Opinion L.A.

Observations and provocations
from The Times' Opinion staff

« Previous Post | Opinion L.A. Home | Next Post »

Behind the gay-marriage talk

Campaign 2008gay marriagegay rightsProposition 8

The Times editorial board formulates its positions on ballot measures not only by research, but by inviting representatives of both sides to (separate) meetings with the board. It's a good forum for probing an issue, and the results sometimes are surprising.

So it went with the supporters of Proposition 8, which would amend the state constitution so that gay and lesbian couples no longer could marry. The board already has published its stand on the measure, but the editorial left out some interesting turns in the conversation.

The measure's supporters are generally careful to avoid appearing anti-gay, probably because they realize that, for all the voter split on same-sex marriage, Californians generally support gay rights. They professed in our meeting to have no ill will toward gay people...until the talk went deeper.

At one point, the conversation turned to the "activist judges" whose May ruling opened the door to same-sex marriage, and how similar this case was to the 1948 case that declared bans on interracial marriage unconstitutional. According to one of the Prop. 8 reps, that 1948 ruling was OK because people are born to their race and thus are in need of constitutional protection, while gays and lesbians choose their homosexuality. So much for the expert opinions of the American Psychological Assn. and the American Academy of Pediatrics that people cannot choose their sexuality. Oh, those activist doctor types.

In any case, one Prop. 8 supporter said, gay rights are not as important as children's rights, and it's obvious that same-sex couples who married would "recruit" their children toward homosexuality because otherwise, unable to procreate themselves, they would have no way to replenish their numbers. Even editorial writers can be left momentarily speechless, and this was one of those moments. Aside from this notion of a homosexual recruitment plot -- making it understandable where the word "homophobia" came from -- this made no logical sense at all. Same-sex couples. whether married or not, already have children. Marriage wouldn't change a thing about this picture except, perhaps, to model for children that parents tend to be married.


Comments () | Archives (42)

The comments to this entry are closed.

Marine Vet

Anti-gay bigots make me so sad. All this energy they spend desperately trying to demonize and harm a minority group and their families is such a shameful waste.

Christ calls us to love one another and do unto each other as we would do unto them. I happen to be straight, but if I were gay, I would certainly want the same equal protections and dignity of marriage for me and my family.

That's why I'm voting NO on Proposition 8


Right-wing Christians are idiots!

John Bisceglia

Not only are they mis-informed and wasting energy that could be used to feed the hungry and shelter the homeless, these "Christians" are making & upholding laws that HURT children. Yes, real, living, breathing CHILDREN are being lovingly raised by same sex couples, yet these families are treated as LESS THAN other families. THAT is the abomination!

Gay Tax Protest


It is not the gay marriage that hurts the "family values" it is the heterosexual divorces that hurt the family.

Jason D

If you ever talk to gay people, the idea of replenishing our numbers...never comes up.
What a lot of people don't seem to understand is that gay people have very little in common. The only things keeping us together are homophobia and oppression. If homosexuality became completely and unconditionally accepted....there would be very little reason, other than dating, for the gay community. It is persecution, death threats, discrimination that has forced there to be a gay community in the first place.

Alex Gill

What an ignorant thing to say....

"and it's obvious that same-sex couples who married would "recruit" their children toward homosexuality because otherwise, unable to procreate themselves, they would have no way to replenish their numbers. "

Recruit? Who ever made that comment you have no brains...
Marriage is for procreation? I guess we should pass laws to outlaw people that don't want or can't have kids.

Dumb redneck get a clue.

Chino Blanco

Considering that ProtectMarriage.com has decided NOT to appeal the ballot language, what chance do you really see for Prop 8 to pass? I just don't see a majority of Californians voting YES on a proposition titled ELIMINATES RIGHT OF SAME-SEX COUPLES TO MARRY.

Once the churches realize that Prop 8 is an almost guaranteed loser, are they going to do the right thing and let their members know?

If not, what happens after Prop 8 loses 40-60 (or worse), and then the members find out that the churches were privy all along to internal polling that predicted a crushing defeat? Do the members get their money back?

Or do they get stuck paying for ads that were run by a campaign that knew it was going to lose but ran them anyway!

linda w

uh, "recruit"? Like current 'gays' were recruited by their (, likely,) heterosexual parents?

Seems effective (not).
If anything it's logical to assume that a majority of gays will come from straight families. Given that a number of children have a penchant for living in defiance of their parents' lifestyle or values, raised with gay parents, they might be more likely grow up straight!

Though, overall, since identity and orientation are largely influenced by factors before birth, biological parents set the stage for the child's most basic and fundamental personality traits before birth -- just like children are born with 'temperaments' or dispositions being sad, quiet, happy and gay, they can also be gay and sad, quiet, or happy and gay.

Kathy H.



I think it is amazing that we as a society are still allowing some religions to legislate how everyone lives. Further, it ceaselessly amazes me that we have proof now that human sexuality is biologically determined (as evidenced by a number of physiological differences between gay and straight people). These differences, things like brain structure, are things that are determined by our genes prior to birth. So NO we haven't identified a specific 'gay gene', but we have determined that sexuality is genetically determined. We just don't know which genes. Why is it that they cannot imagine a supreme being who would create gay people, but cannot deny that say, hermaphrodites are born the way they are. DEATH TO IGNORANCE!! LIFE TO ELUCIDATION!!


Marriage means the intrinsically complementary union of husband and wife. Period.

Virtually all of humanity understands that simple and profound fact.

Vote yes for common sense.


Sounds like your editorial board would benefit from a bit of diversity.

BTW, if comments are moderated, then how did the following hateful piece of ignorant bigotry slip past?

"Right-wing Christians are idiots!"

Jon Healey

J.A.M. -- You're right, the board isn't diverse enough. But it's a hard problem to solve when our little group, like just about every other department here, is getting smaller and smaller. There are six editorial writers now, which is less than half the number in 2004. I need to point out, though, that the blog represents the views of individual members of the board and columnists on the staff, not the board as a whole. So you can't measure diversity from any individual post.

As for moderating comments, you can read the entire policy by clicking the link to the "full legal terms" above the comment field. The short answer is, we don't block comments that are merely uncivil, nasty, mean-spirited, silly, insulting or biased. Our preference is to approve everything, frankly, because one of the core values of journalism is free speech. But we do draw the line at threats, profanity, and hate speech. The latter category is ambiguous, and we might err on the side of allowing people to be too offensive. That's how many people express themselves online, sad to say. Check out the comments on the posts regarding immigration, you'll see what I mean.

As a newspaper, we're continually discussing what our comments policy ought to be. Again, it's hard to define where the line should be between angry words and injurious ones. Trust me, I approve every comment on the blog that calls me a moron or worse, and it's not the kind of thing that brightens my day. Ditto for my colleagues. But the point here is to share the platform, and to leave it to you all (as much as possible) to decide how to use it.


"Choose to Be Gay"....yeah right, I decided at the young age of 12 or 13 that I wanted a lifetime of being gay....RIIIIIGHHHHHT. Yeah! I wanted to have that challenge in life.

"Recruiting". Why in the world would someone think being gay means we want everyone to be gay? Shoot I would think every gay person hopes their child is not gay so that they won't have to go through the same bigotry and harassment that they have.

Basically put, gay individuals already live in family units, already have children and already do all the same things as married folks. The only difference is that their rights are not protected to take care of that family.

Again to all the religious folks. Marriage is not a religious right, it is also a civil right, which is why persons who have absolutely no belief in God can get married too.

Charles MacKay

"same-sex couples who married would 'recruit' their children toward homosexuality"

Sure, because all children choose to emulate their parents regarding sex.

Is anything more off-putting to a child than the idea of parental intimacy?

Holy numbskull, Batman, that's the kind of stretch that will snap any intellectual hamstring.



It is not bigotry to call an idiot an idiot. It's just telling the truth. Now, if the statement had been, "Right-wing Christians are idiots! And idiots should not be allowed to marry/vote/procreate/speak in public," or something similar, then THAT would have been bigotry.

Expressing your opinion is not bigotry, but trying to force everyone else in the state/country/world to go along with your opinion -- that's bigotry!


"Marriage means the intrinsically complementary union of husband and wife. Period."

To you, maybe, but not to everyone else. PERIOD. You ARE NOT allowed to force your"morality" on the rest of us. PERIOD!!

"Virtually all of humanity understands that simple and profound fact."

If that were true (and it's not), then the implication seems to be: "If everyone believes something to be true, then it is true." Which is complete BS! The definition of Truth makes no reference to people's beliefs. A Truth is True whether anyone believes it or not! THAT is a simple and profound FACT.

"Vote yes for common sense."

There is absolutely nothing common about "common sense" (chew on that one for awhile ...).

Randy Cunningham

It does continue to amaze me that such ignorance and intolerance exists in 2008. But, thank you to everyone who posted your positive comments towards gays and lesbians.

As someone else stated, we are just like everyone else...living our lives, paying our taxes, raising our children, etc. The only difference is that we are forbidden to be protected legally, which means we are second-class citizens in a country that is suppose to be the last Super Power on the planet.

But, our country has a long history of discriminating against its citizens. It took a while for our country to allow blacks to marry whites. In fact, had it been left to the American public, the laws banning interracial marriages would have existed much longer.

Gays and lesbians are now the last minority in our country that people can legally discriminate against, which is a shame. I can actually be fired from my job in Montana just because I am gay. It is a reminder of how much progress we still need to make as a society and human species. This is also why it is important for our judicial system to interject itself to ensure equal rights are provided to all Americans.

But, baby steps. We'll get there. It just takes time. I applaud the judges in California that allowed my partner and I to get married. And, guess what? My husband and I are no different the day after we got married then we were the day before. We just no longer feel like second-class citizens, even though we also recognize that our country has a long way to go before all gays and lesbians are not treated like second-class citizens.

In the meantime, you can make a difference, so please vote no on Proposition 8.

And, if you have no reason one way or the other on making your choice for our next President (especially for us Hillary lovers), please consider that Barack Obama is far more friendly towards rights for gays then John McCain is. Just something to consider, even though you may not like either candidate…


Last time I checked churches were busy recruiting members through television commercials, advertisements in the print media, and signs outside their houses of worship.

When was the last time anyone saw something similar recruiting children into homosexuality. Never.

The churches behind Prop 8 have gotten a lot of political power over the years with their institutionalized homophobia. They can see the future, though, and know that they are losing- so now you see this last effort to force their repugnant views on the rest of society.

John D

@JAM, re your comment "Virtually all of humanity understands that simple and profound fact":

Do societies that allow or even encourage polygamy understand marriage in the same way you do? Keep in mind that polygamy exists in the majority of societies in the world (see this Wikipedia page, for example).

To me, that degree of variety in marital arrangements suggests that the definition of marriage is neither "intrinsic" nor "common sense" as you suggest.

Bob Zwolinski

I really don’t understand the bigotry and hatred. We don’t “choose” our sexuality. It is determined at the very second of conception. Love is not a penis falling in love with a vagina, it is two people in love, regardless of sexual orientation.
Putting a human rights issue such as banning gay marriage to uneducated voters makes me ill. To think that interracial marriages were also unconstitutional only 2 generations ago…
Hopefully, we, the human race, are beginning to grow up and realize that not everyone is born caucasian and heterosexual. What a concept!


Not surprising what came out at this editorial meeting. What else could be at the bottom of the zeal of Prop 8 supporters except a radical misunderstanding of gay men and women (and a strong desire to perpetuate those untruths in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary).

Prop 8 supporters, don't pretend that passage of Prop 8 will affect no one, but will only return California's marriage laws to the way they were before May 15. My family will be immeasurably hurt is Prop 8 passes. My children will be constantly reminded by the children of those who support Prop 8 that our family is second class. Don't think for a second that won't be happening. Because their family will not have the rights and protections that nearly every other family at their school has. Try explaining to a seven-year-old that in a country where everyone is supposed to be treated equally, her parents are not, her family is not.

All this court decision did was assure that all families in California are equal. Hallelujah. And by the way, we are Christians. Not every Christian spews the hate.


The nice thing about the radical christian right is that you don't really have to do anything to expose the stupidity of their assertions. Evenually they do it for you. The assertions that gay people choose their sexuality or recruit their replacements are cases in point. Purely idiotic stereotypes propogated by these pios blowhards.

Steven Groth

"According to one of the Prop. 8 reps, that 1948 ruling was OK because people are born to their race and thus are in need of constitutional protection, while gays and lesbians choose their homosexuality."

How ironic. Religion and speech are choices in which Prop. 8 supporters revel, so they should be careful of using "choice" as a disqualification for constitutional protection. If these people think that homosexual orientation is a choice, what are they saying indirectly about their own (supposed) heterosexual orientation?

"...it's obvious that same-sex couples who married would "recruit" their children toward homosexuality because otherwise, unable to procreate themselves, they would have no way to replenish their numbers."

I haven't seen this kind of nonsense since the Anita Bryant / John Briggs anti-gay campaigns of the late 1970s. Haven't these people developed any new talking points since then?

Prop. 8 has nothing to do with protecting marriage or family values, if it did, it would be a proposition to make divorce unconstitutional. According to their arguments, they would seem to oppose any marriage between non-procreative or non-fertile couples. But is none of these.

It is the continuation of a 30-year-long anti-gay campaign, pure and simple, using the same tactic: to put minority rights to a majority vote, appealing to the worst instincts of ignorance and fear. Love and commitment, the necessary requirements for a healthy marriage are totally ignored. All that marriage means to them is heterosexual anatomy and fecundity. If the proponents of this initiative were honest, their argument in the voters pamphlet would simply state: "These people with their icky sex lives don't deserve equal rights."

baby Jesus

oh lord these chritsians are dumber than I thought


All Christians are fools and liars, no exceptions!

Mara morken

Reading this article and some of the responses to it is like watching the Gerry Springer Show, full of the kind of ignorance that sets my teeth on edge. It's a mess of embarrassing stupidity that you just can't turn the channel from.

I cannot imagine why anyone would decide to be homosexual. Maybe it's the sheer happiness a lesbian teenager experiences when her mother and father disown her and she finds herself homeless and without a family? Perhaps it's the over-the-top fun of being assaulted by homophobic hate-groups? Could it be that gay people actually find satisfaction in the complicated and often dangerous side-effects of the "lifestyle" they have "chosen".

No one wants a life of discrimination and fear. No one wants to have their relationships, families and love not respected and protected. It was the religious right who fought against interracial marriage, the black right to vote and even woman's right to vote. Just like those hateful ignorant tirades before were squashed, this one will be too.

With the American divorce rate at about 58% and the constant bombardment of divorce advertisements for only $149.99, maybe the right should spend some effort and money on keeping families together.

Marriage is not only about religion. If your dwindling parishes don't want our money and our attendance because we are an abomination in the eyes of your god... That's cool. Most of us don't need to be married in your church anyway. (I for one, am thinking a nice beach wedding in southern California.) However, our rights as humans has nothing to do with your church and whether or not you agree with us. Church and state are separate in this country for the very purpose of protecting everyone from the religious beliefs of few.

Gay people have mortgages, pay taxes, raise children and love, just like straight people. We want to be left alone with the same rights and protections that straight people have.

"...fed with the same food, hurt with the same weapons, subject to the same diseases, healed by the same means, warmed and cooled by the same winter and summer, as a Christian is? If you prick us, do we not bleed? if you tickle us, do we not laugh? if you poison us, do we not die? and if you wrong us, shall we not revenge?" -Shakespeare

Jason in MN

Please, don't say that all Christians are fools and liars. That is the kind of false, blanket-statement that our opponents use to stereotype us and to keep our otherwise caring neighbors afraid of gay people and of marriage equality. There are many Christians who will vote NO on prop. 8 and I am a gay Christian who would vote NO if I lived in CA.

Some of the previous posts are the most passionate statements I've read in support of civil marriages for same-gender couples. The opinion that people choose to be gay and that it can be taught is so incredibly ridiculous. I'm living proof that those ideas are wrong. I was raised by straight parents and I didn't know anyone who was gay until after college. Looking back with a new perspective, I can recall my attraction to certain guys as far back as 4th grade. I wasn't taught to be attracted to those guys, I just was. And no, the Bible doesn't condemn homosexuality any more than it condemns heterosexuality.

People of CA, please realize that marriage requires love and commitment between two adults, their gender isn't important.


Allan T

Why is it that if we elect Obama that is completely legitimate but if most Californians support Proposition 8 they are bigots? Both represent the wisdom, and the will of the majority.

Labelling those opposed to changing the definition of marriage bigots (and worse) reveals to me that there is also a deep streak of intolerance among those against Proposition 8.

Marriage, accross time, across ethnicities, across religions, across cultures has always involved a man and a woman.

Since marriage has been so for so long, why is it that a one judge, on a deeply divided courts, should be the one to decide what marriage is? What makes a judge an expert on family above and beyond the democratic will of the people?

Susan McGee

I appreciate your critique of the attitudes of those working to eliminate the right of same gender folk to marry.
But I think you underestimate their bigotry and hatred.
1) The idea that lesbian/gay parents "recruit" their children into being lesbian and gay is a code, a hidden message, that lesbians and gays are child molesters, and are recruiting their children by having sex with them.
This theme (lesbian gay as pederast/child rapist/molester) is one constantly promulgated by the right.
2) The right is really stupid about children They claim that lesbians and gays cannot procreate...huh? What about the many, many lesbians who give birth via artificial insemination......?


The lawmakers and politicians in Belgium after arguing decided that same sex marriage was to be legally accepted and the people never had a say or vote for or against it.
It seems to me that the majority who would vote for proposition 8 are not zealots or Talibans these people are probably people more or less like me, which is, not being comfortable with this issue and it is true I was a bit worried about the kids were they going to be recruited to become homosexuals? but that argument didn't go too far as these homos were born to "normal" hetero parents whom I'm sure didn't bring them up to become what they are. What I find disgusting is those so called leaders and do-gooders brainwashing and lying to a majority of people who don't know any better, I also feel confident that proposition 8 will be shoved into their darkest tunnel and the "normal" people will realize with shame that homosexuals have been thrashed for centuries and it is time to make it up to them.


Hehehe. Silly uneducated bigots are funny. Seeing how 50% of heterosexual marriages end in divorce (usually within the first 2 years), I’m not so sure the man/woman model is necessarily the best arrangement for children. If heteros can’t even save their own marriage, they clearly are in no position to say gay marriage is bad for children.

You want to “protect” marriage? Get rid of divorce, infidelity, domestic violence, and those quickie Vegas marriages people like Britney Spears are having….instead of trying to prevent those who WANT to get married from marrying.

Truth is: the vast majority of the EDUCATED people of society (from legal scholars to social scientists–AKA people who can think LOGICALLY) SUPPORT gay marriage/adoption. Survey after survey has shown that the higher the education level, the more supportive they are of gay rights (in other words, the dumber you are, the more anti-gay you’ll likely be).

If conservative/religious/homophobic nuts would spend a little more time in school (and learn some SCIENCE and LOGIC) and less time sticking their noses into other people’s personal lives (which don’t affect them one bit), then they might earn some respect from those of us who are educated and civilized.

Stopping gay marriage isn’t going to make gays go extinct, and it certainly isn’t going to stop them from having gay relationships and adopting/raising children. Get over it and start worrying about more important things in life (such as getting a college education). Yikes!

Laura Haughey

"it's obvious that same-sex couples who married would "recruit" their children"

Statements that begin with "it's obvious" are ALWAYS 100% wrong, because it's not obvious. It's an opinion, and a poorly supported one at that. These people are just scary. Vote NO California! Don't let the bigotry win!


Calling "Right Wing Christians" "idiots" is not bigotry, because Right Wing Christians choose to be morons. Homosexuals don't choose to be homosexual, and thus making negative statements about them is bigoted.

It's simple really. It's not bigotry to make fun of morons, imbeciles, racists, idiots, and other such ignorant people because their stupidity is self-inflicted and correctable. You wouldn't say it's bigotry to correct a child's math problem, right? Likewise, it's not bigotry to correct an adult's mental deficiencies.


"Why is it that if we elect Obama that is completely legitimate but if most Californians support Proposition 8 they are bigots? Both represent the wisdom, and the will of the majority."

Very simple. We elect representatives because in a civilized society, people choose their representatives. The will of the majority determines who has power.

We do NOT use votes to determine who in society has rights and who does not, because that would NOT be how its done in a civilized society.

Representatives are chosen. Rights are immutable. Otherwise there would still be slavery in the south because the majority would have voted to keep it.

Any other questions?


"Why is it that if we elect Obama that is completely legitimate but if most Californians support Proposition 8 they are bigots? Both represent the wisdom, and the will of the majority."

Very simple. We elect representatives because in a civilized society, people choose their representatives. The will of the majority determines who has power.

We do NOT use votes to determine who in society has rights and who does not, because that would NOT be how its done in a civilized society.

Representatives are chosen. Rights are immutable. Otherwise there would still be slavery in the south because the majority would have voted to keep it. Otherwise the holocaust would not have been a crime, it would simply have been popular will.

Any other questions?


It never ceases to amaze me how some proponents of Proposition 8 try to ignore the existence of Constitutional Rights that restrain majoritarian actions and judicial review that is the main means of enforcing those rights.

They understand these aspects of American government perfectly well, since the bill of Rights has been around since the first Congress and judicial review has been a feature of American law since the Jefferson Administration. Object, if you like, to the result, but don't expect us to believe ludicrous claims that majoritarian rights were trampled by judges enforcing equal protection. They weren't.

I agree with whoever suggested that letting the Far Right talk does more to discredit it than anything else we could do.

Kathy H.

"All Christians are fools and liars, no exceptions!"
Even I don't feel that way and I"m pretty much against most of them. I do find a few here and there to be honest, sincere and for equality. .

Kathy H.

"I agree with whoever suggested that letting the Far Right talk does more to discredit it than anything else we could do."

I also agree. As my father used to say, 'Give them enough rope and they hang themselves.". They do quite a fine job too!

david porter

Allan T said "Marriage, accross time, across ethnicities, across religions, across cultures has always involved a man and a woman."

Oh Allen, who told you that? Santa Claus? The Tooth Fairy? Well Allen, they lied to you.

In seventeenth-century China and nineteenth-century Africa, for example, the institution seems identical to opposite-sex marriage. In Native American society, marriage between two men was commonplace, but its similarity to contemporary lesbian and gay marriages is far from evident.

Randy Cunningham

I have to say I am thrilled to be one of the 70,000 gay and lesbian couples that has a child. Our son (my biological son) is now 16-years old, and it is great to be a parent. At 16, he gets good grades, is well mannered, loves his Xbox, and is a loving human being to all. He is a perfect example that children need love and support to help them to grow into fine adults…not just a married man and a woman.

My husband and I have been together for 9 years. We got married in June of this year, and guess what? None of you (especially those who are FOR Proposition 8) would even know it. Why? Because there is no impact to you, just as there is no impact to me when you get/got married. Now, just like you, I am legally protected and am treated as an equal citizen in the State of California. It’s as simple as that.

As for your life, nothing has changed. As for your marriage, nothing has changed. It is still up to YOU to nurture your marriage to ensure it lasts. My marriage has nothing to do with the longevity of your own. My marriage has nothing to do with the ruining of yours. If you believe it does, then you really never had a good marriage to begin with. It is too bad that many do not take the personal responsibility for the downfall of their own marrage versus blaming everyone else but themselves.

My son was thrilled to see us get married. In fact, he was the first person to ask us if we were going to get married once it became legal. I thought, and still think, that was pretty cool.

So, now, post-marriage, we are just living our lives like most married Californians. What’s next? Well, our son is taking drivers education, so that should be fun…

For those that want to annul my marriage by supporting Proposition 8, I am sorry for you. It is a shame that instead of appreciating the love that two people can share in this world, you would rather preach hate and intolerance.

But, I strongly believe that our marriage is a good thing for society, just has been proven in the many other countries that allow gay marriage today.

In the meantime, I am thrilled that my life is surrounded in a circle of wonderful family and friends that support and love us, and they will all be voting No on Proposition 8 because it’s the right thing to do.

It’s just too bad that more Americans couldn’t be a little more loving to thy neighbor and focus their energy on more productive things that could truly benefit our society. Fortunately, with the exception of recently posting in a few places regarding this issue, I do not spend much time worrying about what others say or think. I truly believe it requires way too much negative energy, and it is counterproductive to living a happy and healthy life. But, it has been interesting to see people’s comments on this issue, and it’s a reminder of the progress we still need to make as a human species and as a society as a whole.

Paulo Santos

Marriage is a bond between two people that involves responsibility and legalities, as well as commitment and challenge.
Why are we giving so much attention to this proposition 8?
We are all human beings. We should all have the same rights…men or women.
Let’s look at it outside of the box for a second:
Times have changed in several aspects and we as human beings should respect and accept it…we call it evolution. It is one of those things that it is what it is. Laws can’t change it…it is a process determined by nature!
I actually believe religion delays evolution and of course their representatives too (The church).
It is unfortunate but a fact that we have pedophiles representing the church. I would believe that we also have gays representing the church but maybe because to be gay isn’t a crime they have not yet surfaced to our society.
I would also believe that some priests, monks, rabbis…as human beings and not as church representatives…will be willing to marry gay people as they may be gays themselves.
So, marriage seems to be a contract and also a way to unite people as I say in my first sentence.
If a man wants to be with a man and woman wants to be with a woman what is the big fuzz about it? Let them be happy! They are people! Is that going to destroy the church doctrine? Well, the pedophiles priests have already done that to its extreme!!! Oh, I forgot that been gay is not illegal but church wants make gay marriages illegal…
How about this: Gay people under the law (as a legal contract) should be able to get married and churches, synagogues, temples…and their representatives: priests, rabbis, monks … would have the option to perform those marriages or not at their description.
Religion has no right in the country of freedom we live to interfere with the law or with the freedom of people, period! They can have the option but not the right!
I know we can’t change any form of religious believes otherwise we would be trying to make them what they aren’t. So, make it an option for them to perform or not a gay marriage but do not give them the power to decide! They are not above people! They are just people like all of us! We are talking about human rights not religious rights!
The law has been and should be made by people not by religion believes or religious believers!
Gay marriage should be a valid option just like all the other options humans have, just like the option to get married or not.
P.S. I am not even gay but I respect them as people!

Paulo Santos



In Case You Missed It...



Recent Posts
Reading Supreme Court tea leaves on 'Obamacare' |  March 27, 2012, 5:47 pm »
Candidates go PG-13 on the press |  March 27, 2012, 5:45 am »
Santorum's faulty premise on healthcare reform |  March 26, 2012, 5:20 pm »


About the Bloggers
The Opinion L.A. blog is the work of Los Angeles Times Editorial Board membersNicholas Goldberg, Robert Greene, Carla Hall, Jon Healey, Sandra Hernandez, Karin Klein, Michael McGough, Jim Newton and Dan Turner. Columnists Patt Morrison and Doyle McManus also write for the blog, as do Letters editor Paul Thornton, copy chief Paul Whitefield and senior web producer Alexandra Le Tellier.

In Case You Missed It...