Comments on: Sanders and Prop. 8

By: Stephen

Stephen — Wed, 25 Mar 2009 20:48:10 +0000

Check out the articles on http://www.squarewondotorg.wordpress.com. There is a three article series on Prop 8. Part II is at http://squarewondotorg.wordpress.com/2009/03/19/prop-8-and-circular-reasoning%E2%80%94part-ii-defining-the-%E2%80%9Cright%E2%80%9D-in-question/

Part I is about natural law, Part II about legal defenses, and Part III, coming tomorrow, addresses the public benefits of traditional marriage which the state can promote.

By: RP

RP — Sun, 02 Nov 2008 06:29:48 +0000

Why do supporters of “No on 8″ say Constitutional Rights are being taken away? They can still Vote, They can still get a J-O-B….they can still collect taxes and get Medical Attention. Marriage is clearly defined as one Male and one Female. Marriage is for Creation, not Recreation. If these No on 8 folks want “just a title” then say so, but don’t try to say that Gay or Lesbian right s are taken away. We live in a Fallen World and we are allowing our future generations to accept immorality. What’s next? Polygamy? Marriage among family members? Under age Marriage? We are opening the doors to deeper situations. Vote according to your will, I’m not here to judge…just to voice my opinions.

By: Dan

Dan — Tue, 28 Oct 2008 04:18:18 +0000

While I am not a proponent of Prop. 8, I don’t think being one is “spew[ing] faith-based bigotry.” If you look at this issue without slinging around all the emotive and misleading crap about inequality you’ll see that California has long provided every single right of marriage to gays through civil unions. It’s not about equality, it’s about beating the other guy, and I’m saddened that opponents of Prop. 8 think that you have to vilify others and be divisive to do it. Proponents of Prop. 8 are just scared that the gay community is going to follow up by trying to take away their rights to free speech and free exercise of religion. Comments like “spew[ing] faith-based bigotry” only reinforce their conviction that that’s the case. If you want to defeat Prop. 8, do it without showing you’re less tolerant than they are.

By: BoyCanFly

BoyCanFly — Mon, 20 Oct 2008 22:32:13 +0000

I think Prop 10 would have typographically been a wiser choice
from a graphic designers point of view. We all know what 1 and 0 can accomplish behind closed doors, but it scares some to think what 1 and 1 do, so Prop 11 wouldn’t work either, But most 1′s love to see a little 0 on 0 action if you know what I mean, so Prop 00 is out too.

But then prop 8 only has 2 holes, which leaves 1′s and 0′s both confused as to which hole they prefer.

But then who cares, 1′s and 0′s should just stick to whatever equation makes them equal and leave the rest of the math alone, since most people think 2+2=5 anyways. If you have read your Orwell, you know what I’m getting at.

-BoyCanFly

By: VJohnson

VJohnson — Sun, 19 Oct 2008 21:42:49 +0000

Forget the rhetoric about who thinks who is wicked. There are practical and real religious freedom consequences. Check out this website http://www.prop8info.com. It has real news clips about real consequences, including Catholic Charities withdrawing adoption services from MA. This is not rhetoric or predictions, this is factual.

By: Scott Cutler

Scott Cutler — Thu, 16 Oct 2008 03:37:50 +0000

Marriage is a contract between two people. What is the purpose of this union? To provide a stable and committed relationship wherein new arrivals to this planet can arrive to learn and grow.

Same-gender marriage, lacking the ability to have children, is simply a commitment to perversion. Many may label this bigotry. I would say those who label others as bigots cannot be anything other than that themselves.

Voting yes on proposition 8 will be a solid step in the right direction toward moral behavior and a better world for our children.

By: John

John — Wed, 15 Oct 2008 02:11:25 +0000

The whole concept of the constitution and equality and whatnot is inherently flawed. Equality doesn’t come from redefinition of marriage. It would come from enacting laws to maintain the rights within a domestic partnership. Encroaching on the nature of marriage for heterosexuals is in all realty a removal of rights from those who enjoy such life existence. No bigotry, no extreme faith based rationale. Just reason. I am for rights, pursue them for same sex individuals as needed, but it is not proper to change and alter the rights of others just for a title. That, is bigotry and hypocrisy in the No on prop 8 logic series.

By: Jean

Jean — Wed, 08 Oct 2008 22:41:52 +0000

I always wonder about the mayor now. Had his daughters been small children and had to personally witness a drunk guy urinating on the beach in front of HIS OWN little girls, or if they had gone to the beach to enjoy their day, only to have it ruined by all the drunks, fights and vulgar language, would he THEN have supported Prop D because his own little girls were involved?

By: Joel

Joel — Wed, 08 Oct 2008 03:40:51 +0000

This whole equal rights argument is nonsense. Equality in marriage was there before any discussion of Proposition 8 or any California proposition for that matter. I am a straight man, I cannot marry a man. I can marry a woman, provided I follow the other provisions of the law. The same thing is a true for a gay man. Those promoting the homosexual agenda would do better not to costume themselves as brave freedom fighters and be a little more honest.

By: James R

James R — Sun, 05 Oct 2008 17:55:54 +0000

I dont understand why the minority cant take the fact that they are the minority. The Majority of Calif and the usa are not gay’s. So, when the majority become gay or come out gay, then the gay’s can vote something in over their minority. Remember the constitution!! If the vote passes, then we the supporters will have had our day. If the vote fails then the minority won and this is how the process works in the USA. I would not want it any other way. But, to say it is ok for our society to become controlled by the minority, well, that is not what we have fought for. I dont want this taught in our schools as ok. I dont want to know about your sexual preference. Why cant the gay’s just do what you want, but dont affect the rest of us. our a lost bunch. I am voting and praying for prop 8 to pass and finally end this madness.

By: JW Turskey

JW Turskey — Wed, 01 Oct 2008 23:07:01 +0000

The wording of the summary on the Ballot Initiiative petition to be placed on the Novembeer ballot, noiw known as Prop 8 contained the same fifteen words as the 2000 law so wrongly struck down by the california supreme court:
“Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.

The GLBT’s are quite pleased with themselves that they have sucessfuly used activist courts to attain their advantage over those of us who accept the outcome
of ballot box decisions; we may not always be “winners”,
we just move on.
The term “Freedom and Rights” are now the property of the Homosexual community. So revel in these times
of getting it over all the groups,that are victims of activist
courts for your “freedom and rights”

By: Raquel

Raquel — Tue, 30 Sep 2008 16:25:42 +0000

KHM – actually, no, the rights of civil unions and marriage are NOT the same. Civil unions do not give you the same level of respect under the law. A paramedic doesn’t tell a SPOUSE that he/she cannot get into an ambulance his/her spouse. Married couples can automatically make life or death decisions for each other in these crisis situations, no questions asked. Not so with domestic partners.