You wrote “Where do you go to get married? Church.”

- People get married in lots of places – parks, beaches, homes, backyards, courthouses, and Vegas wedding chapels. A church is not a requirement.

You wrote “Who is responsible for the marriage of 2 people? A priest/reverend.”

- Conducting marriage ceremonies (legal ones) is done by a person licensed by the state. They don’t have to be a priest or reverend. They can be a county clerk, housewife, valet parking attendant, or even those Elvis impersonators. All it takes is a license to officiate marriages.

Lastly, you seem to be under an impression that all religions are opposed to same sex marriage. That is not true. Gays and lesbians have been able to enter into religious ceremonial marriage for decades and can be married in a church ceremony today.

The black and hispanic voters that voted in droves for Obama also voted for Prop 8 by higher percentages than their white counterparts. Perhaps GLBT protesters should spend more time doing outreach in Watts and East Los?

BOYCOTT UTAH,

This ends THIS election, never again will these LDS elders attack OUR families and think it’s FINE to make LGBTs the ONE minority excluded from the equal protection clause. Let the Utah residents, when their 6 Billion of tourism TANKS, curb their elders.
KEEP your H8 in your own G*D DAMN State.
If CA Supreme Court doesn’t overturn prop 8 in June 09, add this intiative to the 2010 ballot:
Be it resolved the CA Constitutional equal protection clause will be re-named the HETERO-EQUAL protection clause.

Lets just end this charade…shall we?

Many of the heteros here are under the misconception that prop 8 stopped same sex marriage. MA and CT allow same sex marriages to ANY couple from ANY State. So what did the LDS elders buy with their 22 Million of H8 money?
The perpetual animosity of gays and lesbians.
I for one, am well prepared to give them what THEY PAID FOR!

All this time and effort over a word and it’s definition. If gays were given ALL the same rights as straights thru a civil union they still wouldn’t be happy.It seems silly to me.

So the definition of marriage should be expanded to include relationships between those of the same sex? Why not include relationships between brothers and sisters, humans and animals, and polygamist relationships too? And really, who are we to say someone is too young to get married? If your 12 year old daughter wants to marry a 45 year old guy, shouldn’t she be able to?

First I would like to say that I have nothing afgainst the gay community. What I am against is people trying to overturn a vote of the people, that disturbs me more.

redefining marriage,
Your 12 yo daughter marrying a 45 yo guy, sounds like the polygamist CULTS the Mormons wink at, except the 12 yo daughter gets RAPED, and the marriage is against her will and she is the G*D DAMN 5th wife.
Doesn’t my vote count,
The COURTS decide if the tyranny of Majority has passed something UNCONSTITUTIONAL. we aren’t run by a MOB. inter racial marriages wasn’t passed by a majority, women’s access to birth control wasn’t passed by a majority, Persons with a Disability Act for equal access to public facilities wasn’t passed by a majority.
Japanese Internment Camps was passed by a majority, banning gay adoption in FL was passed by a majority…BOTH were deemed UNCONSTITUTIONAL.

Timmayy:

Actually, registered domestic partners already do have the same rights as spouses in California!
Family Code 297.5 already provides that. So… you are exactly right! It wasn’t enough for them!

Ok…forget laws, statutes, amendments, and even divine beings.

If humans are just another animal (which I do not belive, but that belief is widely accepted) then why the heck is gay marraige considered “your chhoice”? If humans are just “superior animals” because they’re smarter, and the monkeys aren’t going gay, I think it seems pretty obvious homosexuality is just…not gonna work. It’s so gross, even the dogs won’t do it. Red light should be going off, eh? Sex is the natural way of reproduction with humans, and it involves a man and a woman. Obviously, that’s the way it’s supoosed to be. Negatives connect to the positives, and vice versa…positives and positives don’t fit…

James,

You contradict yourself in your posts. Look at what you wrote on 12/4 then what you wrote recently. You clearly state that DP and marriages have differences then say they don’t have differences. It’s a proven fact that DP and marriages are different so please stop your lying.

Registered domestic partners already have the same rights as spouses (Family Code 297.5).
For same sex couples to claim they don’t have rights is flat wrong.
You are right, there are differences between marriage and domestic partnerships, most significantly the gender of the people involved.

Dowhat:

No, you just misunderstood what I said.
Marriages and domestic partnerships are significantly different, primarily because of the gender of the individuals. One is sanctioned by the church, the other is not. One was created by the state, the other was not. One is a centuries old tradition, the other has been around for about a decade.

What I also said was that regardless of whether a couple is married or in a domestic partnership, they are entitled to the same rights and privileges, and the Family Code assures that.

There is no contradiction. It is unfortunate that you can not argue your point without resorting to insults. It is truly a reflection of your inability to objectively discuss the issues.

LGBTQ community, you did this to yourselves.
While a contestant at the International Mr. Leather Contest in Chicago in May 2008, I remember talking to a leatherman from the Southern California area who described himself as conservative, and proudly so. Imagine his shock when Prop 8 passed.
So many of the LGBTQ community have forgotten what Stonewall was: a three-day riot. They have forgotten what ACT UP was (of which I was a proud member and arrested over a dozen times). So many have forgotten that if you truly want your voice heard, it is time to stop sitting on the sidelines and PUSH BACK.
It is time to say NO to the gay-hating new Jim Crows of the world and tell them to FUCK OFF and live their own lives.
The gaystream have forgotten this. As a leatherman, an old guard, true to the fight leatherman, I have seen so many think they have gotten somewwhere just because they have a Volvo and a house in the suburbs.
Stop trying to be something you are not. You are weird, queer, and damnit, as taxpaying citizens you have a right to equal treatment under the law.
Don’t like gay marriage? Then don’t have one.
Sincerely,
Ben Brown Jr.
Mr. Oregon State Leather 2007

Queer Lounge
I feel EXTREMELY sold out by the gathering sponsors of Queer Lounge, and the guests they are attracting. These are old friends who have done super human efforts in the darkest times of the AIDS crisis, and I feel they are being put in an ugly awkward position by Queer Lounge.
Maybe Queer Lounge can answer these questions.
How does acting as if it’s BUSINESS AS USUAL, inspire the very young film makers they champion, or will this action make the film makers milque toast party queens?
How does funding Utah, stop the LDS elders NEXT election?
What influence does the LGBT community have at Sundance, that our MAJOR magazines, and networks who produce shows SPECIFICLY to our community, can’t MOVE SUNDANCE?
What will Queer Lounge do when gay activists protests them publicly on the streets of Park City, you know it will happen?
Fighting hateful churches is exhausting enough, trying to fight the biggest LGBT corporate interests too…is too much.