The first vote on Proposition 8 ...
... comes tomorrow, when the state Supreme Court decides at its Wednesday conference whether to accept or reject a petition to throw Proposition 8 -- the initiative to ban same-sex marriage -- off the Nov. 4 ballot. Additional possibilities include calling for more briefing or even setting a date for oral argument. But time is of the essence, because ballot materials go to the printer next month.
To recap: On May 15, the Cal Supremes invalidated the state's prohibition on same-sex marriage, adopted by voters in 2000 in the form of Proposition 22. Soon thereafter, an initiative petition to go the other way, enhancing the ban by making it a constitutional amendment, qualified for the ballot and was designated Proposition 8. On June 20, victorious parties in the court's May same-sex marriage decision and other opponents of Proposition 8 asked the justices to strike the measure from the ballot.
There are two main arguments. The first is that in the wake of the court's May decision, Prop 8 would so completely change the meaning of equal protection in the state Constitution that changing it wouldn't just be an amendment, but something far more sweeping -- a revision. Revisions can't go to the voters unless they were put on the ballot by a two-thirds vote of the Legislature or by a constitutional convention.
The simpler argument is that people who signed the petition were told that same-sex marriage in California already was barred. Of course, it was true at the time they signed, but it's not now that the measure is about to go before voters.
Find information about the case before the court tomorrow here. It's entitled Bennett v. Bowen. It is near the top of the list of cases to be considered tomorrow morning in San Francisco. You'll find results posted tomorrow afternoon at he court's site here. For background on the case and links to more detailed analyses of the legal arguments, see last week's Perpetual Election update here.
Did everyone watching the vice-presidential debate notice how gay marriage proponents lost whatever (albeit weak) political support they had from the Obama/Biden ticket? According to Biden, "Barack Obama nor I support the redefining from a civil side what constitutes marriage. We do not support that." Palin then agreed saying, "... my answer is the same as his and it is that I do not (support gay marriage)" As polarized as these two parties are on the issues, it deserves notice that at least on this one, they clearly join together in bipartisanship.
I trust all CA voters - both Democrat and Repulbican - will fall in behind their party leadership and vote YES on Prop 8 .
Posted by: Tim | October 03, 2008 at 10:53 AM
For those of you anti Prop 8 folks who have suggest that our religious beliefs and our laws be some how disconnected let me offer this. Marriage does indeed contain important spiritual significance to us Prop 8 supporters, for without the institution of marriage many of us would be living a sinful life. It is an undisputed fact that through out almost every religion, adultery is one of the more odious transgressions. Marriage is thus the difference between being found culpable in the eyes of our Creator and being found worthy of his greatest blessings.
Among the other abhorrent sins in the eyes of our maker is homosexuality. To juxtapose homosexual marriage with the institution designed by God is thus a mockery. It belittles the institution of marriage and erodes the moral thread of our Judo-Christian society. Thus marriage in its true form cannot be separated from religion.
I understand the desire from the gay community to divorce themselves from religion. It is through religion that we learn the consequence of sin is guilt. The less we think of sin (and religion) the less guilty we feel. My friends, guilt is real and it has a divine purpose, but rather that following the natural course of their guilty feeling and leaving their sinful ways, the gay community is attempting to remedy their guilt by making their choices “mainstream”. While this may work in the short term it will not nor cannot last over the long term. At some time we are all going to have to own up to choices.
Posted by: Ron | October 02, 2008 at 03:34 PM
Are you conservatives really listening to yourselves??? Look back at history, you are making the similar arguments that were made when the South didn't want to abolish slavery!!! Because YOU are not adversely affected by gays being unable to marry you feel it is alright to hinder their rights. When will this be over? Black people are now free to marry whoever they want, when will our entire population be allowed to?
Posted by: Sonia | October 01, 2008 at 02:40 PM
I say keep it that Gays and Lesbians have the same rights as all of us,but please stay away from marriage,God made marriage,He is the only one that did,so call it what you want to call it,but do not call it Marriage,call it a contract,but for a gay and Lesbian to be together it will never be marriage in Gods eyes,if you want to get Married marry the opposite sex,Proposition 8 is not trying to take Gays rights away,just protect what marriage really is,between a Man and and Woman.Please remember that Christians do not Hate Gays and Lesbians,just Sin,Sin is Sin no matter what it is.If there is a Christian that is saying they hate Gays or are judging them,they are just as Guilty,and this is not what Prop 8 is about.With as crazy as the world is getting we have to have some morals left for the sake of the kids today.Vote Yes on Prop 8!!!!!!!
Posted by: joanne smith | October 01, 2008 at 12:18 PM
What right does anyone have to try to tell someone who they can and can not love ? Everyone should have the right to marry anyone they choose.
I would like just one person to answer a question that I have not been able to get an resonse to -- would someone tell me ( straight person ) what was the time and the date that they decided to be straight? They are always saying that a gay person chooses to be gay -- well when did they choose to be straight? I did not choose : I just am - no pondering , wondering, just am.
Like I said never an answer ----
There is too much going on in this world to try to keep people from being what and who they are.............................
Posted by: Teresa,NC | October 01, 2008 at 10:49 AM
Seems to me that, while both sides have some explaining to do, Prop 8 proponents have far more.
On the one hand, supporters of gay marriage have yet to convince me entirely that civil unions would not suffice, if California law were to be entirely stripped of distinctions between the two -- especially given that respecting this distinction would strengthen a barrier between church and state that I strongly support -- and if the "full faith and credit" provisions with other states were to be fully resolved. (Not that either of those "ifs" is trivial to pull off.)
On the other hand, it strikes me that that the only defensible reason that supporters of Prop 8 might have for their opposition to treating gay couples identically to straight couples under the law is that it would prevent two men or two women from making a legally binding commitment to each other, when they might instead have made that same commitment to a member of the "more appropriate" sex if only Prop 8 had been in place. As one who considers sexual orientation to be not a choice (whether it's a result of "nature" or "nurture"), that's a tough sell. Even if I were to buy it, I would have to question how demanding that a woman who is sexually attracted to women marry a man or no one at all in any way strengthens a single one of our institutions, apart from the ones that George Orwell most passionately warned us against.
Several Prop 8 supporters within this thread have made it clear that, in their view, we must give special recognition to heterosexual marriage because it leads to procreation and therefore the survival of the species. This is ludicrous. If we have observed anything as a species by now, among the most self-evident observations must be that (a) breeders are going to breed and non-breeders aren't, and (b) we are not exactly underpopulating the planet as of 2008. Is it about keeping up with China or what? If these folks are serious, I expect nothing less from them than a proposition to disallow marriage between any heterosexual couple who have been demonstrated to be unable to conceive. (We can quibble over the medical standards of proof later.)
All over the United States, court decisions and propositions and legislation have forced us to conflate too many issues with respect to gay marriage and civil unions that might better have been considered separately. Does that make Prop 8 the correct remedy? No. It goes too far and closes too many doors.
Posted by: Ethan | September 27, 2008 at 05:33 PM
Let's change the definition of homosexual! Let's say the definition now included man and sheep or woman and cat. How would you like to HAVE to clarify to your kids what you mean by homosexual? Be creative No on Prop 8 folks. Why don't you ADD rights to domestic partnership and leave the definition of marriage alone. I'm just so surprised that everyone uses the terminology that rights are TAKEN away with prop 8. It's a definition!!!! When those that lived together wanted certain rights they came up with domestic partnership. Well.....can the anti- prop 8 group be just as creative?????
Posted by: Kellie | September 27, 2008 at 02:14 PM
Prop 8 is about protecting Marriage between a man and a woman and does not challenge any rights that gay couples have under domestic partnership. It is important to realise that Americans hvae the right to say no to gay unions being considered marriages or to objec t to anything we find to be against what we beleive. the pourpose of prop 8 is not to penalize but protect our rights.
Posted by: Mason | September 27, 2008 at 12:00 PM
Proof: The damage has already started. Simply advancing the argument that members of the same sex should earn recognition as married, people have arged that marriage is just a government program, thereby degrading it into nothing more then a benefits grab. That never happened before. The next level of damage will be to have a systematic social design to remove parents of the responsibilities in moral, ethical, and legal senses... Entire classes of children designed to be removed from their parents and heritage.
Also, no, there were no priests involved in marriage in the very distant past. All experts agree on this point. Also, it predates all legal recognition, not being recorded lawfully until Roman times. Marriage is known to all peoples no matter how primitive.
Marriage is, obviously, the simple understanding of how we form mating pairs in our species.
I make no claims that God had anything to do with it, and since all people, religios or not, recognize it, then you should not either. If their is a God, then one might suppose that he could take an interest in human mating pairs.
SMS
Posted by: sms | September 27, 2008 at 01:38 AM
Since marriage is ancient (older than the wheel) we should be careful. So, take the wheel for example. Invention, or discovery?
Are you smoking crack. Yes there were preists around before the wheel?
SoI must ask. Should sterile people not be allowed to Marry because the violate all of your argument.
PS where is your proof, I CHALLENEGE ANYONE who wants to post from this point forth with some HARD data that Gay marriage threatens anything. Leave your biblical mumbo jumbo out of it. I challenge you to tell me why how gay marriage between TWO CONSENTING ADULTS is going to ruin anything, anywhere at anytime? You all have huge mouths. Now back it up!
Posted by: Paul | September 26, 2008 at 01:54 PM
It is important, I think, to visit only briefly, the entire notion of marriage, just so we know what we are messing with.
But 1st, make no mistake, the gay movement is very self-absorbed and politically motivated, and they are hitting hard on ancient structures.
Modern political activism and ancient concepts are like oil and water. Gays don't care at all about marriage... they care about being seen as "normal" and "equal" at *any* cost... we have to decide if we want to pay that cost for their current political benefit.
Since marriage is ancient (older than the wheel) we should be careful. So, take the wheel for example. Invention, or discovery?
If it is a discovery.... then the wheel can NOT be changed, even if we write laws that say "wheels are flat sided objects designed to prevent motion"... the law would be nonsensical.
A wheel is a wheel... regardless of the infinite designs or laws or rules... there is always a core meaning to the idea that remains intact.
The same is true for marriage. Sexual interactions make our species work... end of story. Men are not *triggers* for female reproduction... they are *contributors* and it is always true that the man and woman beget children that are the PRODUCT of the two.
As mankind realized, or "discovered" this basic fact, they had a need to understand paternity. Maternity was not an issue... as birth points directly from mother to child... but paternity is another issue entirely. In this case, the mating pair is important... not just for humans, but for any species that forms them... as the behavior known as "mating pairs" for any species creates the pointer to paternity.
For mankind, as an intelligent species that can see how his own biological nature works... the notion... the instinct to form a mating pair and to have clear pointers to paternity, mattered and still matters today.
Marriage is the human mating pair, and it is the pointer to paternity... to the male contribution to human lineage.
For people of the same gender (who can not have sex... except in a slang usage of the term), no mating pairs are possible, so no marriage is possible. There is NEVER a need for a paternity pointer of any kind... and so there is no social need to recognize a "couple" of the same sex.
Marriage is the human mating pair... and like the wheel... regardless of what laws are written *surrounding* it, the concept of the wheel can not be violated in fact. It is a pure concept.
To allow California law to try to undermine the idea of the wheel OR the human mating pair... would be a travesty.
Posted by: SMS | September 25, 2008 at 01:05 AM
The majority of those in favor of Prop 8 argue on religious lines, and those lines are exclusively Christian. If you look at the words in red in your Bible, folks, Christ never said a word about homosexuality. Those red words do show that Christ found his greatest audience in "the least of these," those whom the rest of His society and culture had considered outcasts. He railed against the Pharisees, those whom in those times insisted on a restrictive and overly literal definition of holiness. Christ preached love and tolerance. Where is that message in the Prop. 8 argument?
Yes, I know about Chapter 20 of Leviticus. That's the book that also forbids wearing mixed fibers, and mandates death by stoning for any number of things we do every day, like crop rotation. And I know Paul had an offhand comment about homosexuality. But Paul is badly interpreted and above all, isn't Christ, nor did he ever meet Christ.
I consider Christ my ultimate arbiter in these matters, and I think the love and tolerance he required of his followers requires me to VOTE NO ON PROP 8.
Love, not 8.
Posted by: fragileindustries | September 25, 2008 at 12:32 AM
An institution (such as education or marriage) that is separate but equal is inherently unequal. Marriage is a civil right and it is a human right. Prop 8 isn't trying to separate church and state, it is trying to write the Bible into the California Constitution.
Please understand, homosexuality is not a choice. If it were one (like religion or political party), then perhaps there would be more protections allowing us to marry.
Isn't it just a little bit silly that proponents of Prop 8 will allow convicted murderers and rapists to get married...in prison even...yet focus their attention/attacks/hatred on law-abiding gays?
Stop pretending that your fight for Prop 8 is a fight to protect families. Understand that the struggle for gay marriage is so that gays too can develop a family, not destroy yours. Recognize your homophobia and ignorance for what it is. Stop trying to take away my rights, it's so un-American of you. Vote NO on Prop h8.
Posted by: KlemChowder | September 24, 2008 at 06:01 PM
Is this a civil rights battle or a moral battle or maybe just a political game? Gay couples already have the same rights as married couples under the Domestic partnership Acts. For a look at all of these rights go to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domestic_partnership_in_California .
It is all about the title of marriage -- which was originally created by religion. Government saw value in marriage (it produced the next generation of citizens) and wisely invested in it. The big repercussions dealing with Prop 8 have to do with the separation of church and state and how those lines will remain.
Posted by: Amy | September 24, 2008 at 03:05 PM
I FOR ONE WILL PRAY THAT GOD'S WILL BE DONE. HE IS THE CREATOR WE ARE HIS CREATURES. HE IS THE POWERFUL ONE AND NOTHING THAT IS CONTRARY TO HIS WISHES WILL COME TO PASS. MAY GOD'S LOVE AMD WISDOM BE WITH US ALL.
Posted by: Linda | September 23, 2008 at 04:06 PM
It is intense to ME how gay and lesbian people are fighting to gain rights and respect. Fighting to be with the one they LOVE. While the people who already have those rights and respect (just under the heterosexual title alone) are taking those rights for granted and spending all of this time and money on an attemp to banish those rights for "other" people, because believe it or not we are ALL people. I am a lesbian with a STRAIGHT family, yes my parents are straight (heterosexual), I am the first of four girls. I am extremely lucky to be accepted and loved for WHO I AM by my FAMILY and PARENTS. My point here is this, and I am not insinuating anything, but for the people who are voting yes on proposition 8 (I can't even believe that fellow humans are honestly going to be voting on wheather or not I can wed) imagine that? You are SO in love with someONE and you are ready to make the commitment and spend the rest of your lives together (anyone, gay or straight can understand this feeling) and then you have to turn to everyone else in the state and ask "is this ok with you guys?" Wow. But I guess I am unable to fathom a great deal of what this world has come to. As you can tell, I am extremely passionate about this. This is my life, this is WHO I AM. So, make your decision on proposition 8, vote yes, then if/when (there are a lot of gay people in this world, being born everyday) your child comes to you and tells you who they are, remember you have already made the decision for them. Be a "good" parent. Make sure to raise your child in a "healthy" home, teach them to be "proud" of who they are, love them UNCONDITIONALLY, fight for your rights and definition of a parent, a family, a marriage.
Posted by: ashlie | September 22, 2008 at 05:55 PM
I think that adoption in a wonderful thing. These children need parents. Some parents are better parents than others. This has very little to do with wether the parents are Homo or Hetro. I don't think that is a fantastic leap in logic for anyone. Straight people can be bad parents, so can Gay people. Both have the potential to be outstanding parents also. As for a Gay raising being negative I think that their is as much a chance of that as elsewhere. If a mother or a father figure is missing that is as unfortunate as a single mother or father situation is. I think that a child does need a male and female figure in their life but that figure does not have to be absent if both parents are of one sex. Uncles, Aunts, Close relations and friends can provide this experience.
I think to have 2 LOVING parents is the most important thing required for any healthy child.
State Marriage should not be dictated by any religious institution. I am not saying that religious institutions should perform gay marriage if it is against their ethos. But I believe they should most definantly not interfere in any such marriage performed by the state.
Studies on Identical twins and homosexuality have shown that if one twin in Gay then the other is 60% likely to be Gay also.
I believe that Homosexuality is a case of Nature. You are born gay, in as much as any heterosexual reaches an age and they find the opposite sex attractive, Homosexuals reach that stage and find the same sex attractive. That is not to say that people cannot make the choice. I can teach myself to me ambidextrous. But it does not come naturally, but it can happen. Possible through experience and nurture or even simple personal logic someone could make that choice.
I believe though that people are born one way or the other.
The roommate issue, a man referring to his husband as his roommate. His life situation could currently mean that he must be wary about telling a stranger over the phone for any number of reasons. People guard their personal business closely, especially an orientation that could lead many people to interact or percieve them differently. Any number of reasons that I'm sure this person ringing would not have any idea of as much as I have no idea.
Everyone views marriage differently.
You know what marriage is to yourself.
I know how I view it. The ultimate unification between two people in love.
I was raised on disney and love stories. I know what marriage means to me.
Be happy and secure in your own understanding of what your marriage is to you and don't fear the effects of someone else marriage.
If you're married and someone else gets married it does not change your marriage. You know why you got married. Why feel like it is threatened?
Love is a beautiful thing. It should be celebrated, not contained.
Posted by: Jenn Byrne | September 22, 2008 at 09:51 AM
I would first like to start off saying that I have some very good friends who are gay. Even family members. I myself have bi sexual tendencies. But I do not however believe that there should be same sex marriage. Marriage has been between a man and a woman since the beginning of time. Whether that means to you six million years or six thousand years is not the case. The fact is that it has always been like that and we as a peopole have never taken away from gays the right to marry because it has never been given to them. And we all choose what we want to do in life and we are never forced to do anything. Perhaps we are born with homosexual tendencies, perhaps not. But what I do know is that we as human beings choose to follow those tendencies. No one ever has, ever can, or ever will force us to do anything unless they are holding a gun to our heads. And as for those who believe that it does not make a difference whether a child has a father or mother in their lives. You are dead wrong. I grew up without a father and while I am not scarred for life there are many things that I missed out on and many lessons that I have yet to learn that my fellows peers have had and do know because they themselves had a father. Sorry to rant for so long but lets all act civilized and not throw out shrude and rude comments out at each other. After all we are all human beings and no one is better than the other.
Posted by: Jack | September 19, 2008 at 08:51 AM
It has become a sad, sad time in history when, the will of the people (majority) can be overruled by the will of the special interest groups with lots of money. If Prop 8 does not pass, gay couples will be able to sue religious institutions and have many of their rights taken away as a result. Take a look at what's happened in Massachusetts already. Catholic Charities had to shut down because they would not adopt kids out to gay couples. Churches have lost their tax exempt status and they would be able to have much more done to those not willing to budge on their beliefs. This country was founded on religious freedom, not sexual orientation freedom. If it doesn't pass, the schools will begin teaching the gay agenda. If that happens I will quickly take my children out of the public schools and teach them from home where they won't be indoctrinated.
Posted by: Erica | September 16, 2008 at 03:16 PM
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/sep/08091011.html By a Gay.
"Extreme vanity" he says, has been "sewn into gay culture." It "is now so mainstream in the gay community that otherwise intelligent young men are happy to be treated as sex objects on a demeaning meat rack."
Gay men, he says, are so "hardwired" towards finding casual sexual encounters, some going as far as plastic implants to enhance their appearance, that finding genuine intimacy is "practically impossible."
Vote YES on Prop. 8
Posted by: eagle | September 13, 2008 at 06:27 PM
1. All gay couples can enjoy all the legal entitlements of marriage through a legal partnership. Therefore, the argument of hospital visiting rights, etc. is over. So can we please move on?
2. It's not fair to compare the best of gay couples to the worst of non-gay couples. There are good and lousy examples of both.
3. Same-sex couples cannot create a child without the help of a third person. This brings a varying degree of confusion and risk into the child's life. Can you guarantee the child will grow up happy with his/her origin? Can you guarantee that the third party will not, at some later time, reappear and want involvement? Some adult children have sought out their father, who was a donated sperm from a bank, because they needed to know him.
Posted by: Brenda | September 13, 2008 at 09:36 AM
Ben Guerrero you are really wrong when you state "If this passes and gay couples are able to adopt as married couples, those children will have a different upraising. I will say that it would be a very negative upraising."
How do you know that a child would be in a negative upraising if a child lives in a family with two dads or two moms? As far as I know a child has more negative upraising in a straight couple family than a gay couple.
Families where a father and a mother have more issues and causes a child to be abused, and physically hurt. Most of the gay couples who adopt a child have more of a positive upraising than straight couples do.
Also why deny people the right to get married? How would you like it if straight couples couldn't be able to marry? How would you feel if straight couples couldn't visit their dying husband or wife in the hospital because you voted Yes on a Proposition that is so stupid.
Then you talk about how you have to hate and banish people of a certain sexuality because your Bible tells you so. People don't choose to be this way. You might think they have a choice of being gay or straight, but how do you know that you guys didn't choose to be straight?
If you vote YES on Prop 8 eventually you're not different then the people like Fred Phelps and his church of crazies who go around picketing at funerals of Dead U.S Troops.
I am voting NO for Prop 8!
Posted by: Brandon | September 12, 2008 at 01:14 AM
I would like to encourage everyone to vote yes on Proposition 8. Yes, I am a Christian man however I realize using The Bible as an argument for gay marriage to a group who does not believe The Bible will not be very effective. Instead I will just list a few statistics and leave it up to you guys to decide weather or not you think encouraging homosexuality will be healthy for this great country. I believe strongly that allowing gay marriage will eventually ruin the family dynamic in America, and we all know if the individual family is struggling the whole nation is in trouble.
Consider these statistics from 2005, I assure you they have worsened.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1502263/posts
Posted by: Jed Bridges | September 09, 2008 at 09:35 AM
Umm, Ben? Gay couples have been able to adopt for years, through domestic partnership arrangements and other means. So the question here is whether it's better for a child being raised by a gay couple sees them as married or merely living together. Beyond that, it's worth asking whether sexual orientation matters as much as devotion.
Posted by: Jon Healey | September 02, 2008 at 11:38 AM
I am a volunteer for YES on Prop 8. I have had the opportunity to contact many people regarding this proposition and have gotten many different responses. I had an experience i guess you could say just this last week. As I was calling registered voters I would ask if I could speak to the person named on the list. One particular time the gentleman said that the person I was looking for was not home at the time. Trying to make use of my time I asked the man if he was a registered voter. He said yes and also mentioned that he was the "room mate" of the male person I was trying to contact. I then continued with my script and asked if he had heard of Prop 8 and whether he would be voting yes or no. He said that he and his "room mate" were recently "married". A gay couple recently married. I thanked him for his time and that ended the call.
I thougt to myself, why would a person refer to thier spouse as a room mate? Is marriage so important to this particular person? I am married and I would never refer to my spouse as just a "room mate".
I also think of what kind on influence would a child have with two dads or two moms. If this passes and gay couples are able to adopt as married couples, those children will have a different upraising. I will say that it would be a very negative upraising.
Posted by: Ben Guerrero | September 02, 2008 at 11:00 AM