Log in

No account? Create an account
Willow & Tara kissing

Still grieving

Do these two look like so much of a danger to all of us that we need to pass laws to stop them from providing a solid foundation and home for their future children?

Every day I continue to be saddened about the overturning of gay marriage in California. I'm struggling to understand the consequences of the law and the last I heard, no one really knows if it invalidates current gay marriages or not. They can't know because this hasn't happened in this way before. But the law is being challenged in court, mainly because it simply isn't allowed in this country to pass laws that only apply to a certain group of people. So you can't pass a law that says black people have to stop at yield signs or gay people have to pay fines for walking their dog in public, etc. And of course this new law, applies only to a select group of people, so it's a up to the state supreme court to decide I guess.

I think that if they are going to allow a law like this to apply only to a minority, then it should be passed to cover other small groups of people as well. For example, all people ever convicted of domestic abuse should not be allowed to marry and should have their marriages invalidated. Or all people convicted of selling drugs to children should not be allowed to marry. And how about all people convicted of child abuse, why should they be allowed to marry and make more babies? God forbid we should let peaceful, loving, law abiding gays and lesbians have the same rights as everyone else. The important thing is that murderers and multiple convicted felons and child and spouse abusers should continue to have the right to marry. I was born in California and I'm so embarrassed to be a native Californian right now. I can't imagine what they were thinking when they voted to make gay marriage illegal.


They're positively terrifying.

The world isn't round, either; it's shaped like a giant burrito. :P
I'm down in San Francisco right now....and damn....the mood is sooo not happy. so so not happy.
The odd thing is that I was born during a time it was illegal in certain states for our current president to be born. Black couldn't legally marry white. Same logic.

The threat to marriage is divorce. Plain and simpe.

It's stupid. This proposition just delays the inevitable. And it's not clear to me how this overrides the notion of equal protection under the law.

52% can't dissolve free speech.

Don't be embarrassed. Your native state will be the forefront of the duh.

There is no logic to it other than the Mormon investment and 4% being convinced to be on the wrong side of history.

But since when did basic rights be a decision of a simple majority.

I fail to see how the existence of any marriage can affect anything, including "sanctity" of any other marriage.

Besides, ALL "marriages" are religious, except those that get married by a JP. And those latter ones are better referred to as a Civil Union. Thus, I believe that the government and the legal system should not even have laws about or in any way recognize ANY "Marriages".

The government should allow Civil Unions and those should not have gender restrictions. In fact, just like some large companies have, a domestic partnership ought to be able to be any two people that want to have some legal ties and benefits(?) with each other.

"Marriages" then become a function of Churches and other religious organizations. Officials in Religions should not be able to form Civil Unions.

As I think all that is way too radical to happen, I was hoping that Prop 8 would NOT pass and I'm unhappy that it did. At least the few that got married while it was legal are still legal.
I totally agree with what you say about civil unions and marriages. I was just talking the other day with my boyfriend about that. I think that people should not confuse the two! And everyone should have the right to both.
The reasoning I heard for so many people voting for the proposition was interesting. Apparently the religious leaders told their congregations that if it passed "gay marriage would be taught in schools" and that if a religious leader chose not to officiate at a gay marriage they would be put in jail.

I don't understand the first one, and I think the second one is false. As long as there's a person in government who's job it is to marry people, I don't believe a religious leader would/can be forced to perform a marriage they object to.

So I understand now that it wasn't necessarily pure bigotry, it was also specific fears that the people were given that prevented them from voting against the proposition.

It's terrible to take away a right that had just been given. How horrible to be gay in California and (hopefully) know that if you ever wanted to get married, it had to be in this 4 month period where that right was assured. I wonder how many got married too soon just because of (a valid) fear of losing that right later. Major life decisions shouldn't be made under the gun, so to speak.
I want to let you know that you are coming at this from a fatalistic standpoint when this morning not two blocks from where I live thousands of people blocked a main street in San Diego to protest this proposition's ruling.

It was passed into law. It has been overturned. It CAN be overturned again. The bottom line - the genuine TRUTH - is that the nation IS headed towards equality and justice for all. The fact that some states approve of gay marriage is a testament to this. The fact that the issue continues to come up again and again on ballots testifies to this. It may not happen now, it it is inevitable that it will happen. And in all likelihood, it will happen in our lifetime.
I live with people who are personally affected by this law. We all have hope, even in the disappointment and WTF?? that this is a temporary ruling.
How can it not be? It is no more temporary than telling women they could not vote or blacks that they could not run for office.

Have faith and dwell upon that faith. This is where change takes root.

Thank you.