Gay Marriage Ban Qualifies For California Ballot
You had to know it was coming....
An initiative that would again outlaw gay marriage in California has qualified for the November ballot, the Secretary of State announced Monday.California Secretary of State Debra Bowen said a random check of signatures submitted by the measure's sponsors showed that they had gathered enough names for it to be put to voters.
The measure, known as the California Marriage Protection Act, would amend the state constitution to "provide that only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California."
If approved by a majority of voters on Nov. 4, the amendment would overturn the recent California Supreme Court ruling that legalized same-sex marriage in the state. It is similar to gay marriage bans that have been adopted in 26 other states.
"This signifies the fact that California voters really do favor and will come out to vote for the protection of historic marriage," said Ron Prentice, executive director of ProtectMarriage.com, a coalition of religious and social conservative groups behind the initiative.
In response to the Supreme Court's May 15 ruling, California public health officials already have amended marriage license applications to read "Party A" and "Party B" instead of bride and groom. Local officials have been told to start issuing the revised licenses to same-sex couples on June 17.
Gay men and lesbians would still be able to get married between then and the election, even with the initiative pending, unless the court agrees to stay its decision until after Nov. 4, as the amendment's sponsors have requested.
Equality for All is fighting the initiative. A recent Field poll shows that the majority backs gay marriage, while an LA Times poll shows more support for the ban. Clearly, it is a contentious issue and you can count on the Republicans playing it up to encourage the social/religious conservative voter turnout.
It's sad to see people filled with so much hatred based on their delusions about an imaginary friend named jeebus and an ancient, poorly translated book of fairy tales.
I wish I could vote in CA.
*
Gays don't deserve equal rights.
Neither do women.
Nor minorities.
As the song says:
Put a rider on that amendment that bans divorce among heterosexuals.
Getting real tired of this artificial issue.
Scotty beatin' the crap outta the White House.
Dick Cheney insults W. Virginia.
Retired Generals beating the crap out of "W".
John McCain turning his foreign policy positions into one gigantic senior moment.
Democrats uniting.
Obama on the offensive.
It must be time for our favorite GOP wingnut family game..."Bash the Homos".
Bob:
How about gay, black, handicapped, poor women from Mexico ?
Leave it up to the homophobic Reslugs in California.
Bob @ 3:
Dude, that was a hell of a flame throw. Do you work out?
Anyway, back to sanity. What the hell are people afraid is going to happen if gay marriage or unions are legal? I cannot figure it out. Do they think they are the only ones who should be happy?
Get the freaking government out of my bedroom.
"Clearly, it is a contentious issue and you can count on the Republicans playing it up to encourage the social/religious conservative voter turnout."
Let's keep the real issues in the forefront. Be sure to write and keep the pressure on "news" entities that focus on divisive issues for the sake of stirring the pot and remind them of the many other concerns of the majority of Americans. I think equality is a fundamental issue, and it will be well-served by a Democratic president, house, senate and judiciary. Am I dreaming big, here? Eye on the prize? You betcha. FOCUS, PEOPLE! FOCUS!
Bob @ 3:
Is "Bob" your name is that what you do in men's airport bathrooms ?
Bob @ 3:
You left old, doughy, christian white men out.
*
"Protecting" marriage by banning it? Only in reich-wing world.....
Alice Hussein @ 9:
I watch CSPAN during sex.
I'm just sayin'
“This signifies the fact that California voters really do favor and will come out to vote for the protection of historic marriage,” said Ron Prentice, executive director of ProtectMarriage.com, a coalition of religious and social conservative groups behind the initiative.
He must mean when women were chattel, marriages were arranged and no mixing of races.
pissed off patricia @ 8:
Change terrifies them. They are the biggest hot-air balloons on the planet - but when it comes down to it - they are the biggest cry-baby, wet-their-pants cowards there are.
*
I like jesse venturs take on it that went something like this,
why are states involved in marriage. States should just provide legal agreements between people and call it a civil union. then the church of your choice or not and you can call your union what ever they like and give it what ever religious meaning you and they decide
*looks at watch*
yup, about the perfect time for this to come up again.
the GOP must be pinching themselves.
forget iraq, the econ, torture, climate change, etc. the GOP, with the media's assistance, will, AGAIN, catapult this issue to the top.
yeah, mccain's people couldn't have gotten a better time nor issue for them to run on.
Chico Hussein @ 11:
Same-sex marriage and abortion only become reich-wing hot button issues around election time.
pissed off patricia @ 8:
Well, we know what the republicans are afraid of -- they wouldn't have the gay-hate vote to dredge up from the sewer, every four years.
I think this Genie's just about out of the bottle now. They're terrified.
*
Alice Hussein @ 9:
Muuuust fight....urge...to write...snarky.....commm...mmment.
; 0 )
conservatoire @ 19:
Uhhh....satire, folks? (now in the correct spot, sorry.)
Contracts are contracts. We are all the same, and we all have equal access to the benefits of contracts.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Alice Hussein @ 9:
Agreed, but that invokes imagery of sex behavior. I think this should be about civil rights, not what's going on in private. Talk of bedroom behavior in this context just excites the wrong element.
Bob @ 3:
You forgot non-land owners.
Reich-wingers, if your gay neighbors on one-side of your house gets married and your neighbors on the other side of your house has an abortion, how will it effect your life, livelihood, family, or paycheck in any way?
Chico Hussein @ 14:
I don't. I can't see the tv!!!
Blue Lensman @ 27:
And pizza delivery men.
I can't remember who said it, but he said, of course he supported gay marriage. He said that gay people have just as much right to be miserable as straight people.
Trittydi @ 22:
Not the analogy I would have used...but it works.
Can we pass a constitutional amendment banning men with Alzheimer's from running for President?
Jon @ 1:
Absolutely!! Religion and the asswipes that try to force it on the rational make me sick. They need to go worship jeebus of whatever in their closets.
Screw religion and the religious!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Bob @ 3:
Evilgelicals neither.
I better update my voter registration to help vote this down. Unbelievable when it comes to ignorance and mindless fear. I'm beginning to really detest people in general. People would deny others basic rights because they don't want to understand. I admit I don't completely understand myself. But I understand enough they have just as much rights as I have and should be protected. I thought we were making little progress when state supreme court overturned the ban. UGH!!!
If gay people didn't want to get married and if no woman wanted to have an abortion, how the hell could the republican party continue to function?
They should make it a two-parter, to also invalidate mixed-race marriages. That was illegal for the longest time. Also, the vote should allow women to be property again. They miss that.
conservatoire @ 24:
Yeah, I see satire in that post as well.
Regarding the topic:
Congrats, GOP slimeballs, you got your annual "Yeehaw! Git Out Th' Vote! Bang bang!" ballot measure. You can't find good candidates, you can't argue the issues without looking like foaming madmen, but tarrrrrnation of you can't rally your base with hate-filled, red-herring, craptacular ballot measures!
I'd feel sorry for you if I thought there was any hope for you bunch of goons. But you like it this way, don't you?
Looks like McCain has his wedge issue in California in the hopes of perhaps taking votes away from Democrats.
It won't work.
Dr. Hussein Matt @ 28:
you see, the simple truth about whats wrong with gay marriage is... umm
...
pissed off patricia @ 37:
Flag pins, pant suits, bowling scores, and former pastors.
really let it go for god sakes.. who the f cares who marries who. stop the the madness in iraq plz
Shet, and, I was buying a new wardrobe and sprucing up in hopes of finding a husband in time for the holidays.
medlakeguy @ 41:
I blame my parents' 25 year old divorce on gay marriage, which is still not legal in most states.
Damn teh gays! Damn teh gays all t' heck!
[sob] Mommy! Daddy! It wasn't your fault!!
Don't bet too much on Californians doing the right thing. We've been going down the tubes since we voted anti-immigrant.
I'm still waiting for an answer on how gays getting married "threatens" hetro marriage.
I think that anyone who has a problem with gays/ gays getting married has their own sexual hangups. Look at all the self-loathing closet gays in the republican house & senate. It really doesn't seem too healthy to be that repressed. Sad, really.
Bonkers @ 39:
Sorry:
"Initiative". Though I don't know, off-hand, what the difference is.
Create a ballot measure that does two things.
1. All Marriages must be not allow divorce.
2. All Marriages must produce children within 3 years, or the couple goes to jail.
That'll show those straight F-kers.
Wouldn't an amendment banning gay marriage be a violation of the separation of church & state clause in the Constitution? Is this too obvious, or am I too subtle by half?
++++
I just knew it.. I just knew this court decision wasn't the end of this gay marraige thing... I got all the sympathy in the world for the rights of gays to be as miserable as straight people in the 'holy' institution of matrimony if thats what they want... I'm glad the courts came down on their side... But I can't help feeling this certain way... I just wish they'd have waited till next year... I think they would have a better chance of getting what they are actually after with a dem in the wh without all this bullshit....
I'm sorry I feel that way, wish I didn't, but ya just know the RNC is going to use this as a club to scare the shit out of all the narrow minded bigoted troglodytes who are always reliable for being counted on to vote against their own best interests out of fear... And this phony sanctity of marriage 'can only' be between a man and woman is just the kind of shit that will chase them to the polls in november to screw themselves and the rest of us too... All because they just can't wrap their little pinheads around the idea that Adam and Steve deserve to have the same rights to misery as Adam and Eve enjoy...This is a fucked up world..................JD
Didn't California vote on gay marriage once before?
I thought they voted on the matter and decided to outlaw any marriage save for that between a man and a woman.
Is this supposed to be like in "It's a Wonderful Life"? In that story every time a bell rings an angel gets its wings. Only in this case, is it every time a gay couple gets married, a straight marriage comes apart?
baby jesus doesn't care who loves who,
baby jesus only likes to watch.
Litabell @ 47:
Maybe because teh gay couple will make more money than the hetero? Plus, of course, their house will be decorated better!
baby jesus @ 54:
My keyboard thanks you for the shower.
If gays can't marry, then they should pay less taxes.
If you get "reduced" rights, your should pay "reduced" cost to your government.
Fair is fair, and in the end like everything in this society... it must be boiled down to money.
Wouldn’t an amendment* banning gay marriage be a violation of the separation of church & state clause in the Constitution? Is this too obvious, or am I too subtle by half?
*What I meant was, wouldn't a law banning gay marriage be a violation of the separation of church & state clause in the Constitution? Is this too obvious, or am I too subtle by half?
I blame Dick Cheney's family history of inbreeding for my lack of precision.
++++
its a constitutional amendment....meaning that 2/3 of the voters must approve it....it wont pass
especially when sulu marries his long time partner
the trekkie vote is big here in california
medlakeguy @ 41:
Gay men should not have an abortion.
Left handed people should be outlawed. It is the natural order of things that all people are right handed. Look at all the tools of the world...even simple household things like scissors...even the computer mouse...all designed for right handed people. It was only the pressure of the politically correct that has forced the abomination of left handed products onto the rest of us.
I like the quote from Jesse Ventura,
"First of all," Ventura began, "I made a statement when I was Governor and I stand by it today: Love is bigger than government.,
"Who the hell are we as a government to tell people who you can fall in love with? I think it's absurd, the fact that it's even being debated."
Guess this proves that the South hasn't cornered the market on small-thinking, close-minded, redneck religious conservatives.
Do any of these "people" have jobs, hobbies or any kind of life???
What will the GOP do when this amendment loses? What if this causes more folks to come to the polls who favor legalizing gay marriage? Oh goodness, they may even favor the Dems on the ballot. Poor GOPers, they are still listening to that genius Karl Rove. You know the guy who led them to the 2006 slaughter and has lost them the last three contests in heavily favored GOP districts. So here's my message to GOPers everywhere.
PLEASE KEEP FOLLOWING KARL, at least until the first Tuesday of this November.
Chuck @ 62:
Jess speaks the truth...again.
Liberal AND Proud @ 61:
We already die more often in household accidents. So, don't think we don't know that you have it in for us!
The Truth Hurts @ 65:
Jesse and baby jesus are tops in my book.
On the bright side, laws that restrict the rights of others, usually don't last forever.
Jack Damage @ 51:
Makes you wonder if there weren't GOP operatives covertly pushing the right for gays to marry in the first place so that they could emerge a few months later with this Git-Out-Th'-Vote rallying cry, yeah?
Hey, it's not that crazy (well, THEY are. I mean, I am not that crazy for imagining that scenario).
uncle joe hussein mccarthy @ 59:
To my mind, anyone that would try to ban the cuteness that is George Takei and partner marrying finally is probably mentally unstable and likes to punch kittens in the face. Maybe even kick ducklings. Nobody with a heart would want to make George Takei sad :(
(I imagine there are many other couples in California just as adorable, but I don't know their names. Obviously, I don't want to make anyone sad)
Bonkers @ 69:
Helping, I should say. Obviously there are mostly good-minded folk work on this sort of thing, with full blessings by "libs" like me.
Civil rights issues should never be put to a popular vote. If banning slavery had been put to a popular vote, the Southern states would have voted against it. In spite of what these "wingnuts" say about "activist judges", it IS their job to interpret the constitution and render decisions which correct inequalities.
Nope, it only needs a majority, but it still might not pass. *fingers crossed*
If Senator Obama ever finally becomes the Dem nominee, there will be a lot of young people turning out to vote in Nov. A whole lot of these young people could give a damn about who marries who. This thing just might be defeated.
One marriage I do not want to see is the democratic ticket marriage of Senator Obama and Senator Clinton.
I wish some of these people on the right would take a simple course about the constitution and government. The United States government is only "majority rules" to a point, the constitution does not allow the majority to discriminate and treat the minority unfairly. Under our government, people are supposed to be equal. Being equal doesn't mean "Christian", it means we're all fuckin' human so leave people different than you alone.
To ban something don't you first have to prove its harm? So where is the proof of harm if my two gay friends get married?
uncle joe hussein mccarthy @ 59:
Is that a "fact"? That is, it will take 2/3rd to approve and not just a majority vote?
GOP moving from gays to illegal immigrants in ....5..4..3..
Liberal AND Proud @ 61:
Uhm....I have reason to believe my mouse is bisexual, as fits snugly in either hand. Perversion!...everywhere, perversion!
what heterosexual marriages are protected by banning gay marriage? the very premise makes no sense. the initiative should be thrown out for illogic alone.
Hillary wants VP spot
http://firedoglake.com/2008/06/03/hillary-wants-the-vp-slot/
The Truth Hurts @ 63:
this is the same state that has had raygun and ahnold as governors.
remember the police verdict after they beat rodney king. like him or not the verdict tell you all you need to know about the people of california. It's like Alabama west.
pissed off patricia @ 76:
they have hate and they believe that's all they need.
Bonkers@69;
No, Bonkers, you are not crazy in my opinion in imagining that
scenario.... Even if the majority of people helping the gay marraige cause are ligit in their intentions....
P.S. L&P@61; Comeon share bro, where can I get some of these evil lefthanded tools??? I got some big home improvement projects and I just can't seem to master the right handed tapemeasure at all...hehehe... I'm with Fanon on this one, we got our eyes on you righties so don't go tryin nuttin funny like killin us lefties off with an apple moth spray or somethin... heheheheh ...Just for the record...I'm talkin hands, not politics.... hehehehehh JD
Some crybaby Republican state attorneys general have begged the California state supreme court to suspend its ruling pending the outcome of the November election. They're hoping we California voters will bail them out from having to deal with same-sex marriage litigation. I say we should disappoint them and tell them to do their jobs.
While most press accounts leave out the names of the GOP attorneys general who pleaded with the California high court for a stay, I have all of them here (and a link to their letter). Expect great things from them in the future.
This is another NorCal vs SoCal issue....the conservatives in SoCal favour the ban, whilst the progressive/liberals in NorCal favour equal treatment.
It's gonna boil down to who can mobilise more voters on election day...If you californians believe in equal treatment under the Law, then i'll see you at the voting booth.
Nicole, what is needed is a constitutional ban on non-secular marriage.
Attack these bastards. They will never stop and they will never go away. They will continue until you live your life to their pleasure.
Attack them.
Doggiebobo @ 77:
Not true. It takes a simple majority vote to enact an initiative constitutional amendment in California. Initiatives that amend the state constitution have to pass a higher bar to get on the ballot (they require more signatures) than those initiatives that merely enact new statutes, but they do not need a supermajority at the ballot box.
justadood @ 86:
This is just one round of possibly an infinity of rounds. They will not stop until they destroy you. Honest. Its your existence that is the true problem. You are ungodly and unclean. You are wicked and evil. You frighten them.
BaBeAb@82;
Ahhh comeon... To be fair, its only the middle part of the state and maybe San Diego/Orange county that is 'that' insane... Us coasties? Mostly we have our brain screwed in and intact... And the far east side... Well, I think for the most part, they are survivalist get away from civilization types and anarchists will no real use for politics and politicians generally... As a personal note, I wasn't around for the Reagan reign of terror, was still an Ohio boy then. And I didn't vote for Ahh nold more recently... He's a putz as a governator.... But I'll give him this much.. He was O.K. as Conan the Barbarian... We'd all have been better off if he had stuck to that......JD
Trittydi @ 16:
If you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen.
rain @ 91:
...and into the bedroom!!
I keep warning people about being so eager to take rights/privileges from any another group of people. One day, the rights/privileges to be taken away might be something they care - and what will they say to keep those rights.
What right/privilege do you think we should go after to wake these people up?
Jack Damage @ 84:
http://www.thelefthand.com/lefhantapmea.html Here you go.
Please, will someone simply point out how UN-AMERICAN it is to attempt to deny equal rights to others?
and How thoroughly un-democratic it is to try to enshrine discrimination in the constitution?
America, you've got a long way to go to live up to your brand image.
RayC @ 15:
He's full of shit anyway, because California VOTERS haven't said any such thing. It's the petition signers. If and when (please please please) this amendment doesn't pass, do we get to turn this back on him? "See, Mr. Wingnut, you were only able to mobilize other wingnuts. The voters don't agree."
Chico Hussein @ 11:
His name's 'Bob', not Larry Craig, Einstein!
You folks should visit the discussion on Pam's House Blend about this. They don't think that this will be the one issue that sinks Democrats, as it did in 2004. There's been a really interesting debate on the whole issue over there.
And was it here or somewhere else that I saw BillO actually challenging a Pasadena lawyer who's anti-gay marriage (though he accepts civil unions) for not having a good enough reason? When O'Reilly encourages wingnuts to develop what he calls "cogent" arguments against gay marriage, you know the end is near.
Bonkers @ 69:
Is Debra Bowen (Sec. of State) a Republic?
A ballot initiative for a constitutional amendment? That sounds weird to me.
Time to find out if the Libertarians are on the CA presidential ballot this year. If he is I'd say lots of contributions to his campaign in CA are in order! He'll strip away the anti gay rights votes from McCain. He has a much longer history with them.
I want to know what goes on under the sheets, in Ron Prentices (the Executive Director of ProtectMarriage .com)bedroom! usually the one who whines the loudest, is the one who has the most to hide!
Hey Ron what you been porking lately: your son, daughter or God forbid, the family pet?
How do we know your a straight arrow
speedbird 9 @ 93:
Non-secular marriage.
Ban and disolve all non-secular marriages.
the "Marriage Protection Act"? ROFLMAO! Maybe they should make divorce illegal, that'll sure "protect" marriage.
And I'm duly stumped that there's isn't any attached flag-burning amendment in there, I mean come ON, this IS an election year!
anon @ 103:
Wasn't that reason the court gave for their ruling? That the state couldn't have civil unions for gays and not heteros? It was just opening a BIG can-o-worms.
casper46 @ 105:
And if the christians are going to ban non-christian (gay) marriage, then ALL marriage should be banned.
Or if you would rather, ban HETEROSEXUAL marriage.
No offense, but I'm sick of this non issue. All it's going to do is make right wing Whacko turnout even higher. We're torpedoing ourselves with this stuff.
This is how elections are lost.
casper46 @ 99:
Nope. Secretary of State Bowen is a Democrat. Please understand, the requirements for a getting an initiative on the ballot ain't that great.
greg @ 95:
UN-AMERICAN??? You must be joking. This whole country is built on a system of haves and have nots.
anon @ 106:
Actually, just ban divorce. That'll effectively kill marriage. Remember, these people are just plan hypocritical. But, then again, I'm not married.
UN-AMERICAN??? You must be joking. This whole country is built on a system of haves and have nots.
Hear, hear. America IS living up to itself. The brand image is just
As much as I want to bang my head against the wall until the frustration goes away, I'm slightly comforted by the fact that this is the beginning of the end for a dying ideology. Sure, it may be making a lot of noise now, but this is the right desperately trying to cling to an America that has already passed them by. The change has already occurred. In the long term, support will get greater and greater, as the old guard falls away.
garrett @ 109:
The most conformist and hysterical (right wing christianist) person I know is in his twenties, married with two kids.
You'll be waiting 70 years.
Having a ballot on gay marriage is retarded. What if you're not for, or against it, but just don't give a damn because your house is worth nothing, and you food and gas prices are ruising.
If you get invited to a gay wedding you don't have to go.
You decline politely on the RSVP.
Conservatives dont understand the phrase - mind your own business.
anon @ 110:
It will never fade completely. We're still fighting centuries of racism and sexism and misogyny, and probably will forever. But it will cease to be a national, debatable, viable wedge issue much sooner (I hope). Each generation has its boogieman. The Irish, the Commies, etc. Support for laws like this will never be nationally strong enough to stick, and some new "horror" will take its place.
Gas and food prices are out of control. And these people are angry about Gay Marriage? Way to keep your eye on the ball ReThugs!
I bet you if they tried to ban divorce and heterosexual marriage, there would be riots in the streets! :-D
This needs a counter proposition that forbids the outsourcing of civil service functions to organized religions. i.e. state sanctioned unions should only be performed by state officials.
Yup! America becomes more irrelevant everyday and why? Not because of gay marriage, but because Americans are too stupid to see issues like gay marriage and abortion shouldn't even be issues at all!
Why talk about overpopulation or global warming when you can talk about people who can't even have children getting married!?? No matter what happens to this country in the 20-50 years, we've got it coming! Let's hope "Jeebus" comes to our rescue!
(I'm not holding my breath, how about you?)
Fanon@94;
Thanks for the link guy... I was actually only trying to be funny about lefthanders and right handers, but the link is cool.. I should have known there would actually be lefthanded tools out there to be bought someplace. I'm actually cool using the right handed stuff.. I make do...regards; JD
Trittydi @ 16:
Thank you, damn you put it right. The republican party and their idiot pundits constantly and only plays the victim card. Anytime anyone disagrees with them, they never argue the point or the issue, they just play victim and whine and cry about the liberal bias, and the liberal media is all stacked against them and they are just the innocent victims trying to do good and being shut down by the evil liberal establishment.
Time to organize in Los Angeles to defeat these fucking cretins.
Sagnac@120;
Ya know, your post reminds me of this other poster goes by the name of Jerry I was having a little chit-chat with ealier... But I got to admit you have a good point. This marriage business should not EVEN be an issue in 2008... Especially given the 'real issues' on the table whether our infamous MSM is paying attention or not....
Those issues such as the two you highlight as well as others are really there and need addressed.... This issue?? Such as it is, as an issue, this should have been dealt with and the gay community provided an avenue to all the 'bliss' or 'misery' (take your pick on that) the straight community has always taken for granted, probably at least 15 years ago if not longer.
I hope Debg@98 is correct about this not turning out to be that big a rallying issue for idiots in november.. But we'll just have to wait and see how the repubs play this thru the summer and fall.......Not holding my breath this will be dealt with rationally at this point any more than I'm holding my breath waitin for Jeebus to save us all from ourselves............JD
The Christofascist knuckledraggers will fall for it hook line and sinker. They will pay $4.00 a gallon on the way to the polls, drop their son or daughter off at the military recruiting station on the way to fight and die in a Republican oil war based on lies, just to vote against teh gays!
You can fool some of the people some of the time but if you are a Republican you can con, divide, distract and fool your base all of the time!
Idiots.
I keep trying to tell people, CA is the greatest state in the union, BUT, there are still plenty of regressive assholes that live here.
If you have a problem with gay marriage, don't marry a fag.
And shut the fuck up.
Mike V. @ 126:
NYC is the greatest city in the union but we have to deal with some backwaters upstate as well.
Ruthless People @ 127:
....scratch that....the greatest city in the world...but still have to deal with knuckledraggers.
pissed off patricia @ 31:
I believe that was Chris Rock who said that....it might be in one of his old stand-up shows that they re-run on Comedy Central.
Sadly I once had a Roman Catholic friend from college who had a 'nervous breakdown' of sorts and became a EWTN right wing Catholic. He attempted to become a priest but then married (somewhat pre-arranged) to a girl who backed out from becoming a nun!
The worst and probably the most unbelieveable thing that I saw at their wedding when the priest read their wedding message/sermon that they wrote, was that they would speak out and fight against.... gay marriage! (oh, and abortion too)
My jaw almost dropped thru the floor and almost into the boiler room of the church. You would think that on their 'special day' they would celebrate their own love and union, instead of worrying what two loving adults of the same sex do hundreds of miles away!
Apparently, their marriage meant very little to them if they have to use it to lash out at people just trying to go about their business.
May I just add one thing?
I believe the Constitution, which is the law of the land, says one man and one woman. Which Articles and amendments do we follow and which do we break?
Thank you
The first problem we have is that marriage means two different things, a religious union and a legal one. We cannot stop religions from believing what they will nor should they be determining law based on religion. The California Supreme Court ruled it unconstitutional to deny anyone the right to marry and you cannot legislate away constitutional rights. Just because bigotry was accepted in the ignorant good ole' days doesn't make it right. That anyone can believe they have the right to deny anyone else this right is pure bigoted arrogance. It's private and none of your damned business.
An_American @ 130:
Ruthless People @ 128:
It really is the greatest city in the world.
So far, the most stunning city I have ever seen is Prague, and San Francisco is pretty damn awesome.
But nothing can top New York City. Absolutely amazing place.
Even when you have to deal with the knuckledraggers..
Gay people need the rights we all have...BUT...I am not so sure if they should have the "right" to marry. I don't care a bit about preserving the "sanctity of vows between a man and a woman" that crap is all hogwash. I am just concerned that this last, pristine, unaffected segment of the population is now going to be wide open and ripe for the picking by the filthy vultures called DIVORCE LAWYERS! Take it from someone currently embroiled in a divorce, gay folks, you don't want any part of it, and if you know what is good for you, you won't rush to marry ANYONE.. EVER. (Actually, aside from gay rights groups, I am convinced that if you peeled back the layers of support for gay marriage laws, you'd find the legal community at the very bottom of this entire movement!)
....biggest mistake I ever made...grumble gripe grumble....signing life long contracts when you are a kid in your 20's....gripe grumble...
This is what brings republicans to the voting booth.
It seems sort of odd that a constitutional amendment requires no more votes than any other initiative: only a simple majority
Zeno @ 88:
That's correct. Simple amendments to the California Constitution require a mere majority of voting voters to pass. This is a serious flaw in our Constitution.
We on the side of equality should have anticipated this amendment, and proactively responded with one of our own, something like, "No right declared by the California Supreme Court to be fundamental under the California Constitution shall be rescinded except by amendment to the California Constitution approved by at least two-thirds of all eligible, registered voters."
If that were to pass at the same time the bigot amendment received its bare majority, that bare majority of bigots wouldn't matter.
I believe that Article 5 stipulates 3/4 of the House and Senate plus 3/4 of the states.....
Article Five: Process of amendments
Main article: Article Five of the United States Constitution
Article Five describes the process necessary to amend the Constitution. It establishes two methods of proposing amendments: by Congress or by a national convention requested by the states. Under the first method, Congress can propose an amendment by a two-thirds vote (of a quorum, not necessarily of the entire body) of the Senate and of the House of Representatives. Under the second method, two-thirds (2/3) of the state legislatures may convene and "apply" to Congress to hold a national convention, whereupon Congress must call such a convention for the purpose of considering amendments. As of 2008, only the first method (proposal by Congress) has been used.
Once proposed—whether submitted by Congress or by a national convention—amendments must then be ratified by three-fourths (3/4) of the states to take effect. Article Five gives Congress the option of requiring ratification by state legislatures or by special conventions assembled in the states. The convention method of ratification has been used only once (to approve the 21st Amendment). Article Five currently places only one limitation on the amending power—that no amendment can deprive a state of its equal representation in the Senate without that state's consent (limitations regarding slavery and taxation having expired in 1808).
An_American @ 138:
They are talking about an amendment to the California Constitution.
I Like Pie @ 139:
Indeed. Moreover, it does not require 3/4 of Congress to amend the U.S. Constitution, but 2/3 (plus 3/4 of the state legislatures).
samdog @ 134:
Heh, it has been said that gay couples should have the right to be just as miserable as married straight ones. ;)
Personally, I don't think the state ought to be involved in marriage at all. I think that each individual has the right to enter into contracts with any other individual or group of individuals. And that should be that. If they contract to share property in a marital relationship or civil union, fine. The state should enforce the contract. Otherwise, the state has no business defining and sanctioning the kinds of relationships people may enter, and defining the rights and responsibilities accorded to such relationships.
This issue again. It'll pop up in November AGAIN and will pump up the bigots.
Just like they did in 2006, WHY don't the Democrats do anything about this.
They will put this on the ballot on a number of states AGAIN and just squeak out a victory.
THIS IS SO EASY FOR THEM TO DO, WHY? WHAT THE HECK ARE THE STATE DEMOS DOING????
Conservatives crack me up.
They'd rather go through all the trouble of driving a bus backwards and pretend it's the same thing, than let everyone sit at the front.
bring it on neopubs, another wedge divisive issue? We already PASSED this via the State Supreme Court, and when we overturn your so called constitutional 'ban' with Arnolds help, will you STFU about this NON-ISSUE THEN?
Time to focus on the plummeting economy, the financial crisis this administration has put our nation is and the serious allegations of treason and war crimes.
Bush and Cheney will be prosecuted and found guilty. count on it!
This is not a worry.... we're all accustomed to the church brigade coming out in droves and the apathetics staying home.
Well, I've got news for you....the apathetics have registered to vote, and they will vote DOWN the man/woman wording. Why? Because the USA has NEVER been in such a state of danger. Even the poor who have never voted before are in deep disgust over presnit Caligula and Darth Cheney's rampaging bankruptcy regime.
They'll come out to vote for Obama, and Orange County's blue hairs will pee themselves when the real majority votes against their hate campaign.
Normally this is a ploy by the repigs to get the self hating closet gay Chri$tians out to vote against themselves. This time it's going to really blow up in their pasty white faces. Not only is this going to galvanize the people who support equal rights for all humans, it's also going to get a lot of the normally whishy-washy repigs out of their chairs to vote for this amendment. And when they are doing that, they aren't going to be voting for 8 more years of fucking hell with Johny McSucksbushsdick.
Bob @ 3:
I is hopin' you bein' sarcastic n' all. But if you isn't. You shouldn't deserve equal rights either, but the law is the law and you get them along with everyone else.
Expect more wedge issues to be used to get out the vote for Republicans. Democrats have to register as many people as they possibly can to 1) overcome those who will be suppressed and 2) overcome the Republican gotv efforts.
Hate filled Christian terrorists hate everything that the United States supposedly stands for, and these theofascist piles of shit will NEVER give up working to violate the rights, freedoms, and liberties that America supposedly stands for.
These Christian terrorists are zero different from their Islamic colleagues. Their Islamic colleagues also hate equal rights for all.
Comments are closed on this entry