Proposition 8: A Poll

by Cory H. on November 10, 2008

I support Proposition 8 and traditional definitions of marriage.  For those of you who don’t know, Proposition 8 is an amendment to the California state constitution that states, “Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.”

This amendment was passed by a 52% to 47% margin in the recent election.  The language on the ballot, which is considerably different from the language of the initiative itself, reads, “Eliminates Right of Same-Sex Couples to Marry.”  While it may amount to the same thing, the difference is one of semantics and is at the crux of the protests and angry arguments that supporters and detractors are having.

Even though the amendment passed, gay rights groups are challenging it in court and there’s a good chance this battle will drag on for years to come.  Proposition 8 raises some very challenging questions about the nature of marriage.

There’s a poll on the right side.  Why don’t you answer and let us know what you think by commenting below?

Facebook Twitter Email Digg Delicious Stumbleupon Reddit

Post comment as twitter logo facebook logo
Sort: Newest | Oldest

"A marriage is a covenant before God."

Only among Christians afaik. That puts us in the minority.

Scotts last blog post..Spiritual Stew: Episode Ten - Rabbit Trails

Homosexuality is a sin. A marriage is a covenant before God. Ero why would you make a covenant before God to sin?
God loves homosexuals and he loves all sinners. He died for me while I was still a sinner.

God established marriage and we should all honor it better than we have as a nation.

bradmcs last blog post..The Nickled Nicolaitans

"It really comes down to a belief by conservative Christians (and others) that homosexuality is against God’s will. "

Plenty of things that are "against God's will" that aren't codified in to law. Why choose this one? I think I can tell you why. Because the Christians who are voting against this aren't gay and the homosexuals make a good scape goat for whatever social ills you want to tack on them. If that is your sole criteria for not recognizing gay marriage then a) you're ignoring the Constitution and b) you're ignoring divorce (also against God's will).

Scotts last blog post..Spiritual Stew: Episode Ten - Rabbit Trails

Whoops, I got confused by the layout. I agree with Joe, not Laurie.

Hayden Tompkinss last blog post..Dealing With In-Laws Without Losing My Mind

I do not support prop 8 and I think marriage should be legal between a gay couple. Being gay is not a choice, it's biology and science. Why then should a person not be allowed the same rights? I feel sorry for people that are so closed minded that they want to control another person's life and happiness that way and who use the bible as an excuse/weapon to force their ignorance onto others.
I have enjoyed 15 years with my husband and I would not deny that right or opportunity to anyone. I think anyone that could is really sad and I don't see how they can find peace with themselves.

No worries @Kevin

Tyler @ Building Camelots last blog post..1st Movember Update - Help Me Fight Prostate Cancer

Proposition 8 made simple:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vI-GjWY-WlA

I think a lot of this boils down to semantics. What "marriage" are you referring to?

If we're talking of the Christian definition of marriage, I have to support it. Christianity, as mentioned above, does not support homosexuality. Christianity is not obligated to recognize a gay union. If a Christian group came out and said "We will not recognize a gay marriage", they would have my full support.

However, here is where the problem stems - what about a marriage in a strictly legal sense (ie. a government-recognized civil union with benefits and obligations)?

Scenario: my wife and I were married by a High Priestess of the Pagan/Wiccan religion. In the eyes of Christianity, our marriage is not recognized (at least, according to the ministers I've spoken with). However, we are legally married all the same.

Why can a gay couple not perform a pagan marriage or handfasting, which has no objection to homosexuality, and be granted the same legal rights and responsibilities my wife and I currently share?

Russs last blog post..Blog Action Day 2008: Poverty

My bad Tyler. Laurie was talking about this. I agree with Joe...not Laurie.

Cory, you are right. However, it is very difficult to understand why people are against this. It was like the constant nagging of "Who is Barack Obama?" thing. It was very difficult to hear that discussion over and over again and not to think about ulterior motives. It was a way to paint a picture without using hate speech and being so overt.

Not saying there is hate in the Prop 8 argument, but it comes across that way. It comes across as intolerant. But the folks on my side of the argument have to be careful not to jump to this conclusion off the bat.

It is VERY important to understand the other side - not necessarily agree - just understand their position. Once there is understanding, then there might be common ground found. If there can be common ground (anywhere), then we can get to reconciliation.

Kevin (ReturnToManliness)s last blog post..Manliness I Learned This Week: Job Search Edition

The thing that I find interesting is that the terms used to define traditional marriage are labeled as hate speech. A state employee in California was recently fired for using the term "natural family." A friend of mine has been ostracized in her office for the mere fact that she is a Mormon and Mormons are Pro-Prop 8.

There is plenty of hate speech (and action) on both sides. It's not like Mormons or Catholics are standing outside of the sacred places frequented by the gay community and protesting.

Can a discussion take place without resorting to name calling or saying the other side is full of hate?

"This tells me the conviction is there, even if the voice isn’t able to articulate it."

I think it has to do more with the angle of the argument. If we discuss this on an emotional level, then religion and "traditional" marriage values seep into the discussion, and it all devolves into hate speech.

However, if we look at it from the legal standpoint that I tried to bring up earlier, the "man and woman" arguments go out the window, since we're talking raw legal terms with no religious bearing.

I simply want my gay friends to have the same rights as me and my wife, and to see this happen just makes me angry.

Jeffreys last blog post..A story

What I find really interesting is that a majority of voters in California supported this proposition, and yet the majority of respondents here (and in nearly every other venue in which this topic is discussed) are against it.

This tells me the conviction is there, even if the voice isn't able to articulate it.

I seriously doubt a logical discussion can exist about any subject as visceral as this.

Just a meta observation.

toms last blog post..But You Said...

I agree with Laurie.

Hayden Tompkinss last blog post..Dealing With In-Laws Without Losing My Mind

Some very good points here. To @Kevin, I wasn't the one talking about "special rights".

Tyler @ Building Camelots last blog post..1st Movember Update - Help Me Fight Prostate Cancer

Let them get married, what's the big whoop? If they love each other and are committed to each other, let them express that through marriage. What right do we have to say that people of opposite sex have the benefit of marriage, while people of the same sex do not? Why should they be denied the benefits of marriage in a society where all people are supposed to be treated equally?
I am proud that same sex marriage is allowed where I live, and it doesn't undermine me, my marriage, or anything else about my life. When I see a same sex couple that have gotten married and adopted a child, I think it is great, and means another child has been saved from an orphanage too.

Vincent @ The Dad Jams last blog post..How to Relieve Parenting Stress: Enjoy Your Kids

Kevin, it's a good question, and one that I plan on elaborating on tomorrow and over the next few days. It really comes down to a belief by conservative Christians (and others) that homosexuality is against God's will. This, of course, is fundamentally at odds with the gay community.

The question then, is how can these two possibly be reconciled? Where do we compromise in order to have a harmonious society?

Cory,
I do not support a ban on gay marriage. I don't understand the other side of the argument. Since you support, can you please expand a little more? Not saying you are wrong or I am, but I want to understand. One possibility is fear. This is a real possibility and can not be discounted. If people are fearful of it for some reason, then that should be addressed. Not saying it is the core reason, but could it be one of them?

I agree with Laurie. It has no bearing on me or my life. I am not sure why we must put ourselves in the middle of this by outlawing it. They are not mocking marriage or making fun of it. They are not discounting my love for my wife. They are wanting to legitimize their love for another human being. We may not agree with their lifestyle

Tyler, these are not special rights because of their behavior. They are simply asking for equal rights. By banning it, you are doing exactly what you say - legislating for (or against) a behavior. BTW, our entire society is about legislating behavior... I think you are confused about the problem of legislating beliefs. You can not legislate a person's thoughts, but behavior is the cornerstone of all legislation.

The slippery slope argument is always a fallback argument when the core position does not hold water. I could go the other way and say, "Should we ban homosexuals from anything and everything? Should gay folks not be able to vote? Should they not be able to play sports with same sex? Should gay folks not be able to attend our public schools?" All of these are silly discussions, but they fall under the "slippery slope" ridiculousness.

All that being said, the voters have spoken. The argument will continue, but people have spoken and we have to respect it for the time being.

Kevin (ReturnToManliness)s last blog post..Manliness I Learned This Week: Job Search Edition

Just a reminder to everyone to keep it civil. Everyone's fine so far, but I won't allow any direct name calling or slander. Thanks for all of your input, you all raise thought provoking points for consideration.

I agree with Joe and will go one step further in calling out the bigotry in this issue. I could get very verbose on this, but why? Bigotry is bigotry. The end. As to the issue of the sactity of marriage - if you honestly believe another couple's right to marry will detract from the strength of your own marriage, perhaps your marriage isn't so strong after all.

(*typing & deleting & typing & deleting & finally deciding I'm too pissed off at the blatant prejudice to bother commenting further & deciding, instead, to go for a drive*)

Hmm, lets see, you can either have a gay couple that have been together for 30 years and desperately want to be able to have the same rights as straight couples, or you can have people like Britney Spears when she married Jason Alexander, and Peaches Geldof and her 96 day marriage who take the piss and completely make a mockery of the institution.

I know what couple I would rather support

minority rights should not be left to majority vote.

Sherelles last blog post..Use Social Media - Make People Listen

Marriage is a legal contract, and should be treated as such in regards to this argument. It's not about love, or passion, or whether or not you should be able to get gay-married.

I'm sorry if I sound a little empty here, but that is what marriage is. It is a contract between two people, with benefits and obligations. To say that two people cannot enter into this contract because they both happen to be of the same sex is ludicrous. Denying someone a contract like this for as flimsy reason as "my religion says you shouldn't" undermines what marriage is: a contract between two people who are dedicated to one another.

"To us, it would just seem to undermine everything that my wife and I have worked to build as a couple."

What does that even MEAN? YOU undermine your marriage, unless these gay people have a personal stake in your life, which says more about you than the issue itself.

"If you say that they need the right because gay people “desire and love” only those of the same sex, well I could say the same thing about a pedophile. Should we give the pedophile special rights?"

Don't point out that slippery slope garbage. Society decides what is right and what is wrong, and the last time I checked, pedophilia is a crime, punishable by law. A Supreme Court decision repealed sodomy laws a few years ago. The gay community doesn't want "special rights", they want the same rights as everyone else.

Jeffreys last blog post..A story

Why do they define it as there "right"? It is like saying I have the "right" to call day "night". If they want legal rights and benefits that a married couple get that is a different issue however they can not change the definition of a word like marriage.

I don't support it in anyway but if we have to give them any rights because of their type of relationship then they better come up with their own word for their relationship.

Marriage must be reserved for the relationship between man and woman.

orlunds last blog post..The Christmas Bus Vs. The Smart Car

Does the divorced woman living next door add or subtract to the quality of my marriage?
The newlyweds up the street?
Does the thrice remarried couple two doors down add or subtract from the quality of my marriage?
The septagenerian empty-nesters?
How about the cohabitating yet unmarried couple around the block?
Hmm?
No.
No.
No.
No.
And no.
What about the guy who beats his wife and kids?
Or the woman cheating on her husband?
Or the couple that decided to not have kids?

The quality and sanctity of my marriage is determined specifically and by nothing else than the qualities of my wife and me, and the energy and effort we spend to make it work, raise our kids, and keep our home.
Nothing and nobody can detract from the uniqueness of our relationship except but by our leave.

Gay people already have the right to marry but choose not to marry someone of the opposite sex. Their rights aren't being taken away. They want special rights due to a behavior they are involved in. Now I don't want to debate whether being gay is genetic or not but people don't get special rights due to their behavior. If that is the case, where would it end? Would we end up giving rights to other kinds of objectionable behavior as well. If you say that they need the right because gay people "desire and love" only those of the same sex, well I could say the same thing about a pedophile. Should we give the pedophile special rights? What about a rapist or even an exhibitionists? We have to have limits.

My wife and I were just talking about this and we both support Prop. 8 - even though we don't live anywhere near Cali. To us, it would just seem to undermine everything that my wife and I have worked to build as a couple. How would we explain to our kids that our marriage isn't as important as it seems if it were passed into law. Call me old school but it's just my perspective.

Tyler @ Building Camelots last blog post..1st Movember Update - Help Me Fight Prostate Cancer

Previous post:

Next post: