California Proposition Eight - Ban on Same-Sex Marriage

[Endy]

But you just said that civil unions are NOT equal to a marriage license. That's what Im saying. I think they should be equal IN ALL ASPECTS. 100%. I am NOT advocating separate but equal crap. Im advocating ALL possible ways to get gay couples rights right NOW. You aren't addressing the reality. Right now, the majority is that people are against gay marriage. If you want to wait around, hoping people will change their little mind about gay people..... sorry but I'd rather capitalize on the fact that most people are okay with gay couples having a civil union. So I feel that we'd have a quicker success on getting gay rights (maybe not 100% but definitely more than what they have now). It seems like you want to wait around, prolong things so that you'd go straight from 0% rights to 100% rights........

Ahh, it's much better. At first, I thought you are opposed to gay marriages by your subtle messages. Okay, I am glad that I agree with you on most things you said. I am cool.

No, I don't want to wait around. My main concern is their kids. I want the gay couples to have full support from schools, government, churches, etc to accomplish the "social" expectation for their kids. Often they denied the gay couples opportunity, you know.

 

[dead money]

lol this argument is never gonna end. Might as well give it up. I dont think anyones been successful changing someone else's mind here and its like a broken record that skips over--and over--and over--and over again.

 

[Endy]

I wasn't aware that a civil union can't be a wedding....? Isn't a wedding just a celebration event? I think people are misunderstanding me here. To me, marriage is something religion made up. THEN the government made it into a legal institution for the purposes of taxes, benefits, etc. I am trying to respect the religious aspect of it. When I say separate marriage from whatever, I am not talking about separating gay and straight, I am talking about separating the legal and religious aspects of it. This is the problem. The ONLY main thing that's holding gay rights back is religion!

Yea, you got it. "that's holding gay rights back is religion!" I am glad we are on the same page.

One problem that I am dealing with those religious people not understanding the US Constitution that everybody is entitled to every right that everybody has. It's like US Constitution VS. Holy Bible. The main reason we have US Constitution is to divorce from England, The Church of England and the Authorities. US Constitution protects individuals and their rights.

Sadly, People don't see that way, and want to put "discrimination" into the US Constitution. I can guarantee everybody that Supreme Court can rule out as unconstitutional.

 

[Daredevel7]

But that's the whole point, civil unions don't give you those rights. And even in states where they come close (at the state level, at least), there is a certain level of understanding that is conferred to a marriage and not a civil union. If your partner were in the hospital, and you walked in and said "We're married." You would automatically be allowed in and given power of attorney, no questions asked. Even couples with civil unions aren't given those rights because the hospital staff doesn't know what to do with them (see my posts about how civil unions were invented about 8-9 years ago). First of all, it's not taken as a given. You will legally be kept out of the room unless you carry your paperwork around with you. Have you ever seen someone say they were married and then have to present their marriage certificate? A civil union will get you nowhere unless you actually carry it around as proof. Same with power of attorney.

I read an article for a presentation I gave last year about a woman whose partner died in the hospital after being trapped in their house while it flooded. All of their paperwork was destroyed in the flood, and she spent hours being denied entry to the room until she could finally contact her partner's family and have them grant her access. The hospital staff wouldn't let her in because, legally, they had no proof that she should have been allowed. And in this situation, her partner's family accepted her and their relationship. That's not always the case.

In a more ideal world, sure, maybe civil unions and marriages could be the same (even though they would still be separating an entire group of people for no reason). But even if on paper you made everything equal, the way that society perceives them won't be.

I totally understand. Believe me, you don't have to explain why civil unions could never be as equal as a marriage in ALL aspects, especially socially. But you're assuming that I want civil unions and then stop right there. That is not what I want. I want to use civil unions to FACILITATE gay marriage. Right now, I see the anti-gay marriage people going "No no! Marriage is between a man and woman!" and the gay marriage supporters going "No no! Marriage is between 2 people!!". You think we are making great progress on our side? Look at California, it's supposed to be liberal, and it can't even make up its mind! Polls say the MAJORITY will vote for civil unions. Im asking why can't we take advantage of this WHILE we still fighting for gay rights? And you know how you can change a person's mind about gay marriage? By discussing it with them? Hell no. It's simply by being friends with them and SHOWING them why gays need to have marriage rights and why civil unions isn't enough. Have you noticed that most supporters who are not gay usually have a gay relative or a gay friend, so they understand why this needs to happen? Hope that makes things clearer.

 

[Byrdie714]

My dear friend, I don't think Tousi is prejudicin'. He is seein' different just like me. I am seein' different, because a " woman " is really a " woman " - a " female " nature with real breasts and vagina. A real woman could give a birth and can breastfeed a baby.

Can you help me to understand how it is that 2 same men or 2 same women be an equal as a man and a woman - to make the same sex to become recognized ?

What about heterosexual couple who are infertile? Should they be allowed to get married even though they can't have kids?

lol this argument is never gonna end. Might as well give it up. I dont think anyones been successful changing someone else's mind here and its like a broken record that skips over--and over--and over--and over again.

No.

 

[lsfoster]

I totally understand. Believe me, you don't have to explain why civil unions could never be as equal as a marriage in ALL aspects, especially socially. But you're assuming that I want civil unions and then stop right there. That is not what I want. I want to use civil unions to FACILITATE gay marriage. Right now, I see the anti-gay marriage people going "No no! Marriage is between a man and woman!" and the gay marriage supporters going "No no! Marriage is between 2 people!!". You think we are making great progress on our side? Look at California, it's supposed to be liberal, and it can't even make up its mind! Polls say the MAJORITY will vote for civil unions. Im asking why can't we take advantage of this WHILE we still fighting for gay rights? And you know how you can change a person's mind about gay marriage? By discussing it with them? Hell no. It's simply by being friends with them and SHOWING them why gays need to have marriage rights and why civil unions isn't enough. Have you noticed that most supporters who are not gay usually have a gay relative or a gay friend, so they understand why this needs to happen? Hope that makes things clearer.

Oh, no worries, daredevel. I get what you're saying, it's just that there are a lot of things standing in the way of civil unions, too. For a civil union to be made equal to a marriage would require basically the same thing as allowing gay marriage. DOMA is going to stand in the way of either, and if that has to change, I'd rather it change for an actual equal standing.

And it might be pointless most of the time, but I have to believe that people are capable of logical thought, even when they seem determined to prove otherwise.

 

[Byrdie714]

The other issue in regards to civil unions is that same-sex couples have to travel to their state capitol to register whereas a heterosexual couple can register in their own county of residency.

Now if the same-sex couple decides to split--they can file their separation in their county of residence.

The other thing about civil unions/domestic partnership--it costs more than a marriage license.

Is that really fair? No.

(This is how Domestic partnership/Civil Unions work in Washington State)

 

[Byrdie714]

Oh, no worries, daredevel. I get what you're saying, it's just that there are a lot of things standing in the way of civil unions, too. For a civil union to be made equal to a marriage would require basically the same thing as allowing gay marriage. DOMA is going to stand in the way of either, and if that has to change, I'd rather it change for an actual equal standing.

And it might be pointless most of the time, but I have to believe that people are capable of logical thought, even when they seem determined to prove otherwise.

DOMA is a contradiction.

 

[Byrdie714]

I am seein' different, because a " woman " is really a " woman " - a " female " nature with real breasts and vagina. A real woman could give a birth and can breastfeed a baby.

I want to elaborate on this....

Marriages are for procreation and ensuring the continuation of the species. The proponents of this argument are really hard pressed to explain, if that's the case, why infertile couples are allowed to marry. I, for one, would love to be there when the proponent of such an argument is to explain to his post-menopausal mother or impotent father that since they cannot procreate, they must now surrender their wedding rings and sleep in separate bedrooms. That would be fun to watch! Again, such an argument fails to persuade based on the kinds of marriages society does allow routinely, without even a second thought, and why it really allows them - marriage is about love, sharing and commitment; procreation is, when it comes right down to it, in reality a purely secondary function.

The proponents of the procreation and continuation-of-the-species argument are going to have a really hard time persuading me that the human species is in any real danger of dying out anytime soon through lack of reproductive success.

If ten percent of all the human race that is gay were to suddenly, totally refrain from procreation, I think it is safe to say that the world would probably be significantly better off. One of the world's most serious problems is overpopulation and the increasing anarchy and human misery that is resulting from it. Seems to me that gays would be doing the world a really big favor by not bringing more hungry mouths into a world that is already critically overburdened ecologically by the sheer number of humans it must support. So what is the useful purpose to be served in mindlessly encouraging yet more human reproduction?

 

[Daredevel7]

I want to elaborate on this....

Marriages are for procreation and ensuring the continuation of the species. The proponents of this argument are really hard pressed to explain, if that's the case, why infertile couples are allowed to marry. I, for one, would love to be there when the proponent of such an argument is to explain to his post-menopausal mother or impotent father that since they cannot procreate, they must now surrender their wedding rings and sleep in separate bedrooms. That would be fun to watch! Again, such an argument fails to persuade based on the kinds of marriages society does allow routinely, without even a second thought, and why it really allows them - marriage is about love, sharing and commitment; procreation is, when it comes right down to it, in reality a purely secondary function.

The proponents of the procreation and continuation-of-the-species argument are going to have a really hard time persuading me that the human species is in any real danger of dying out anytime soon through lack of reproductive success.

If ten percent of all the human race that is gay were to suddenly, totally refrain from procreation, I think it is safe to say that the world would probably be significantly better off. One of the world's most serious problems is overpopulation and the increasing anarchy and human misery that is resulting from it. Seems to me that gays would be doing the world a really big favor by not bringing more hungry mouths into a world that is already critically overburdened ecologically by the sheer number of humans it must support. So what is the useful purpose to be served in mindlessly encouraging yet more human reproduction?

So true! Not to mention they would adopt!!! A lot of infertile couples don't even bother adopting because they REALLY REALLY want a blood baby of their own, so they go for other means such as in vitro. (I know because my friend works in an in vitro firm)

 

[Liebling:-)))]

My dear friend, I don't think Tousi is prejudicin'. He is seein' different just like me. I am seein' different, because a " woman " is really a " woman " - a " female " nature with real breasts and vagina. A real woman could give a birth and can breastfeed a baby.

Are you saying that you believe in marriage for create a baby, not love?

I don't marry for create a baby but love.

Can you help me to understand how it is that 2 same men or 2 same women be an equal as a man and a woman - to make the same sex to become recognized ?

Simple answer: same and opposite sex couple married for LOVE, not create a baby...

 

[Liebling:-)))]

I was talkin' about marriage.

Yes, I know you are talking about marriage. But... is it okay to ban same sex couple for want to marry because they love each other?

 

[Daredevel7]

Oh, no worries, daredevel. I get what you're saying, it's just that there are a lot of things standing in the way of civil unions, too. For a civil union to be made equal to a marriage would require basically the same thing as allowing gay marriage. DOMA is going to stand in the way of either, and if that has to change, I'd rather it change for an actual equal standing.

And it might be pointless most of the time, but I have to believe that people are capable of logical thought, even when they seem determined to prove otherwise.

Didn't realize that changing civil unions could be just as hard as legalizing gay marriage. Just thought it would be easier. Thanks for explaining!

I get frustrated with people who are anti-gay marriage (or anti-gay, which is MUCH worse!) too. I just think "Come on, we did this with black people too. You know gay marriage is gonna happen anyway. Get over it already! *taps watch*"

 

[lsfoster]

Didn't realize that changing civil unions could be just as hard as legalizing gay marriage. Just thought it would be easier. Thanks for explaining!

I get frustrated with people who are anti-gay marriage (or anti-gay, which is MUCH worse!) too. I just think "Come on, we did this with black people too. You know gay marriage is gonna happen anyway. Get over it already! *taps watch*"

Yeah, anti-gay are the worst. Especially because it's just about impossible to change their minds. People who are just against marriage, you can sometimes point out enough flaws in their argument that they realize they don't make any sense. It's harder to do online like this, where people can just avoid the comments that point our where they might be wrong. (Not like anyone in this thread, of course)

But trying to reason with someone who's homophobic is about as effective as talking to brick. Except the brick might even be more logical. Oh well, I'll keep trying to talk some sense into people. Even if it's probably a waste of time. Gotta keep hoping.

 

[jillio]

I have to disagree with you. I have seen children doing great with two dads and some kids with two moms. They are successfully family, even a couple. The kids are fantastic, I swear God, they are so good!! They did so well in school. I have seen in the action. I fell in love with the family. They are so "functioning" family, comparing to dysfunctional families who ended up divorced up to 90 percents.

I have a lot of Single fathers with children. They are doing alright. I have seen a lot of Single mothers with children. They are doing alright. Many people are not married, sharing kids in one house. It's becoming common.

I don't believe in the word "successfully" fitting in a straight family ANYMORE because of the highest rate of divorces, domestic abuses and child abuses. Sorry, I have seen many wonderful children doing so well with two dads and two moms. No big difference.

What exactly are you disagreeing with here?

 

[BradB08]

The more I think about Prop 8, the madder I get.

Why in this day and age, is gay marriage an issue? Why do straight people care so much about it? How about they just fuck off and let the gays get married? Eh? That would make much more sense than this bullshit posturing from anti-gay marriage folks.

 

[lsfoster]

Still waiting for replies from netrox on #311, Tousi on #358 and 380, and Maria on #366... Just sitting around waiting...

If anyone would like to pm me about this, feel free.

 

[BradB08]

Still waiting for replies from netrox on #311, Tousi on #358 and 380, and Maria on #366... Just sitting around waiting...

If anyone would like to pm me about this, feel free.

You may be waiting forever. Heh.

 

[lsfoster]

You may be waiting forever. Heh.

Most likely. People tend to get strangely silent when you point out their arguments make no sense.

 

[Byrdie714]

Still waiting for replies from netrox on #311, Tousi on #358 and 380, and Maria on #366... Just sitting around waiting...

If anyone would like to pm me about this, feel free.

Simple: because they know that their argument is weak and don't want to admit defeat.

You know that argument--"fight or flight"?

They choose the latter.