[sohmer]

With all the interesting things in the news of late, I’ve been having a hard time picking what to talk about today.

Initially, I had intended to write about the utter uselessness that is the United Nations, in response to their (in)actions to the North Korean situation. The league of nations failed to prevent world war II, so I suppose it seemed a good idea at the time to rename it The United Nations and hope for the best.

The next topic I was considering was Obama’s nomination of Sonia Sotomayor for the Supreme court. I don’t know enough about her to make a call either way, but what is bothering me here is that every politician, every news anchor, every analyst and commentator is focusing on her ethnicity, rather than her qualifications.

This doesn’t help ease racial issues and tensions, it only highlights them.

Over at CNN, Ruben Navarrette talks about what a step forward this is. For me, a step forward would have been had Sotomayor been nominated, and no one even remarked on the fact that she was Hispanic. That she got nominated because the President thought she was the best candidate for the job.

In the end, though, the thing that’s predominantly on my mind is yesterday’s decision in California to uphold proposition 8, which bans gay marriage in the state. This measure, passed by a close vote during the November elections, overturned a May 2008 ruling by the California Supreme court that had made it constitutional for same-sex couples to get hitched in the state.

I am a proponent for gay rights, but more importantly, I make no distinction between gay and civil rights.

A gay individual in California pays their state and federal taxes like anyone else, so why are they denied certain rights? The bible may define marriage as a union between a man and a woman, but isn’t the bible based on a system of religious beliefs? Isn’t there supposed to be a clean line that separates church and state?

What gives someone the right to impose their beliefs on someone else?

I may not agree with your beliefs, whether you’re Christian, Muslim or Jewish, but I won’t spend millions of dollars and countless hours to deny you a civil right that I enjoy.

That environment, California, is not where I would choose to live, or raise children, gay or not.

The year is 2009, and the fact that we’re even having this conversation is absurd to me.

- Because I can.

Quote of the Day

“When my time comes
Forget the wrong that i've done
Help me leave behind some
Reasons to be missed
Don't resent me
And when you're feeling empty
Keep me in your memory
Leave out all the rest”
-Leave out All the Rest, by Linkin Park

[Twinklestar]

I think the scariest thing about proposition 8 is that it sets a precedent for the majority to enforce their beliefs on the minority, regardless of whether or not it effects them. I've never seen an argument against gay marriage that states how it would effect anyone outside gay marriage in any way whatsoever, but apparently despite this, it's people's "democratic" right to tell others what they can and can't do based on nothing but prejudice if there's enough of them. Very, very scary.

[Incessant Pyre]

it's disgusting to look at the videos and propoganda that is pro prop 8. The ideas that they are trying to drill into the peoples minds are absurd and wrong. Children of gay parents are not being cared for like children of straight parents WHAT?!?! The idea that gay marriage in any way effects the well being of the neighborhood children is purely wrong, if anything gay parents may care more for their children. all in all you are right, the amount of emphasis put on the "minority" today is rediculous and counterproductive.

[CheriD]

I read the Torah. It says that a "MAN cannot lay with a MAN like he does a woman". That is from the original Hebrew text. Hence, according to the Torah, Lesbianism is not wrong. So, if California is going to uphold relgious beliefs, maybe they should be sure they are upholding the correct ones. ROLF. Hmm so maybe only Lesbians should be legally married in California. Personally, a day with out gay rights is a day without sunshine!!

[Stina_D]

I just joined the forum specifically to reply to this post, though I've been an avid reader and fan for years.

I am really really really upset and disheartened by the supreme court's decision to uphold Prop 8. As a citizen of California I was voraciously opposed to the amendment , and I really thought that it wouldn't pass in the first place.

I do see where there was a flaw in the appeal to the supreme court regarding the amendment, and that was the fact that plaintiffs attempted to show that the amendment was so drastic a change that it should have been a revision and therefore had to be approved by the legislature. The supreme court didn't uphold that Prop 8 was or wasn't a violation of civil rights here in California, only that the way it was put onto the Constitution was in fact constitutional.

Having said that, the amendment is ridiculous, a violation of civil rights, and promotes bigotry and hatred in what was once a progressive and forward thinking state.

I've very ashamed to be a Californian. I'm very proud to be gay.

[Darkjester]

I think the scariest thing about proposition 8 is that it sets a precedent for the majority to enforce their beliefs on the minority, regardless of whether or not it effects them. I've never seen an argument against gay marriage that states how it would effect anyone outside gay marriage in any way whatsoever, but apparently despite this, it's people's "democratic" right to tell others what they can and can't do based on nothing but prejudice if there's enough of them. Very, very scary.

I think the problem with the decision of the CA. Supreme Court yesterday, was that they weren't discussing "Is Gay Marriage Legal/Illegal, or Civil Right". The argument they were discussing was whether the 'vote' to amend the state constitution was an Amendment, or an Alteration. Amendmends are allowable under CA Constitution via voting, Alterations require something different.

Its a sad day for Human rights, but the good news there are other states who are carrying the banner of equality of ALL people regardless of race, religion, nation of origin, sexual orientation, so change IS coming, albiet very very slowly.

[ahnolds]

Let's be honest here. The California Supreme Court couldn't really declare prop 8 unconstitutional since it amended the constitution. Of course the constitution is constitutional. And frankly, California is no worse than the other 44 or so states in which gay marriage isn't legal. Don't get me wrong, I vehemently oppose prop 8, but now isn't the time to complain about it. That time would have been back before Californians voted on it, when what you said could make a difference.

[DocAlcoholiday]

The only people I know that supported that in this state initially are the religious nuts. No single other person I know that votes thought it would pass at all. We were amazed. What's keeping it alive now is just the fear of political back-lash if they show as support contrary to their main conservative supporters. Zealots = Rights Fail.

[DEFCON Whiskey]

This is simply disgusting.

However the ray of light in the situation is that now we can start working on a new prop with better pro civil rights language.

The longer we, Californians, appeal Prop 8 and push it to every level of judicial review is time wasted on getting a better, ie more legally sturdy, law on the books.

It's appalling to me that in the same year we elected a black guy and every one was screaming MLK from the capital steps the country overlooked the most blatant and egregious attack on Civil Rights since Birmingham.

Maybe this time the focus can be on Civil rather than Sexual rights.

[Cybercat]

The California supreme court were right in their decision, because all they were looking at was whether prop 8 followed the rules for propositions, which it did. In no way did they look at whether the prop itself was ok, only whether the procedures to get it on the ballot were. So they didn't say "gay marriage is wrong" which is something I *wouldn't* agree with.
As for people who say the bible says marriage should be between a man and a woman, are they following *all* rules the bible has? If not, why should this particular one be more important than the others? People don't even follow the 10 commandments, so to me the whole "the bible says so" argument in gay marriage discussions is hypocritical and just an excuse they use to get their way.
And most silly of all, is the claim that marriage is ruined for everybody if gay people can have it too. I keep hearing that, but nobody ever explains *why* that is. How can other people's marriages influence yours? You might as well say that some other couple getting a divorce ruins your marriage. That makes just as much sense.

[haikusamurai]

I think the scariest thing about proposition 8 is that it sets a precedent for the majority to enforce their beliefs on the minority, regardless of whether or not it effects them. I've never seen an argument against gay marriage that states how it would effect anyone outside gay marriage in any way whatsoever, but apparently despite this, it's people's "democratic" right to tell others what they can and can't do based on nothing but prejudice if there's enough of them. Very, very scary.

First off, this is not a precedent for the majority to enforce thier beliefs on the minority, that kind of thing has been going on forever. We have the right to freedom of religion right? But if you aren't christian you aren't right (Trust me, as a former churchgoin christian I have personally seen these things.) and even before that. The Majority has always, is currently, and will always try to force others to do what they want, because really, they think they can.

Now I'm not saying that you are wrong, or that prop-8 was right mind you, if Gay people want to be married and live in the same horror that straight people do, by all means let them. Everyone should have the same rights and privilages, no matter who they are, but that also comes with the same consequences and punishments (Once again, I know from experience thAt to many people in the world want the rights but not everything that comes with it.). I just wanted to point out that this wasn't a first, or even a second, Human beings have been doing this forever.

[chickensandwichcarl]

My feelings on all this can be summed up in the video I made last summer: http://www.youtube.c...h?v=RSg4eW3AiIM

P.S. I live in Massachusetts: gay marriage ground zero. Oh the horror!

[Twinklestar]

I think the scariest thing about proposition 8 is that it sets a precedent for the majority to enforce their beliefs on the minority, regardless of whether or not it effects them. I've never seen an argument against gay marriage that states how it would effect anyone outside gay marriage in any way whatsoever, but apparently despite this, it's people's "democratic" right to tell others what they can and can't do based on nothing but prejudice if there's enough of them. Very, very scary.

First off, this is not a precedent for the majority to enforce thier beliefs on the minority, that kind of thing has been going on forever. We have the right to freedom of religion right? But if you aren't christian you aren't right (Trust me, as a former churchgoin christian I have personally seen these things.) and even before that. The Majority has always, is currently, and will always try to force others to do what they want, because really, they think they can.

Now I'm not saying that you are wrong, or that prop-8 was right mind you, if Gay people want to be married and live in the same horror that straight people do, by all means let them. Everyone should have the same rights and privilages, no matter who they are, but that also comes with the same consequences and punishments (Once again, I know from experience thAt to many people in the world want the rights but not everything that comes with it.). I just wanted to point out that this wasn't a first, or even a second, Human beings have been doing this forever.

It sets the precedent for the majority to enforce their beliefs on others when it's a matter that doesn't effect them. I'm pro-life, but I can see how even a law regulating that could be seen as effecting others, but gay marriage simply does not, and I can not think of one other law restricts people's rights in this manner.

Gays are accepted members of society. Marriage is a civil right. Proposition 8 denies this civil right to a minority group solely because of popular opinion. Give me just one example that parallels that.

[Juneyo]

A gay individual in California pays their state and federal taxes like anyone else, so why are they denied certain rights? The bible may define marriage as a union between a man and a woman, but isn’t the bible based on a system of religious beliefs? Isn’t there supposed to be a clean line that separates church and state?

I agree that gay marriage should not be denied. I think maybe if they just called it something else then the hard core religious people might not care as much. I think they feel that the gays are trying to take what they see as there religious rituals of marriages and corrupt them, as many religious people think it is wrong both morally and in the eyes of the creator. I think maybe if the same rights were extended to gay couples but under a different name.

Also I would like to comment on the Separation of Church and state issue. NO where in the constitution are the words separation of church and state. It was used in a private letter from Thomas Jefferson to Danbury baptists, which was written to address a concern regarding a specific state ENFORCED denomination. The first amendment was written to keep the government out of church, NOT keep faith based beliefs out of government.

That said, I think to be fair to all people we should allow Gay marriage. As it doesn't seem fair. *Shrugs* but I really think people should stop spouting the "Separation of church and state" at every turn. This country WAS founded on Christian principals, so you cannot fault some of our leaders for holding Christian ideals.

But whatever,
Jake

[NickInDallas]

This recent decision is just one battle in the war that will eventually be won by common sense and reason. There is a movement in society to accept universally applied rights (including same sex marriage) and it's impossible to legislate against "change". It didn't stop drinking in the 20's, it didn't prevent mix marriages from occurring in the mid 20th century. and it hasn't stopped drug use in the modern world. People are going to do what people want to do, regardless of what the government says. Eventually, they will have to succumb.
Yep, an eternal optimist here.

[Granite_Grizz]

I live in the center of Pro-8 county. The county with the highest percent of people that voted yes on 8 and it is scary. Some of the people here still have up yard signs and bumper stickers. They think that it was a moral victory and proudly wear the propaganda of their ignorance. I agree with Sohmer, it isn't just an issue of gay rights, but one of civil rights and the precedent has been sent in California. It seems like civil rights are going onto a backburner while everyone is running around worrying about the economy. I hope that both get fixed soon.

[Michael G]

I am a proponent for gay rights, but more importantly, I make no distinction between gay and civil rights.

A gay individual in California pays their state and federal taxes like anyone else, so why are they denied certain rights? The bible may define marriage as a union between a man and a woman, but isn’t the bible based on a system of religious beliefs? Isn’t there supposed to be a clean line that separates church and state?

What gives someone the right to impose their beliefs on someone else?

I may not agree with your beliefs, whether you’re Christian, Muslim or Jewish, but I won’t spend millions of dollars and countless hours to deny you a civil right that I enjoy.

That environment, California, is not where I would choose to live, or raise children, gay or not.

The year is 2009, and the fact that we’re even having this conversation is absurd to me.

I completely and wholeheartedly agree with you, except the last line. I understand your intent there, but I think that it's always good to have the conversation. That it's an issue at all is absurd, but that we are talking about it is not.

The events leading up to Prop 8 being put on the ballot, and the campaign waged by Yes on Prop 8, are preposterous. This measure should not have even been on the ballot in the first place, and the ads were incredibly misleading and fear-inducing. It is a shame that California has stooped so low. We can only hope that common sense will eventually prevail.

I also agree with your point about Obama's nomination. I have a young friend (a cousin of my ex-girlfriend) who is mildly autistic, and incredibly shy. His family always "treated him like everyone else." I put that in quotes, because although they thought they were, they always talked to him like he was 5 (he was a teen); in a loud voice, they'd corner him and say "Hi Steve! How's school?! How are you doing?", as though he were retarded. I simply treated him like a normal human being, never calling attention to his afflictions, and talking to him like I would to anyone else. He responded very well, eventually came out of his shell, and I am proud to say that he is graduating this week!

My point is that we must stop calling attention to our differences. Calling this appointment a "step forward" because of her ethnicity is almost as bad as complaining about it. We must stop "celebrating diversity" and simply accept that we are all different, we all have different ethnic backgrounds, and we all have jobs to do. The color of our skin has nothing to do with it. Period.

I would love to see Obama criticize people for their coverage of his appointment, and encourage them to look at her qualifications. Fat chance of that happening in the near future, though. I'm an optimistic realist.

[Zaayl]

Stuff like this makes me sick to my stomach, while I find the medieval era interesting, I do not want to feel like I live in it! The church no longer controls our lives, religion is a secondary law, obeyed only by the followers, not the government. And if it is true, that gays go to hell, so fucking what!? Let them! If i wanted to commit a deadly sin all day long and go to hell, I legally sure as hell can!

Of course, why not just follow all former religious laws! Woman shall have no rights, everyone must go to church or be executed! Any man who jacks off or uses a condom should be beheaded!

The fact that Jesus is the christian savior makes no sense, was it not he who said that the most important rule in the bible was "Love thy Neighbor?" and what of an Eye for an Eye (Old religious punishments were completely imbalanced.)


I would find religion five times more attractive if it didn't contradict itself constantly. If war weren't always waged in its name. Even now, what do the middle east terrorists fight based on? Religion.

Religion is a top source of war, and separation of church and state needs to be enforced more heavily, religious freedom yes, religious restrictions, no.

We take our freedom for granted, and then deny others the same rights, this is why the world hates us. To qoute John Stewart after prop 8 passed: "Free at last! Free at last! Whoa whoa, where are you two going?"


And of course, there is also race, acknowledging ones race rather than person is the worst mistake you can make, its racial bigotry that caused the birth of the gangs on our streets, and its not just whites, its everyone, this whole planet is going to hell in a handbasket and we are all along for the ride.

This post has been edited by Zaayl: 27 May 2009 - 02:17 PM

[akira]

I'm pro-life, I'm even technically catholic and as such, I should believe that banning gay marriage. That being said, I am completely apposed to gay marriage being dictated by the state as legal (or illegal). But wait, it gets better. I'm completely opposed to the government doing marriage. I mean, at all. Traditional, non-traditional - its all the same in my book, the govt should not be part of it. Why? Because marriage, in a sense, is a religious term. Leave it to the religious nuts to decide what that is. Let our religion (and we're free to decide whatever religion we want for the most part) be the one that determines if a same sex couple should be "married". If you don't like that religion's choice? Go find another religion.

Now, I understand that from a legal standpoint this would be hell. So I say civil unions for all! If you're married in a church, you've got both a civil union (the legal, govt related aspect) and you're also married (by the church).

I'm all for equal rights, and personally I believe that marriage is a religious term. I believe that civil unions is a legal term. I believe that all people should be in civil unions (if married) and all people should have equal rights to the civil union. I believe that marriage should be left to the religions of the world and that if they want to ban same sex marriage, they can look like morons in 50 years.

As far as this being "unparalleled" I think (not sure though) that if we had a historian on board who dealt specifically with american history involving the south, slavery and what came after we'd have plenty of precedence. I hate to group something like that with something like this (there are similarities, but not enough to go hog wild) - but, that being said, the civil rights movement has a lot of similarities. People lined up on both sides, people using fear to keep laws or make them, people making stupid claims to support their bigotry.

Oh well.

This post has been edited by akira: 27 May 2009 - 02:42 PM

[butterflyfish]

My feelings on all this can be summed up in the video I made last summer: http://www.youtube.c...h?v=RSg4eW3AiIM

P.S. I live in Massachusetts: gay marriage ground zero. Oh the horror!

I also live in Massachusetts. Yay, us!

I'm not gay. But as an atheist, I find it extremely alarming that a religious group can spend a bunch of money and get a law passed based on their holy book. Since I'm quite sure atheism is an abomination to them, I'm wondering when they're coming for me.

And yeah, I registered just to say that.