You belong in the 19th century my friend, or in Kansas. Your vision of what constitutes normalcy is oppressively archaic. From your definition of a functional marriage I take it you have never known a committed gay or lesbian couple who have lived together, supported one another, raised children together. I wouldn’t further be surprised if you didn’t know any gay people at all.

You keep referring to tradition, despite the fact that your definition of what is traditional has been refuted in every way, which you consistently choose to ignore. So let’s say for the sake of argument that your idea of marriage is the traditional one. To that I say, fuck your tradition. You are so bound up in your ideological conceptions of what is right and wrong that it blinds you to the necessity for basic civil rights. Not all traditions are good. It is necessary for traditions to change sometimes for the health of a community. And it is unhealthy for you to cling so tightly to your antiquated notions that you are willing to sacrifice the political and social welfare of others at the altar of tradition.

You’re right, there’s no election for a while. But guess what–even the Republican Governator sees the passage of Prop 8 as unconstitutional and is actively working to overturn it. So we’ll see you in court.

In the meantime, you can stop slumming on the CityBeat blog and go back to reading Ann Coulter and watching Fox News. You pointedly ignore facts and logic and continue to rant with all the misplaced fury of your 7th grade writing skills. You’re not going to change anybody’s mind with your poorly regurgitated right wing talking points and clearly no one is going to change yours because it seems your brain is preserved in a jar on Rush Limbaugh’s desk.

As a married person, I absolutely think that being “married” to your partner changes your relationship and makes it more significant. There are significant legal differences between marriage and civil unions, too. As for your comments about traditional marriage being the foundation of the family, a “family” does not need to be a man, woman and their kids. My mom grew up with a mother and an aunt as heads-of-household because my mom’s father skipped out on the family, leaving behind seven kids. My mom turned out A-OK. In fact, all seven of the kids turned out just fine. My dad was raised by his grandfather (again, father skipped out, mother followed). I can give you countless examples of non-traditional families that are doing just fine and I can give you countless examples of “traditional” families that are doing a fine job of screwing things up. This ain’t Leave it to Beaver. You Yes-on-8 folks have this idealistic vision of marriage that doesn’t exist in the real world.

I find it amazing that these “gay rights” activists can think they’re so tolerant and accepting, but yet they cannot even try to comprehend the whole purpose of marriage and its impact on our society and culture. I’m sitting here waiting, for a reason why the citizens of California need to redefine marriage so that any two people can get married, but do I get anything? Nope. All I can ever find is that this is some right that is so ever important, but if you would look back to the history of marriage, that it is a religious institution, you would find something completely different. And if you’re so “tolerant” minds would even give it thought that our society is built upon families, that we live in families, and that a man and a woman are required to make a family, you would suddenly understand something. But no, anyone who even tries to support traditional marriage just gets called a bigot, a hater, an idiot, etc.

Okay, end of Ron’s rant. This article is all about the protesters and that is why I commented in the first place. And since there is no election coming up soon, they’re wasting their time.

what I meant by the bisexual part is that children will be raised in a society where gender is not part of marriage it will no longer be part of our culture. somewhat will sue someone for discriminating or some junk like that. so eventually our schools and culture will be plain and childrens story will be about prince and prince, princess and princess, and for the heck of it maybe a prince with a princess. because of this and society’s acceptance of gay being normal, bisexual will be what is normal for children. we arent born with some instinct to get married. marriage is part of our culture so if it gets changed more and more people will use that new form. I didnt say everyone is biologically straight. we live in families. we live with our parents and then move out. thats straight and its straight because its our biology. our biology demands a man and a woman to supply a sperm and an egg

And, yes, you do support discrimination. You support denying a same-sex couple who’s in a committed relationship the right to walk into the county clerk’s office and be legally married. Discrimination happens when you treat people differently because of their sexual orientation.

I wasnt saying everyone will be. I said noone will be gay. everyone will be normal or in todays terms bisexual. our whole lives will then be based on a bisexual life instead of the straight biological one that it is now

Basically, what you’re saying, is that if same-sex marriage were allowed, in 10 years, everyone will be gay. Where are you getting that from? That’s illogical. People don’t choose to be gay any more than you chose to be straight. Hopefully your grandkids will grow up in a world that’s not so obsessed with what people do in the bedroom—because that’s really what it comes down to. You Prop. 8 supporters simply don’t like the idea of gay sex.

If marriage wasn’t important to same-sex couples, why did so many turn out to protest Prop. 8? Who are you to decide what kind of value marriage holds for a couple? Each couple, gay or straight, should be allowed to decide for themselves whether they want to make that commitment.