Californians, what happened......

[maestramommy]

with Prop 8? I can't find any coverage yet, and I'm a little anxious, as early returns showed a lead.

[mamicka]

It doesn't appear that they're calling it yet. This is the most info I could find.
http://vote.sos.ca.gov/Returns/props/map190000000008.htm

[Snow mom]

It looks like the margin has gotten closer than when I checked before bed. I was reading the story on Prop. 8 last night on the SF Chronicle website (which is where I grew up.) They had a story about adds that apparently 'suggested school children would be taught in school that gay marriage is equivalent to traditional marriage' (single quotes because this is not really a direct quote) and portrayed a little girl saying something along the lines of 'Mommy, today I learned in school that a prince can marry a princess and I can marry a princess too.' I know this board varies in the conservative to liberal spectrum, but am I the only one who would rather that my DD be told by the world around her that she can love and marry anyone she wants rather than be told that she should discriminate against people based on who they are? It makes me kind of sad on what is otherwise a fairly happy "the world my baby will be born into" day for me.


~Lisa

[Raidra]

It makes me kind of sad on what is otherwise a fairly happy "the world my baby will be born into" day for me.

Yeah, what a way to temper our enthusiasm over Obama's election.. a lot of 'blue' states voted very conservatively on their ballot questions. So disappointing.

[Laurel]

Yeah, what a way to temper our enthusiasm over Obama's election.. a lot of 'blue' states voted very conservatively on their ballot questions. So disappointing.

This.

However, the closeness of Prop. 8 tells me that we will get there. It is only a matter of time.

I also pray that those who were married in CA before prop. 8 will keep their status. I can't imagine the state dissolving someone's marriage against their will.

[Raidra]

This.

However, the closeness of Prop. 8 tells me that we will get there. It is only a matter of time.

I also pray that those who were married in CA before prop. 8 will keep their status. I can't imagine the state dissolving someone's marriage against their will.

I'm sure it is just a matter of time, especially in a state like California. What about states like Arkansas, where they voted to prohibit gay couples from adopting children? Never have I been so glad to live where I do.

[niccig]

This.

However, the closeness of Prop. 8 tells me that we will get there. It is only a matter of time.

I also pray that those who were married in CA before prop. 8 will keep their status. I can't imagine the state dissolving someone's marriage against their will.

Yeah this. If it's not this time, next time it will be. So far, it's 52 for prop 8 and 48 against.

I also heard that prop 8 can't change the marriages that have already occurred. That the law is NOT retrospective. So, there will now be the difficult situation of some gay marriages being recognized, but no more to be held. And I can't see that standing for too long. That is discrimination.

[LarsMal]

I also heard that prop 8 can't change the marriages that have already occurred. That the law is NOT retrospective. So, there will now be the difficult situation of some gay marriages being recognized, but no more to be held. And I can't see that standing for too long. That is discrimination.

I was also wondering what would happen to those who were already married. I'm glad it can't be taken away from them.

To paraphrase Rachel Maddow last night- The right already exists, you are stripping away the right that has already been in place. The sky has not fallen and no one is getting "hurt" by gay couples getting married, how can you suddenly strip it from them?

I completely agree with her. I also agree with pps who have said it will get there...it has to!

[ha98ed14]

I was also wondering what would happen to those who were already married. I'm glad it can't be taken away from them.

To paraphrase Rachel Maddow last night- The right already exists, you are stripping away the right that has already been in place. The sky has not fallen and no one is getting "hurt" by gay couples getting married, how can you suddenly strip it from them?

I completely agree with her. I also agree with pps who have said it will get there...it has to!

ITA!

I am also so confused about how we (CA voters) voted AGAINST Prop 4, which would limit abortions for minors, but we vote FOR Prop 8, to deny people a right that they Court has already said they have. (At least that is what the numbers are looking like now, with 95% of precincts reporting.) That just does not make sense to me.

It is bittersweet. America can overcome their prejudices enough to elect a African American president, but we strip another minority group of their rights on the very same day.

For the life of me, I cannot figure out how my hetero marriage, my children, or the stability of my nuclear, traditional family unit is threatened by the ability of a gay couple to be married!

But I agree, we will get there! Someday. MLK had a dream. Today, a great part of that Dream came true. We just have to keep faith in the dream of equality for ALL!

[MMMommy]

I am outraged that Prop 8 is passing. To say I am disappointed is an understatement.

[Tondi G]

I am outraged that Prop 8 is passing. To say I am disappointed is an understatement.

I couldn't agree with you more!

[happy2bamom]

I'm not from California (I"ve actually never even been there), I'm from a rather conservative area. That being said, I am SHOCKED about the outcome of Prop 8. I really thought that Prop 8 would pass with no problem. I feel like California is the equality trend setter and that once Prop 8 passed there, the rest of the country would soon (or later) follow. I do think that it will eventually happen for California, but now I worry that it will be forever before the rest of the country embraces equal rights for gay couples.

I'm so saddened by this, but even more saddened for gay people that have to continue to fight for what is easily handed to (and taken for granted by) everyone else.

[Georgia]

What about states like Arkansas, where they voted to prohibit gay couples from adopting children?

That one stuns me, so sad.

[niccig]

I'm not from California (I"ve actually never even been there), I'm from a rather conservative area. That being said, I am SHOCKED about the outcome of Prop 8. I really thought that Prop 8 would pass with no problem. I feel like California is the equality trend setter and that once Prop 8 passed there, the rest of the country would soon (or later) follow. I do think that it will eventually happen for California, but now I worry that it will be forever before the rest of the country embraces equal rights for gay couples.

I'm so saddened by this, but even more saddened for gay people that have to continue to fight for what is easily handed to (and taken for granted by) everyone else.

I just wanted to clarify...if Prop 8 passes, CA will ban gay marriage. If prop 8 fails, then there won't be a ban. I think you got your passes/fails mixed up. If you're for gay marriage, you want Prop 8 to fail and vice versa if you're anti-gay marriage

[niccig]

I heard on the radio that it might go to counting mail votes to decide Prop 8. It's close. And that's a change, 8 years ago it was 61% that vote for marriage to be man and women. Now it's much closer.

The NPR speculation was that if Prop 8 passes and there's a ban on gay marriage, it will be challenged in court by no-Prop 8 supporters. And that For Prop 8 supporters will petition the supreme court to annul the 17,000 marriages that have already taken place since May. So, I don't think there will be a final decision anytime soon.

[kcandz]

What I don't understand about this is that 52% to 48% is a pretty big margin, I thought. Don't other races and propositions get called with assurance with this gap? I am anti-Prop 8 and I voted absentee so yes I want my ballot counted, but I find this confusing.

From my observation, No on 8 seemed a sure thing and then that "taught in schools" concept took hold in a big way. It is thoroughly incorrect but it seemed to be the thing that started some undecideds or borderline voters to vote Yes on 8.

[s7714]

I am outraged that Prop 8 is passing. To say I am disappointed is an understatement.

:yeahthat: Wheres a "yeah that" sign with a frowning face?

[citymama]

I am so sad about Prop 8 passing - but good to know the proposed amendment will be legally challenged and hard fought. Equality for all, in marriage as in other things. But I walked through the Castro in SF this morning and was so impressed that people were mostly celebrating Obama, and not letting Prop 8 cloud the joy. Here's hoping for an end to the politics of hate and bigotry!

[elektra]

I was seriously shocked too to see that the Yes votes on 8 were winning out.
I mean doesn't everyone have a gay friend or relative who they think deserves to keep their right to marry? And even if you don't, how can you support discrimination? I am sure people are afraid to post what they feel the answers are to those questions but I am seriously curious. And what about our kids? I only want the best for DD and if she is gay and wants to eventually marry a woman I want her to have every single right that others have!
Want to hear about a scary sign I saw in my neighborhood as I was out walking DD and the dogs?
A house that had a ton Yes on Prop 8 signs up apparently had some stolen. So in response they made a huge sign of their own that said,
"Isn't it QUEER, that only the Yes on Prop 8 signs are getting stolen? Is freedom of speech only for PERVERTS?"
Not even kidding. And while I completely disagree with stealing or vandalizing anyone's signs, her new sign was just frightening to me.
When I passed the sign the woman was actually sitting out in her driveway. Then I saw a guy pull up in a huge suburban and park in front of her house (blocking traffic so people were honking) he then got out and gave her a batch of new signs and told her that it was about time someone put up a sign like that.

I guess alot of people still think that way and I just didn't realize it.

And I honestly think that anyone who was not super familiar with the proposition could have erroneously voted the wrong way. I honestly think some people did not realize that gay marriage was already legal and that a Yes vote meant that you thought gay marriage should actually be illegal. I know that maybe sounds far fetched but I seriously had this conversation with a few people and they were confused.

The two people I know IRL who voted Yes on Prop 8 were SIL and the sister of a good friend of mine. I believe that they made their decision based on their religious beliefs (Catholic,Christian) so maybe that's what others were primarily basing their vote on too.


Edited because even I messed up the legal/illegal wording when trying to explain how it could be confusing!

[maestramommy]

From my observation, No on 8 seemed a sure thing and then that "taught in schools" concept took hold in a big way. It is thoroughly incorrect but it seemed to be the thing that started some undecideds or borderline voters to vote Yes on 8.

The one piece of Yes Prop 8 propaganda that I received was a video featuring a family in MA after gay marriage was legalized. Seems their Kindy son came home with a book that was being read in class. "All Kinds of Family" or something like that. One picture showed a family with 2 fathers. The parents were upset that the school was reading this book without parental notification or the choice to opt their child out of reading it.

At first I thought, well, maybe the school should've given the parents a heads up, particularly if it was a new book. Then again, this particular set of parents kept harping on homosexuality and to me, on sex. Nobody said anything about sex in this book. It was in fact, a children's book, and it just showed what different families look like. I think it's perfectly fine if the parents want to tell their kids that their beliefs don't allow that. But same sex marriages with children do exist, don't parents want their kids to know that? Whether they think it's okay or not, that's their choice to believe and teach their kids. But how long can they pretend it's not a reality?

Anyway, the point of the video was to say that if Prop 8 DIDN'T pass, then YOUR (very young)child would be taught that homosexuality and gay marriage was okay, and you couldn't do anything about it.

It's sad to me that CA, like one of the pp said, is a trend setter, and It's disheartening that so many voters are still so fearful of "something."

[elektra]

From my observation, No on 8 seemed a sure thing and then that "taught in schools" concept took hold in a big way. It is thoroughly incorrect but it seemed to be the thing that started some undecideds or borderline voters to vote Yes on 8.
:yeahthat:
DD's babysitter asked me, "so how are you going to vote on that proposition that allows gay marriage to be taught in school?"
Granted she does not vote, but she seriously thought that was what the proposition was about. She had no clue that it actually would be about banning gay marriage itself. I know she was my focus group of 1 but I seriously think others may have interpreted the ads this way too.

I actually looked up the court case in Massachusetts and from what I read there actually was a book called the "Two Princes" or something like that that the teacher showed or read to their elementary students. It was not a school mandate though.
So based on that I think it would be technically possible for it to come up in schools. That would not bother me in the slightest, and in fact I would want my children to know that there are some families with 2 moms and that there is nothing wrong with that. But same-sex parents could still be something kids could be exposed to in school as being an ok thing, if Prop 8 doesn't pass.

[MMMommy]

And I honestly think that anyone who was not super familiar with the proposition could have erroneously voted the wrong way. I honestly think some people did not realize that gay marriage was already legal and that a Yes vote meant that you thought gay marriage should actually be legal. I know that maybe sounds far fetched but I seriously had this conversation with a few people and they were confused.


I agree with you. I think that the average, uninformed person would be confused by Prop 8 and easily vote for it, when they were actually intending to vote against it. I bet there were a lot of "erroneous" votes on account of the confusion. And I do think the "taught in schools" theory led to a lot of "yes" votes.
It just sickens me. Prop 8 is discrimination, plain and simple. I would never want to interfere with someone else's right to love and marry another individual. I expected more from California.

[sariana]

It is heartening to me to see so much disappointment here about the passage of Prop 8.

I do want to point out that being against Prop 8 does not necessarily mean being in favor of gay marriage. It could mean you are against discrimination of any kind, whether you support gay marriage or not.

I have to wonder what's next?

"I don't want my money to support that lifestyle. All gay business owners should have to post triangles in their windows."

"I don't want my children to associate with any gay people. All gay people must wear triangles displayed prominently on their clothing."

"The gay lifestyle is an abomination. They should be removed from society."

A slippery slope goes both ways. I am both sad and frightened that my state has voted to ingrain discrimination in our state constitution.

[lisams]

Arizona had a similar proposition, prop 102, that passed last night :(

It seems so wrong that we just voted on which consenting adults can marry and which can't. No one voted on my marriage or told me I couldn't marry the one I love.

[Laurel]

From my observation, No on 8 seemed a sure thing and then that "taught in schools" concept took hold in a big way. It is thoroughly incorrect but it seemed to be the thing that started some undecideds or borderline voters to vote Yes on 8.

Ironically it was the "yes on 8" ad campaign that caused my DD to start asking DH and I specific questions about gay marriage! She had known before about same-sex relationships, but never really asked to discuss it.

DH is a jr. high teacher, and prop. 8 came up over and over in his classroom discussions on the election. So much for keeping kids from having to know about the reality of gay marriage.

[kayte]

I'm sure it is just a matter of time, especially in a state like California. What about states like Arkansas, where they voted to prohibit gay couples from adopting children? Never have I been so glad to live where I do.

Totally a spin-off--and probably should be it's own thread--so i apologize in advance for the hijack.... but have you ever considered moving based on the politics of your area?

We live in Texas. We moved here for my husband's job. While our neighborhood is beautiful, educational resources outstanding , local economy holding it's own against the crazinesss, (and now my sister and her family live here), my husband --who now travels for work and can live anywhere except the west coast- and I have been discussing if we want to move to place more civically and socially consistent with our own beliefs. It seems more important now that we have a daughter. WHile I know accepting everyone for who they are and whatever they believe in is an important lesson to teach our child, it would be nice to do it in a place a where we didn't have to defend almost everything we think it right against the 'Texas Norm'

DH and I have been teasing for a while now that we were going to wait until the election and pick out a nice blue state in the central time zone (I much prefer it to eastern for tv viewing--lol!!) and just move. During the returns last night, as soon as they called Colorado, he started texting me names of cities in the precincts that went blue. (I replied it was in Mountain time so I would have to get back to him!)

In some ways it seems such an odd reason to move and in other ways it seems like the right reason to move.

Thoughts?

[maestramommy]

Totally a spin-off--and probably should be it's own thread--so i apologize in advance for the hijack.... but have you ever considered moving based on the politics of your area?

We live in Texas. We moved here for my husband's job. While our neighborhood is beautiful, educational resources outstanding , local economy holding it's own against the crazinesss, (and now my sister and her family live here), my husband --who now travels for work and can live anywhere except the west coast- and I have been discussing if we want to move to place more civically and socially consistent with our own beliefs. It seems more important now that we have a daughter. WHile I know accepting everyone for who they are and whatever they believe in is an important lesson to teach our child, it would be nice to do it in a place a where we didn't have to defend almost everything we think it right against the 'Texas Norm'

DH and I have been teasing for a while now that we were going to wait until the election and pick out a nice blue state in the central time zone (I much prefer it to eastern for tv viewing--lol!!) and just move. During the returns last night, as soon as they called Colorado, he started texting me names of cities in the precincts that went blue. (I replied it was in Mountain time so I would have to get back to him!)

In some ways it seems such an odd reason to move and in other ways it seems like the right reason to move.

Thoughts?

Actually, we did move out of SoCal partly because our cultural values were not consistent with what we saw there. May have been because we're not originally from there, but we wanted to raise our kids in an environment where our values would be the social norm. Also, although Texas was a great place for Dh to find a job we didn't look there because I was totally against living there for among other reasons, the same issue.

[katydid1971]

It is heartening to me to see so much disappointment here about the passage of Prop 8.

I do want to point out that being against Prop 8 does not necessarily mean being in favor of gay marriage. It could mean you are against discrimination of any kind, whether you support gay marriage or not.

I have to wonder what's next?

"I don't want my money to support that lifestyle. All gay business owners should have to post triangles in their windows."

"I don't want my children to associate with any gay people. All gay people must wear triangles displayed prominently on their clothing."

"The gay lifestyle is an abomination. They should be removed from society."

A slippery slope goes both ways. I am both sad and frightened that my state has voted to ingrain discrimination in our state constitution.

Well said!!!! DS has a good friend with 2 mommies and he of course thinks nothing of it (we've been friends a long time). I think its nice for children to see books that reflect their lives, be it two mommies, one parent, living in an apartment, living in a house, living with grandma etc. I think someday very soon we will see gays given the same rights as others.

[ilfaith]

Arizona had a similar proposition, prop 102, that passed last night :(

It seems so wrong that we just voted on which consenting adults can marry and which can't. No one voted on my marriage or told me I couldn't marry the one I love.

Here in Florida we (as a state, I personally voted no) passed Amendment 2 (which defines marriage as between a man and a woman) with 62% of the vote (it needed 60% to pass).

[katydid1971]

Totally a spin-off--and probably should be it's own thread--so i apologize in advance for the hijack.... but have you ever considered moving based on the politics of your area?

We live in Texas. We moved here for my husband's job. While our neighborhood is beautiful, educational resources outstanding , local economy holding it's own against the crazinesss, (and now my sister and her family live here), my husband --who now travels for work and can live anywhere except the west coast- and I have been discussing if we want to move to place more civically and socially consistent with our own beliefs. It seems more important now that we have a daughter. WHile I know accepting everyone for who they are and whatever they believe in is an important lesson to teach our child, it would be nice to do it in a place a where we didn't have to defend almost everything we think it right against the 'Texas Norm'

DH and I have been teasing for a while now that we were going to wait until the election and pick out a nice blue state in the central time zone (I much prefer it to eastern for tv viewing--lol!!) and just move. During the returns last night, as soon as they called Colorado, he started texting me names of cities in the precincts that went blue. (I replied it was in Mountain time so I would have to get back to him!)

In some ways it seems such an odd reason to move and in other ways it seems like the right reason to move.

Thoughts?
When DH moved with his work four years ago he had two choices of location. We chose the Blue area over the red one for just that reason. In college I lived in a very conservitive area (I went to the same college as Sarah Palin) and the politics drove me NUTS!!!!!!!

[shawnandangel]

Gay marriage IMO is a civil rights issue and thus should NOT be dealt with on a state by state basis but should be decided by the federal government.

a friend of mine wrote this "Gay Marriage is a civil rights issue, so I still to this day find it preposterous that each state was allowed to vote on whether or not gay marriage was legal. Since when are civil rights issues up for democratic vote? Civil rights issues have been, and always should be, handled by the federal government. That would be like leaving it up to states about segregation laws in 1964. If that were the case then we would probably still have "Blacks Only" signs hanging around."


It is bittersweet. America can overcome their prejudices enough to elect a African American president, but we strip another minority group of their rights on the very same day.
:yeahthat:

[citymama]

Gay marriage IMO is a civil rights issue and thus should NOT be dealt with on a state by state basis but should be decided by the federal government.

a friend of mine wrote this "Gay Marriage is a civil rights issue, so I still to this day find it preposterous that each state was allowed to vote on whether or not gay marriage was legal. Since when are civil rights issues up for democratic vote? Civil rights issues have been, and always should be, handled by the federal government. That would be like leaving it up to states about segregation laws in 1964. If that were the case then we would probably still have "Blacks Only" signs hanging around."




:yeahthat:

[Snow mom]

Totally a spin-off--and probably should be it's own thread--so i apologize in advance for the hijack.... but have you ever considered moving based on the politics of your area?

We live in Texas. We moved here for my husband's job. While our neighborhood is beautiful, educational resources outstanding , local economy holding it's own against the crazinesss, (and now my sister and her family live here), my husband --who now travels for work and can live anywhere except the west coast- and I have been discussing if we want to move to place more civically and socially consistent with our own beliefs. It seems more important now that we have a daughter. WHile I know accepting everyone for who they are and whatever they believe in is an important lesson to teach our child, it would be nice to do it in a place a where we didn't have to defend almost everything we think it right against the 'Texas Norm'

DH and I have been teasing for a while now that we were going to wait until the election and pick out a nice blue state in the central time zone (I much prefer it to eastern for tv viewing--lol!!) and just move. During the returns last night, as soon as they called Colorado, he started texting me names of cities in the precincts that went blue. (I replied it was in Mountain time so I would have to get back to him!)

In some ways it seems such an odd reason to move and in other ways it seems like the right reason to move.

Thoughts?


We're in TX (and a pretty darn liberal part of TX) for my Ph.D. Now that DD is on her way I'm really worried she might think she is a texan. We were joking about moving to the NE last night after they announced that the entire northeast went blue and that all the senators (?) are now democrats. Where we move when I finish will certainly be determined in part by the culture of the area. It's hard to know what is best: to fight for what you believe in a place you already are or to run as fast as you can to a place that fits your ideals.


~Lisa


BTW: The TV schedule is the same in mountain time as central (prime time starts at 7 p.m.)

[JTsMom]

Gay marriage IMO is a civil rights issue and thus should NOT be dealt with on a state by state basis but should be decided by the federal government.

a friend of mine wrote this "Gay Marriage is a civil rights issue, so I still to this day find it preposterous that each state was allowed to vote on whether or not gay marriage was legal. Since when are civil rights issues up for democratic vote? Civil rights issues have been, and always should be, handled by the federal government. That would be like leaving it up to states about segregation laws in 1964. If that were the case then we would probably still have "Blacks Only" signs hanging around."


:yeahthat:

:yeahthat: for me too. I'm just shocked that we even have to point this out to people. I'm going to jump on the "thinking positive" train though, and say this won't last.

[crayonblue]

We're in TX (and a pretty darn liberal part of TX) for my Ph.D. Now that DD is on her way I'm really worried she might think she is a texan. We were joking about moving to the NE last night after they announced that the entire northeast went blue and that all the senators (?) are now democrats. Where we move when I finish will certainly be determined in part by the culture of the area. It's hard to know what is best: to fight for what you believe in a place you already are or to run as fast as you can to a place that fits your ideals.


~Lisa


BTW: The TV schedule is the same in mountain time as central (prime time starts at 7 p.m.)

I've lived in several parts of the U.S. and there is no place more friendly than Texas. I'm trying not to be offended by your comment about being worried that your daughter might consider herself a Texan! I will always consider myself a Texan, no matter how many years I live outside of Texas, and being a Texan is a pretty darn good thing!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!

P.S. I think what you are saying is that you don't want her raised in a red state. At least I hope that is what you are saying and not disparaging Texans.

[maestramommy]

I've lived in several parts of the U.S. and there is no place more friendly than Texas. I'm trying not to be offended by your comment about being worried that your daughter might consider herself a Texan! I will always consider myself a Texan, no matter how many years I live outside of Texas, and being a Texan is a pretty darn good thing!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!

P.S. I think what you are saying is that you don't want her raised in a red state. At least I hope that is what you are saying and not disparaging Texans.

not Snowmom, but yes, this is one reason why I didnt' want to move to Texas. I've visited Houston, and I know a very sweet woman from Dallas. But socially (and politically) it's much more conservative than I would feel comfortable with. In addition, I met a woman from TX years ago in my field and she told me that it's still the good ole boys club. Which told me I'd have a hell of a time getting back to work, esp. after a long absence and out of state license.

But I totally agree with you that Texans are SO friendly!:wink2:

[Laurel]

Prop 8 is still too close to call!!!!!!

http://www.noonprop8.com/headlines/statement-by-no-on-prop-8-campaign-on-election-status/

:) :) :)

[niccig]

I say count all those absentee/provisional ballots. It's too important an issue to not count all the ballots. Fingers crossed.

[maestramommy]

Prop 8 is still too close to call!!!!!!

http://www.noonprop8.com/headlines/statement-by-no-on-prop-8-campaign-on-election-status/

:) :) :)



Wow! Very exciting!

[happy2bamom]

I just wanted to clarify...if Prop 8 passes, CA will ban gay marriage. If prop 8 fails, then there won't be a ban. I think you got your passes/fails mixed up. If you're for gay marriage, you want Prop 8 to fail and vice versa if you're anti-gay marriage

Yep, thanks for the clarification. I messed-up. For the record, I support Gay marriage.

[Raidra]

Where we live is a pretty good match for politics (Yay, Massachusetts!), but I've often dreamed of moving to a place that's a little more in line with our level of crunchiness. Either that, or starting our own commune here in Mass. ;)

[trales]

I will never understand how people could vote to ban marraige. I guess I don't understand why people could care so much about hating anothers lifestyle that they would work so hard to discriminte. I just don't get why people want to deny their neighbors getting married and have kids and would rather have them living in limbo without the same rights affored to themselves.

We are living in a time of poverty, war, financial crisis and world wide religious intolerance, shouldn't we be celebrating those who want to devote thier lives and love to each other and thier families rather than tearing them apart.

I just don't understand. It saddens me that it is even an issue that has to be voted on. I believe that all people are created equal and should be afforded the same rights.

[ilfaith]

[QUOTE=shawnandangel]Gay marriage IMO is a civil rights issue and thus should NOT be dealt with on a state by state basis but should be decided by the federal government.

a friend of mine wrote this "Gay Marriage is a civil rights issue, so I still to this day find it preposterous that each state was allowed to vote on whether or not gay marriage was legal. Since when are civil rights issues up for democratic vote? Civil rights issues have been, and always should be, handled by the federal government. That would be like leaving it up to states about segregation laws in 1964. If that were the case then we would probably still have "Blacks Only" signs hanging around."
/QUOTE]

Well up until the late 1960s many states still had laws on the books prohibiting interracial marriage. The supreme court case Loving V. Virginia finally overturned these bans in 1967 (several years after the marriage of our our newly elected President's parents).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-miscegenation_laws#Anti-miscegenation_laws_repealed_1948-1967

[ilfaith]

oops...tried to fix my quote and ended up double posting.

[maestramommy]

Just found out last night that it's definitely passed:crying:

[wendibird22]

I too find this disheartening. Many of those against gay marriage site the sanctity of marriage. I have several issues with that reasoning.
1. Um, separation of church and state? State or federal govt shouldn't be making laws based upon religious beliefs about marriage.
2. Plenty of heterosexual couples do not have religiously sanctioned marriages. My brother was married on a golf course. My friend was married by Elvis in Vegas. Are they any less married because the person preforming the ceremony wasn't a religious figure? No, of course not. They get the same rights as DH and I do (we were married in a lutheran church). So then why doesn't the same benefits apply to a gay couple?
3. If the big hang up is on the word "marriage" then lets use a different word for ALL and call all formalized relationships (heterosexual or gay) whether by a minister, rabi, pastor, judge, justice of the peace, politician, or Elvis, a "legal union" and let the religious sects define "marriage" how they wish. To me, that seems the easy solution.

If my church does not sanction gay marriage. Fine. That's their right. But my govt should recognize all legal unions.

[shawnandangel]

I found this quote by Eleanor Roosevelt and had to post it here:

Where, after all, do universal human rights begin? In small places, close to home - so close and so small that they cannot be seen on any maps of the world. Yet they are the world of the individual person; the neighborhood he lives in; the school or college he attends; the factory, farm, or office where he works. Such are the places where every man, woman, and child seeks equal justice, equal opportunity, equal dignity without discrimination. Unless these rights have meaning there, they have little meaning anywhere. Without concerted citizen action to uphold them close to home, we shall look in vain for progress in the larger world.

-Eleanor Roosevelt

[Raidra]

That is a fantastic quote. Thanks for sharing.

[kijip]

but have you ever considered moving based on the politics of your area?


Politics specifically? No. But in the situation we were in,we observed cultural and other issues surrounding political bent that mean a lot to us and our quality of life. My husband and I married and went to college for a time in a very conservative part of our state. We were very glad to be back in our city when we moved back here. Stuff as simple as being able to find good restaurants with all sorts of international cuisine. The Chinese places there, I swear, used spiced ketchup as a sauce. Looking for Ethiopian food was not feasible. And not hearing certain kinds of jokes. And not hearing gay used as a pejorative. Or being looked at funny for saying "my brother's boyfriend". I don't think that is all political stuff, but from the area we were to the area we live now (where I grew up) is a big, big difference. Also, larger cities tend to be more liberal politically and it takes a large city to bring the sort of arts and recreation opportunities we like. And wages are higher here, by a lot. There I would be lucky to have a job at my professional level...sure the cost of living is cheaper but if you are unemployed or underemployed, cheap cost of a living does not mean a heck of a lot. That said, I can only speak for the conservative area I lived in. I am sure it's not like that everywhere. We are however, city people through and through. In fact, I'd move to a bigger city but we are tied to family and a wonderful network from friends here.

[shilo]

Gay marriage IMO is a civil rights issue and thus should NOT be dealt with on a state by state basis but should be decided by the federal government.

a friend of mine wrote this "Gay Marriage is a civil rights issue, so I still to this day find it preposterous that each state was allowed to vote on whether or not gay marriage was legal. Since when are civil rights issues up for democratic vote? Civil rights issues have been, and always should be, handled by the federal government. That would be like leaving it up to states about segregation laws in 1964. If that were the case then we would probably still have "Blacks Only" signs hanging around."


:yeahthat:

not only do i agree with this, but fundamentally, i find it abhorrent that this proposition used our state constitution to ELIMINATE RIGHTS from a singled out group of individuals. how can we be ok with this when the constitution of both our nation and our state have always stood for protecting the rights of individuals? there is no such thing as separate but equal. as a state, we said it was ok to discriminate on tuesday. i for one am ashamed of us.