Steve Lopez on Prop. 8 -- still doesn't get it

Steve Lopez, our intrepid columnist, took in to two Prop. 8 rallies in South-Central L.A. on Tuesday. One was in favor of the ballot measure, which would rewrite the state Constitution to outlaw same-sex marriage, and the other opposed Prop. 8.

While Steve found more people attending the first rally, that's the one that caused him to come up with a lot more questions:

Apostle Frederick K.C. Price stepped to the microphone.

"I believe and teach the Bible," he said, pausing briefly, as if nothing more needed to be said.

But he went on to quote Genesis, saying marriage is that which occurs between a man and a woman. To veer from that course, he suggested, would "jeopardize our children's future."

Off the top, I could name six dozen greater threats to children's futures than the prospect
of same-sex people committing themselves to each other in love, especially in South Los Angeles. With so many single parents and foster children, in fact, two-parent families might be worth encouraging.

Another clergyman, Bishop Frank Stewart of Zoe Christian Fellowship, said he was insulted by the suggestion that gay marriage is a civil rights issue. The real civil rights issues, he said, are the rights of parents (I didn't quite get his point), and his right to choose whom he can join in matrimony as a minister.

Pastor Beverly Crawford of Bible Enrichment Fellowship International clarified that in supporting Prop. 8 she wasn't saying no to gays, but "yes to God" and doing what "the Lord Jesus Christ" would do.

I always envy those who know precisely what Jesus would do. I'm wondering, though, if Pastor Crawford made the right call on that one.

So, how would Jesus vote?

--Veronique de Turenne

Photos: Los Angeles Times

Top photo: Students Joshua Lee, 6, left, and Josiah Wimbely, 6, wave flags as a group of ministers supporting Prop. 8 met at Crenshaw Christian Center on Vermont Avenue to rally support for their cause. Credit: Bob Chamberlin / Los Angeles Times

Bottom photo: The Rev. Vanessa Mackenzie speaks at a news conference in opposition to Prop. 8. Mackenzie was one of three ministers who spoke against the proposition at the Lucy Florence Cultural Center in Los Angeles. Credit: Spencer Weiner / Los Angeles Times

 

Comments

[If You Are Black Vote No on 8]

Prop 8 Takes Away Rights.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TksL3PXw9lU

[RWS]

I look at the little children in the picture attached to this article. The little black, and hispanic children, and I have to think how sad it is that they are being led to think that Voting Yes on Prop 8 is the right thing to do. How they are being used by the religious YES on 8 people as pawns. And then I think about how the Yes on 8 people use children in their ads to fight for Prop 8. I don't see children used in any of the No on 8 campaigns. It seems to me that the Yes on 8 people are real scum bags. And the poor little black and hispanic children in this picture don't even know about the history of racial descrimination in this country and how they are being turned into bigots before they are even old enough to understand. Makes me sick. Vote No on 8 so and stop teaching our children to be bigots.

[Al E]

Greg, you wrote "The subject of homosexuality has become such a black and white issue in the Church. One would expect Jesus to have mentioned it in some detail, but it was never mentioned by Jesus... not even once. Since I am not all-knowing I can not presume to know what an all-knowing God would say about an issue when He never said anything about it. Maybe it is not the issue so many believe it to be. I know many loving, caring, men and women of God who are straight. I also know many loving, caring, men and women of God who are members of the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgendered community."

In the Bible it tells husbands to love their wives as they would the church. Would you say in defense of homosexuals that another man could be classified as another man's wife? Or would they be each other's husbands? And the same for lesbian couples. Would one woman have the official title as the husband and the other the wife? Because it outlines the duties of the family in the Bible. That should give you God's stand on the issue or do you need it spelled out for you R...E...A...D You check it out here if you like:
If you want to the know the standpoint of Christians on a few moral issues or what should one of the standpoints of Christians read Ephesians 5. Reword that and tell me what you really think it says and how that applies to homosexual agenda.

[Greg]

...in reply to a comment above referencing Sodom and Gomorrah and what Jesus would do and say...

I submit that the sin of Sodom and Gomorrah was not homosexuality. Seriously, if some gay men were demanding to "have their way" with some male visitors, would you really tell them "no" and offer them women/girls instead? Of course not! That would make no sense at all. So, I (and many biblical scholars) suggest these men were not gay but were likely trying to fulfill some pagan ritual... because that is exactly what happened: Lot (the "hero" of the story) offered his virgin daughters to these men instead of the angels who were visiting his house! ...because it is certainly a good Christian (Jewish) act to offer your defenseless daughters to hostile men so they can fornicate with them. Apologies for the sarcasm. In all seriousness, then, maybe we are not seeing the whole picture of the story of Sodom and Gomorrah; if we are to base our moral decision about homosexuality on this story, then we must also morally agree it is okay to molest someone's daughters, or offer up our daughters to others for these terrible acts. There are clearly cultural and temporal issues that have not clearly translated to us today, but we are happy to quickly dismiss one part of the story only to dwell and base doctrine on another. We must be willing to openly study the cultural contexts of those who penned the Bible (or any document), and the cultural context of those for whom each section was written. Doing so does not diminish one's faith; it may challenge some assumptions, but I believe my faith has become even stronger through such exploration.

...and speaking of what Jesus would have said about Prop. 8...

The subject of homosexuality has become such a black and white issue in the Church. One would expect Jesus to have mentioned it in some detail, but it was never mentioned by Jesus... not even once. Since I am not all-knowing I can not presume to know what an all-knowing God would say about an issue when He never said anything about it. Maybe it is not the issue so many believe it to be. I know many loving, caring, men and women of God who are straight. I also know many loving, caring, men and women of God who are members of the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgendered community.

I can not in good conscience vote to restrict or revoke someone's rights. Separate is never equal.

"If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels but do not have love, I am a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal... if I have a faith that can move mountains but do not have love, I have nothing... love is not arrogant or rude. Love holds no grudges. Love does not delight in injustice but rejoices in the truth... and so these three will remain: Faith, hope, and love. And the greatest of these is love."

[How Quickly They Forget]

Pastor Beverly Crawford should be ashamed of herself. How would she feel if her right to interracial marriage was revoked, or her right to vote, or her right to be free. It wasn't that long ago that black people were in chains in this country, it wasn't long ago that gay people were thrown in jail for consential sex (Bowers v. Hardwick). We are talking about rights Beverly Crawford! In supporting Prop 8 you are saying yes to discrimination, yes to bigotry and yes to oppressing a group of people just like blacks were oppressed in this country and still are. How quickly you forget!

[Envious of the Simple Mind]

It must be blissful to be as simple minded as Al E who I'm sure selected a sexual orientation. Don't tell me, one day you decide to have sex with a man and then the next day you decide to have sex with a woman, as natural as eating pie. My, my, how wonderful it must be to be you. Simple pie.

[Matthew]

Please vote for Prop 8!

Registered homosexual domestic partnerships have EVERY right, protection, and benefit married couples do according to California State Law:

"CALIFORNIA FAMILY CODE SECTION 297.5. (a) Registered domestic partners shall have the same rights, protections, and benefits, and shall be subject to the same responsibilities, obligations, and duties under law, whether they derive from statutes, administrative regulations, court rules, government policies, common law, or any other provisions or sources of law, as are granted to and imposed upon spouses."

It's a LIE to suggest that homosexuals' rights are being taken away.

Please vote for Prop 8!

[josh]

Im not sure about that Al E. My own sexual "inclinations" have never brought up much trouble. I guess I am fortunate that my sexual "inclinations" are in line with my culture. Unfortunately, not everyone else's is. If I read your post right, I think you are saying that there is no such thing as "preference"?

"people do not choose to be gay"

What I meant by this is that "sexual preference, inclination, etc" is reasonably beyond the person's control. Its a good point on the language though, I think Palin recently referred to it as a "choice". She said something like- "I have no problem with a person's choice to be gay". And I would say that statement is wrong because it isnt a matter of choice for the person.

Orientation? Right, orientation would denote some kind of relationship, and people can be gay by themselves.

It might be easier to think of as something inherent like a neutral personality trait. But its still hard to classify. Youd probably want to call it a sin or something, but thats saying its defective. But it might seem defective from a defective worldview. Thats probably what it is, it probably has to do with your defective worldview. Gayness is not a "disease of the culture or the mind", but people are often wrong about their worldview. Its more likely that your thinking is defective than "gayness" is. Im not saying that offensively either, I would LOVE it if everything the christians said were correct, it would make life so much easier and I wouldnt have to think for myself. Whatever happened to the old christians like st augustine and anselm? These guys thought critically on their subject. Im not sure what all this watered down stuff is, its like spiritual fast food... junk

[Hillary]

If your traditional values hinge this delicately upon someone else employing their own traditional values, I think its time to reconsider your values.

Can a homosexual be a farmer? Can they plant a seed, germinate it, mature it, raise it to full tree growth? If they can, they are indeed capable of reproduction. So, there goes your penis/poon-any theory. (Never minding the obvious sperm/egg donation/adoption).

I remember watching a movie with Sarah Michelle Gellar and Selma Blair full-on faux lesbian kiss. Oh, and some American Pie movies with a hint of lesbianism. And, I have seen a few Playboy ads showing girls together.

That’s okay, though, right?

I just want to be very clear how the hypocrisy works. They are allowed to kiss for your enjoyment, but not allowed to kiss at an altar?

I was actually going to join a yes on 8 rally (as a joke), and while chanting “yes on 8”, do the nazi salute. I have seen gays killed for being gay, but I have not seen any radical movement to burn a mormon church down or anything. Perhaps because Gays are more godly than those who have been saved.

**** VOTE NO ON HATE. VOTE NO ON 8. ****
They are trying to legalize discrimination. You religious fools. Nutballs, really, but fools sounded better.

As a family value, I do not allow soda in my house. If you buy a six pack of cola, I fully intend to round up all my out of state friends for a fundraiser, so I can then worm my way into a state legislated ballot, and force you not to have soda in your house. And sadly, it has come down to being this trivial. You bible-thumping freakshows saw to that.

Read my comments at this article:
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2008/10/mcclintock----n.html

An excerpt:
Gay couples DO NOT have every right they need. Domestic Partnerships do not allow a partner the same rights in an every day or emergency situation. If someone grows ill, and is rushed to the hospital, they will not be able to get into the ambulance, or hospital room with no questions asked. There will be too much confusion that a married couple would not have to deal with.

Gay couples still have people protesting their funerals. Oh, for sure, they have every right they need. Gay people have to live their life in constant fear of violence, they lose family members because of the taboo placed on them, they are denied jobs, etc. They have to hide their being “in a closet.” That does not sound to me like they have every right they need.

This would change as soon as we allot them the rights every other human in California has. They would not have a classification, outside of blonde or brunette.

-----

As far as religion goes, I urge EVERYONE to watch the zeitgeist movie and its addendum. Religion is nothing more than a way to justify war, and keep citizens obedient.

http://www.zeitgeistmovie.com/

[Patrick]

"Hy"....Ah yes, the "slippery slope" argument! "The sky is falling and if we don't stop it with X, horribly Y and Z will happen!" Let's break it down what you've said.

"What next? Will the government try to OK bigamy?"

Actually your bible and patriarchs had multiple wives. Your bible does not actually prohibit bigamy. In fact, using your bible a case can be made for Christian Bigamy: One husband, multiple wives. And people do. This would be a religious freedom argument that they would make, and rightfully so. Why aren't they allowed to practice what they believe God tells them to? That's a 1st Amendment rights question.

" If two people of the same sex can marry, why not 3 or 10 or 100?"

Why not 3 people who are adults, in sound mind, allowed to make any legal contract they wish to. But seriously 10 people marrying? 100? Do you even have 100 friends, let alone 100 people you want to commit yourself to? Seriously? This is the worst case you can come up with? I don't see the fall of civilization happening if 3 or 100 people "marry".

"How about marrying one's pet dog, cat or goldfish?"

Under United States Federal, as well as California State law, animals have no legal standing. Show me a dog, cat, or goldfish who can read, understand, and sign a legal document and then maybe I'll acknowledge this as a legitimate "slippery slope" argument. I'll buy "What's next, mixed race marriages?!" but not people marrying animals. Seriously. NO LEGAL STANDING. A paw print doesn't count as a valid signature.

"Where does the slippery slope stop?"

Indeed, the better question to ask is where do taking away rights from American Citizens stop? Should it stop at same-sex marriage because you find it icky? Should it start tearing apart families who are of mixed race? Or maybe of mixed religions? Maybe Democrats shouldn't be married to Republicans? Or is the slippery slope another law that will be passed supporting a religion? No working on Sundays? No sale of alcohol? Ban all literature critical of Christianity, Jesus Christ, or even Scientology?

Where indeed does the slippery slope stop? That's why I'm voting NO on Prop 8. For true Religious Freedom, and for not enshrining discrimination into the California Constitution.

Vote No on Prop 8... if only to show "slippery slope" folks the fallacy of their arguments.

[Al E]

If people don't choose to be gay, then how could some choose not to be? Or would you say those people were never "truly" gay in the first place because it's inconceivable for someone to change their sexual "preference." I prefer orange juice today. I prefer apple juice tomorrow. I prefer a man's company today. I prefer a woman's company tomorrow. "Preference" gives itself to choice. Otherwise how could you "prefer" something when you only have 1 choice to begin with. Would you say that homosexuals would need to remove "sexual preference" from their speech? Because preference denotes choice, and you just said people don't choose to be gay.

So now we're going to use sexual orientation instead right? Orientation as it relates to Psychiatry - def. the ability to locate oneself in one's environment with reference to time, place and people. So their sexual orientation is necessitated by the existence of others who believe as they do. But that doesn't speak to people choosing or not choosing their sexual preference, but instead a classification of a particular grouping.

[josh]

Christians being the salt of the earth and protect it from the wrath of god is no more of an account than saying that Yorubans who worship Ogun are the link between the sky and the earth, etc...

If certain stories teach you about being a moral person thats great. But I think universal statements like: "all people are equal" should be the basis of government, not a certain group's literal interpretation of a book of fantastic stories (whether they are true or not doesnt matter, and whether they are a guide for you doesnt either).

If sexual preference is purely genetic makeup, then why is homosexuality seen throughout species? In fact, some fish will change gender if there are too many of one gender around. The biology of sexual preference is complicated and suggests that this "perversion" might be a natural occurrence that can help a species survive. In other words, it probably has its place in the world. Im not sure if christians would accept that though because they dont seem to think that evolution happens. All things in biology are explainable through their function, even aberrations and perversions seem to have their niche.

You accept that since a boy is born with a penis, it should be with a vagina at some point. That makes good sense. That is a functional explanation. It gets tricky when you have to consider other functional explanations that cross paths. Even though I have a penis, it does not mean that it is a good thing for me to insert it into every vagina I encounter (mother, sister, etc.). Why? Because there is another functional explanation- incest is bad for a family, genes, etc.

My argument is that you only consider one kind of function, the one you are used to and comfortable with, but the idea that homosexuality itself in society could possibly serve a positive contribution to society eludes you. Maybe you think that a homosexual person can contribute to society in ways that a straight man would, and that is okay for you because in that regards he is no different than you, but you are not open to homosexuality itself as being something that is naturally occurring and meaningful in society.

Plus, people dont choose to be gay.

[Scared]

People like Matthew are scarrrry! People like Matthew (above) who think all gay people are degenerative are the same people we need to protect our state constitution from. People like Matthew want a theocracy based on their right wing nut point of view. Everyone should be scared, buy into Matthew's point of view and you are buying into the extremist of the extremist. Vote No on Prop 8, it will be a vote to keep the right wing nut jobs, like Matthew, out of your bed room.

[Al E]

AHh now there is a fundamental difference that seems to a basis for disagreement Josh. The "tales" you spoke of came from a book of non-fiction. I would call that more of an "account" than a "tale." You just don't accept or believe that the Bible is a historical reference of accounts, as well as being a guide as which one could live by.

Sexual preference is in the mind. That is something that was brought about to scientifically understand why someone would opt for a relationship with same sex. Prior to that statement, sexual preference was (and still is) genetic make up. The only section of people who I feel could truly be confused are hermaphrodites. Outside of that, if you're born with a penis you're a boy and you are to be with a girl someday. If you're born with a vagina, then you're a girl and you're to be with a boy someday.

Buuut whutever.

[josh]

"We live in the twilight zone. Period. Christians are the salt of the Earth. We preserve this place, otherwise God would send another flood and start from scratch"

Yes, I agree. Thats very twilight zone-ish. You would tell your kids these weird tales as being true but the exposure of a same sex couple is a threat to your lifestyle?

Your kids are going to hear about gay when they get to high school and I promise they wont hear about it in the context of two guys holding hands.

You talk about gays wanting equal rights as some kind of conspiracy. they want what is their birthright. Sexual preference is mostly in the mind anyhow what does it matter what gender they are born? AT the end of the day they are people just like yourself with the same desires and dreams, they arent trying to turn the world gay by making out in front of your kids at the mall or anything. We should protect these people's rights to have the same status as every other person. If a gay group tries to implement "gay science" like christians try to pull with creationism in grade school, thats a different story.

I think the safest thing to do in any society is protect the rights of ALL people. That doesnt mean that a child molestor has his rights protected to molest a child or the murderer has the right to murder because these take away the rights of others.
Your only "right" this threatens is your lifestyle, which is very subjective.
Two guys doing stuff on your lawn would be one thing, but that would carry for both straight and gay couples equally.

[Matthew]

Homosexuals (as domestic partners) already enjoy the same same rights, protections, and benefits as married couples.

"CALIFORNIA FAMILY CODE SECTION 297.5. (a) Registered domestic partners shall have the same rights, protections, and benefits, and shall be subject to the same responsibilities, obligations, and duties under law, whether they
derive from statutes, administrative regulations, court rules, government policies, common law, or any other provisions or sources of law, as are granted to and imposed upon spouses."

Opposing Proposition 8 is about trying to normalize degenerative behavior within our society -- it's not about rights, protections, and benefits

[Queen G]

Al E doth protest too much, methinks.

[Not Afraid]

Hy is trying to make people believe people will marry their dog. Come on, this is another way the religious right in this country wants to scare people. I'm not buying into the scare tactic that Prop 8 is a slippery slope. My dog might not acree with me though. ;)

[Al E]

The ultimate goal of the gay agenda is acceptance. Particularly at the government level. This way all these folks that are not for gay marriages, unions and lifestyle will eventually die off, but if they can gain more and more acceptance from government and have laws that exist in their favor, particularly children being "educated" that same sex relationships are "ok" and "normal', then they have a much better chance at future generations not having an issue with it. Teach an impressionable mind, and you're less likely to get flack about it later.

The post by Matthew is what I was referring to in my previous post. What rights are we really taking away?

No one finds it strange, the idea of having a child grow up in a household with two Dads, openly affectionate in front of their "children?" Then those same "parents" giving their son or daughter the explanation of how babies come and why his/her friend Timmy has a mommy and daddy and he/she has two daddy's.

And we know children are at a disadvantage without a father in the home, so a lesbian marriage with kids would basically be the equivalent of a single mother household with a live in Aunt.

We live in the twilight zone. Period. Christians are the salt of the Earth. We preserve this place, otherwise God would send another flood and start from scratch. This place is far too wicked. And yes, even some who call themselves Christians, or followers of Christ, or Christ-like, still manage to "F" up royally, providing ammunition for all those non-Christians to fire back at the Christian population as a whole.

Its funny because even though Christians don't believe in the same God as the Muslims, we can still tell the difference between an Islamic extremist (those that prefer Jihad, 5% Nation, Nation of Islam etc) and orthodox Muslims. Sadly, Christianity deals with the same kind of issue. Why? Because we're humans; imperfect beings. We get things wrong sometimes.

But the homosexual community would want to change the definition of fanatic to anyone who feels that homosexuality is wrong because their Bible, their spiritual guide to life, tells them so. That's pretty cold. Wait, so I'm a "fanatic" because I emphatically believe that what you are doing is wrong? And if it was so right it would have always been and we wouldn't even be having this discussion right now, because for some reason there are a whole bunch of things that are viewed majorly as right and wrong. The majority of the Earth's population would agree that killing another human being for sport or for spite is wrong. I don't think we have to even argue about that. And that's been the case probably since life began. But for some reason we cannot automatically make that judgment about same sex unions. You couldn't tell me that at the time of slavery, that the majority of the world's population would have agreed with Europeans and Americans for what they were doing with African exports. Europe and America were the super powers at the time so who really was going to stand up for the Africans? No one. That had to be fixed from within.

I had a gay teacher in school. A gay Jew. One of the funniest people I've ever met, and one of the most flamboyant also. I came to class everyday, learned from him and even talked with him about my craft. Heh, no worries. It was cool. But there was a respect there. Even though it was so apparently obvious he was gay, he didn't refer to it, rub it in my face, attempt to get me to rally with him, force any of his views on me etc, and my work included Christian themes. So I want to slap any homosexual that would dare call me a homophobe.

I make it a point to distance myself from those heterosexuals who openly cheat on their girl friends or spouses. I don't dig adultery. Outside of being a sin, it's blatant disrespect to the other party and speaks volumes as to their value in your life. Fornication? That's between you and God. Period. Happens far to often, usually consensual and people are rarely affected dramatically by the action unless they catch something or get pregnant.

I say all that to say I have no problems with gay individuals. I just don't like their lifestyle. And I will never like their lifestyle. Don't involve me with your lifestyle. Don't talk about your lifestyle and don't talk to my kids about your lifestyle. Period. Don't invade my child's programming. Don't start invading commercials targeting my kids. I'm grown. You don't have to worry about me. i can filter what I don't like or agree with, but they can't.

This country was founded on faith, and while we were imperfect, we were great. Over the years we have reduced the effect of faith on the country and yes we have gotten more rights out of the deal but we have also become less of a great country. Hatred is bad. I don't hate people. I do hate what people do. I don't hate the mass murderer. I don't like him, but I don't hate him. I do however hate the fact that he murdered. That disgusts me. Anyways, just more ranting from Al E.

[josh]

"homosexual acts have always contrvened natural law and eating lobster has not"

Then the bible has made it clear what is considered natural law?

Or is this just a way to reconcile a contradiction in your mind? You also can't say that it's "just obvious". you're relying on scripture. And if you're using scripture for your argument, you need to be clear how it is authoritative. Because of this "authority", you feel that it is right to make a law from it that affects people who dont believe in fairy tales.

I still want a good answer to how gay marriage is going to degrade society. Is it going to degrade it the same way that giving rights to blacks did? Or does it mean you have to dig a deeper suburban hole to hide from the world?

[Matthew]

Homosexuals already have the rights some claim they lack because they would not be able to get married.

Balderdash.

"CALIFORNIA FAMILY CODE SECTION 297.5. (a) Registered domestic partners shall have the same rights, protections, and benefits, and shall be subject to the same responsibilities, obligations, and duties under law, whether they
derive from statutes, administrative regulations, court rules, government policies, common law, or any other provisions or sources of law, as are granted to and imposed upon spouses."

[Matthew]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6zbpDe_QhS0 is VERY well done! Nice job.

[Matthew]

Poppycock!

I don't rely on myself to interpret the Bible. If I did I would be a Protestant or Jew and I am not. I am a Catholic Christian who relies on Sacred Tradition (not the mere disciplines or customs of man) and a 2000 year old Teaching Magisterium that dates back to the Apostles during Jesus' incarnate period.

Moral relativism driven by poorly formed consciences will never have me believing that just because it's 2008 that we should condone degenerate behavior. Nor will erroneous (wo)man-made interpretations of the Bible nor what some think America will accept.

I answer to a higher power -- God and His Son. I couldn't care less about the demands of popular culture.

Engaging in homosexual sex acts has ALWAYS contravened the Natural Law -- eating lobster does not. That's the difference.

[Hy]

What next? Will the government try to OK bigamy? If two people of the same sex can marry, why not 3 or 10 or 100?

How about marrying one's pet dog, cat or goldfish?

Where does the slippery slope stop?

Vote yes on Prop 8!

[Matthew]

Some people seem to think that faith/religion took the definition of the sacrament/belief of marriage from government and that it has no business now trying to keep government from changing the definition. That's backwards!

Government took the definition of the sacrament/belief of marriage from faith/religion and applied laws to it. It has no business in now trying to redefine what constitutes marriage.

This is God's territory not the government's. If the government wants to recognize marriage then it needs to based on the long-held tenets of faith and religion.

No, things are not different because it's 2008. A sin is still a sin.

[Holly]

Marriage is about more than just a relationship between two consenting adults: it is about the family which is created and the children which will eventually join it. Children are entitled to a mother and a father. No two women or two men can ever be an adequate substitute. Vote Yes on Prop 8 and protect the family.

[josh]

The video is something like this:
- gays in domestic partnerships already have the same rights as straight couples
- if gays are allowed to marry, then the court can favor certain acts that infringe on the rights of straight couples.
- this right Im guessing is to uphold traditional values.

"Gays in domestic partnerships have the same rights as straight couples" cant be right if you are changing their status and this is affecting a court ruling. Their status is different than a straight couple. This is false.

I think the crux of the argument is in "traditional values". Not a good place for an argument to go because traditional values can be defined differently from culture to culture. Cultures change over time. Whether you consider a changing culture progression or digression is subjective.

Is this really a threat to "traditional values"? In this day, with so much media and video games and interaction, its probably more practical to teach a child to become resilient and able to think critically than it is shelter them from ideas that are different and considered perverse. As long as there is no perverse sexual content in the material, I dont see any harm to the child other than an over-protective parent. Are you afraid that exposure to the idea of being gay is going to turn the child gay? I grew up around a gay uncle and he had a partner, it didnt affect me in my sexual preference.

I dont think this is a liberal thing, its about protecting existing rights that everyone is naturally entitled to. We need to mature as a culture and start finding creative solutions to our personal and social problems instead of blaming others and fearing gay dudes.

[Concernedincalifornia]

Couldn't say it any better than this. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6zbpDe_QhS0

www.whatisprop8.com

[josh]

Thank you Al E for not using words like "sin" in your arguments and I can see your concerns. Your argument encourages me to look at the issue a little deeper and I will try to look into it this week. It is usually always the case that these things take a little time to really get a grasp on because they are not as simple as they seem. My main concern is the denying of a right of another. So if providing a right to one person takes away a right of another, that is a different story. But if we define rights subjectively and loosely, then that can be troublesome too.
Its hard to say that the gays have a checklist too, and if they did, it shouldnt matter. There are going to be extremists in any community and they might continue to fight until their version of justice is met, but that is not important. Education and law should take care of those things ideally. Again, if an extremist creationist started to make a stink about the way biology is taught in school, there is a way the law or education handles this. The rights of the creationist should not impinge on the rights of others to properly learn science.
I think we have a system of law that can handle this.

As far as bestiality, wouldnt that be cruelty to animals? that might be different than two consenting adults getting married. But if a man wants to go ahead and have his genes crossed with a sheep and have a little sheep-man family...then call me a liberal Obama 08! kidding...

[Concerned]

Ultimately, Prop 8 aims to take a subset of society and to remove civil rights they currently have. This IS discrimination, plain and simple. You can disagree with the gay lifestyle and still recognize that taking away a community's existing civil rights is wrong. Please vote NO on Prop 8.

[No ON 8 - Fight for Freedom!!!]

Shame on you Matthew spreading more lies! It's very convenient for you to interpret the bible the way you want to and pass moral judgment on other people. The bible also condones slavery and the idea that woman are subservient to men. America does not accept these ideas! Where have you been for the last 200 hundred years!!! Shame on you Matthew, you clearly are part of the right wing zealots that want to take away the freedom this country stands for and has fought for, including separation of church and state. Shame on Matthew. Vote NO on 8!!!!

[Michael OBrien]

The Right Side of History -- I'm part of a straight couple who has been together thirteen years, plans on having children soon, and plans on being together the rest of our lives. What we do not plan to do is get married, or at least not until gay couples can marry everywhere in the country. I would rather not sound high-and-mighty or holier-than-thou, but as recently as forty years ago there were states in which it was illegal for a black person to marry a white person, and I believe that in forty more years it will seem just as incredible and appalling that at one time the law prohibited gay people from marrying one another. I am hoping that voters in California will get on the right side of history.

[Al E]

So wait, you all are telling me that Prop 8 is denying rights or a particular right? Maybe I need to do some research but I thought with these so called 'civil unions' homosexuals were being granted all of the rights and privileges of married couples sans the title. I'll look it up, but if anyone knows of any hard evidence that this is not the case please post it.

Also, are we to now say that it is normal and natural for a man and a man to be together and a woman and a woman to be together? A man and woman relationship is supposedly equivalent to a same sex relationship? And this is not a matter of sexual preference but a way of life? Is this what I'm hearing?

Now this may seem a bit ridiculous, but what isn't these days. What if (hypothetically speaking) as a result of a win on Prop 8 in favor of homosexuals that a person or group of people wanted to legalize bestiality nationwide? I mean according to folx these days, who is anyone to tell another who or what they can love and/or be intimate with? We're all mammals, humans just happen to be the most vocal and predatory bipedals on the Earth hence our supremacy.

Now, if all homosexuals would promise me that they would not ever in life attempt to be married in or at a church that doesn't agree with their lifestyle and if they did so and were denied, would not attempt to have the state interfere with that churches decision, and that all references to sexuality be left out of schools (hetero/homosexuality in social sciences), leaving it up to the parents to educate their children and not the state concerning human sexuality outside of what you would learn in health science (reproduction etc) then I just might say who cares and vote No on 8.

But something tells me that wouldn't be the case. The homosexual race (or is it community, who knows anymore) has an agenda and they will not stop until their checklist has been completed which basically encompasses the same kind of exposure in life and and in US history as African and Native Americans. And this is purely based on their sexual preference. We have never in the past reference the fact that certain individuals were heterosexual, but now we must go out of our way to indicate that this individual was the first homosexual to achieve this.

It's appalling. If you were to promise to leave my impressionable children alone and don't force feed any homosexual rhetoric into their minds, and steer clear of my church I would honestly say more power to you, do you. Get whatever you can get as far as your so called "rights go." Although this is really ridiculous. You're a human, you already have rights. If you're a lesbian, you're a woman, you have your rights. If you're a gay African American, the civil rights movement has past, your rights are here.

Wait, you're a black gay woman, and you're saying you can't do what exactly?

[Randy]

Well I believe with all this stuff about the Bible the real danger here is that somehow the Bible itself will be defined by some court or Govm't to mean XYZ. It is the Bible itself that provides freedom from the Govm't. Remember a higher authority than the Govm't. A higher morality. Everyone created equal under God. Without "God" the Bible etc and so on then we can believe and do as we please and who is to say it is right or wrong. Stalin, Mao had athiest Govm't. I think the athiests and non-believers should cut the Right Wing Bible Believeing Christians some slack and give them their morality or otherwise let's do like Stalin and Mao. I like the sexual orientation. Hey whats a sexual orientation anyway. Let's not put down child molesters after all they have a sexual preference. How about murderers, muggers and thieves they have preferences don't they. How dare anyone object to their preferences as they don't believe in the Bible or it's words so let them do their own thing simply because they don't believe. If there is no God or Judgement and you believe this then what's wrong with slavery. The Romans and might makes right is what you have to believe if you don't believe in the Bible and that is all you have to offer society as well. Bible believers have Jesus to offer society and the gift of eternal life to those that believe. Athiests have nothing to offer society except might makes right. Oh they also believe the Bible is just a bunch of stories so again the only thing left is might makes right just like the Romans and the reason Jesus had to come to change our philosophy.

[Matthew]

The books of the Bible are God's love letters to man. Be it the Gospel of John or one of Paul's Epistles they are all works written by man through the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. Thus they are all the inspired and inerrant word of God.

To suggest that Jesus Christ never condemned the practice of homosexuality because that condemnation does not appear in one of the four Gospels is false. That position does nothing but show abject ignorance of the Bible or a willingness to be disingenuous -- to mislead others.

God and His Son clearly teach against the abomination that is homosexuality.

[Matthew]

This has nothing to do about equality for gays and lesbians. That's already covered in the law (see below.) It's about forcing degenerate behavior on others and making it normative through the use of a handful of judges.

California has tried to re-define something that MILLIONS hold sacred -- some as a sacrament from God. I am happy to see Prop. 8 gaining momentum.

Vote "YES" on Proposition 8

"CALIFORNIA FAMILY CODE SECTION 297.5. (a) Registered domestic partners shall have the same rights, protections, and benefits, and shall be subject to the same responsibilities, obligations, and duties under law, whether they
derive from statutes, administrative regulations, court rules, government policies, common law, or any other provisions or sources of law, as are granted to and imposed upon spouses."

[Dave]

Having religeous beliefs is a good thing. Putting your beliefs into practice to do good things is wonderful.

But - using your religeous beliefs to justify denying equal rights to your fellow citizens is shameful and WRONG.

Even if your personal beliefs say that families should be one man and one woman, it is NOT christian behavior to do something that harms someone else's family. Prop 8 harms these families, and that includes the children in these families. It denies them equal rights in many, many ways. Do the right thing and vote NO on prop 8.

[Shame on you Susan spreading HATE!]

Shame on you Susan. Misleading the world about 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 which come from Paul not Jesus directly. NO ON 8, NO ON RIGHT WING HATE!

The meaning of this text, said to exclude homosexual people from the Kingdom of God, hinges on the meaning of two Greek Terms, `malakoi' and `arsenokotai.' Throughout history these terms have been translated variably (masturbatory, practicers of heterosexual anal sex, sodomites, catamites and the like). Suggested translations today still vary (morally loose, masturbators who waste their property, boys and their pederast partners, temple prostitutes serving men and women, gold-digging gay hustlers who pursue the elderly). No one really knows what these terms mean. There is no good reason to suppose they apply to consensual, respectful, homosexual acts per se, especially since such an interpretation would be in conflict with all the rest of the Bible.

Susan is the immoral one for writing this! NO ON 8, NO ON RIGHT WING HATE!

[cliff]

do we or do we not have seperation of church and state???

it seems everyonoe making an arguemnt FOR prop 8 is quoting the bible, wich makes the choice clear! it is NOt up to the state to uphold the bible. If you believe strongly against gay marraige, then you should be voting to keep gay marraige out of your church. wich I agree that every christian should have the right to do in regards to thier church as suported by our cosntitution to have freedom of religion..

If you set a presidence that church can change the rights of citizens, then be careful! Homosexuals have the freedom to thier own religion, and if theirs is agains hedrosexual marriage then they could very well make it illeagle for a man to marry a woman, as per the presidence set by prop 8.

[josh]

Al E-
That might make sense to someone if they are a christian and have it ingrained in their thinking that the world is coming to an end, we should repent, and take Jesus as our savior. From that perspective, it would seem like gay marriage is just another step downwards towards the apocalypse. And why try to do fight something that is inevitable, right?
This kind of propaganda has kept people from making good decisions for centuries.

As far as "it being more natural for a penis and vagina than a penis and an anus". That is true for reproduction and if you want to take that route, then you would also have to say that all sex without the direct intention of procreation is sinful, even amongst married couples.

And how do you know that gays dont have an important role in society? Its been suggested by some biologists that nature protected this attribute in species for the purpose of contributing to the community at large. And from my knowledge, it looks like gay people are pretty involved in contributing to their community. Gay neighborhoods are also usually pretty nice. It would also make sense given that not all parents of children survive, and some are pretty lousy parents. Gays would naturally fill this gap.

Plus, sex is 98% mental anyways.

A yes on proposition 8 would be denying a right to someone that is just as deserving as you. There is no difference between the love of two people of the same sex and two people of the opposite sex if you really look at it.

[RICKD]

TO AL E

"When a penis and an anus come together no life can ever occur."

You must be a biology teacher....

By the way, your president is a born-again Christian. Shall we ask the 600,000 or so dead Iraqi men, WOMEN AND CHILDREN(!) exactly what they think of the implementation of your and your president's "Judeo Christian beliefs"? (That's a rhetorical question by the way). Let's see, the Crusades, the Catholic church's wholesale slaughter of tens of thousands (hundreds of thousands? millions?), the extermination of the American Indian, on and on ad nauseum, all in the name of.....what was his name again? Whoever. He must be terribly proud of each and every one of you!!!!

[Ed]

I am disturbed by the rampant and unfettered use of religion to support a vote on Prop 8.

People...wake up! When priests set the law, you get a THEOCRACY. Even if people vote the priests will as their own, IT'S STILL A THEOCRACY.

Iran and Saudi Arabia are two great examples of theocracies. In those countries, the rule of law is religious authority. People there don't have a choice. They are subject to the will of their equivalent of the pope. Is that what we want here in America??

People. Understand, a vote for 8 is a vote to be like Iran. I, for one, am an American! I believe in Democracy. Religious authority should stay at church and in the home, not in a constitution! VOTE NO ON 8. PROTECT AMERICA FROM RELIGIOUS FIAT!

[RICKD]

"Do you (and Hollywood and the media) think we are a bunch of idiots (in addition to being bigots, hatemongerers and religious fanatics)?"

Uh, yeah, I do.

[RICKD]

If going to heaven necessitates eternal exposure to and living with the hatred, violence, and otherwise abject ignorance so desperately and completely perpetuated and disseminated by this country's christian community and if your god and savior share in this hatred, then I reject your offer of "salvation".

Is there anything I can do to hasten the "rapture"?

[Al E]

You know, this is sad. No one is looking at the transition. This country was founded on Judeo-Christian principals and beliefs. Our spiritual guide-book: the Bible and all contents within. It's on our money for goodness sake. But heh, this is the melting pot of the world. We have so many different beliefs now, that it won't be too long before we have as many different religions as India, if we're not already equals. So because of that, we have to put away with Judeo-Christian beliefs that permeate our society because if we don't then we're discriminating etc.

Well hey, over the years our great country has gotten more liberal. Things that were once taboo and shameful are now things to be proud of and wear on your sleeve. Having sex outside of marriage? No big deal. That's not a sin. Wait, I don't even believe in Christianity, so who cares. Adultery? Shame on you; get a divorce; get your share of goods and do it again, or just stay single and shack up with someone. Doesn't matter who knows. We're in a new day.

Movies like Saw, the Devil's Rejects and Final Destination are fun, and entertaining. Porn is no big deal anymore. Our society is releasing its ties to conservatism and uptight behavior for a more relaxed and accepting way of thinking.

Poverty in America is at its highest. Public schools are not equal from city to city, state to state. The economy sucks. We're at war for oil, losing million dollar investments (soldiers) by the handfuls for a product the America people make nothing off of and instead pay more for. Our currency has declined in value. We're hated and despised all over the world because our politicians, that we appoint shame on us, are hypocritical in their actions.

Our society is focused less on what's good for the people and more on what's good for the individual or the people who have. And they want to have more. Because when our great nation finally falls, like that of the Roman Empire or any other great empire of our past, all these people who have millions + will up and move to the new super power, and that country will welcome them with open arms, because money speaks volumes.

So I say, heh, I'm voting yes on prop 8 even though I feel we can't stop the decline of our country. Based on history its inevitable and it's becoming glaringly apparent as to how and/or why it's going to happen. I love this country for the freedoms it has or at least appears to have in comparison to other countries, but everything doesn't need to be "freed."

The only reason we can sit here and have this issue of legalizing homosexual marriage is because we've separated church and state, and want to remove church from the equation entirely. We want to take prayer out of schools, but we want to put same sex education in. LOL wow. That's one of the biggest slaps in the face to Christians, whose ancestors founded this nation. Granted they were far from perfect considering Native Americans and Africans but no one is and everyone has an opportunity to atone for their sins, granted they recognize and realize certain actions as sins.

Ya know, I'm a bit cynical. I don't think this country or the Earth can be saved. I sure some people in it can, but as a whole its going to hell in a hand basket. It'll be interesting if this thing doesn't pass, to see if homosexuals will try to get married in Churches that follow the Word of God and refuse to marry them because according to their (our) faith its a sin and an abomination. I just wonder if they would be spiteful enough to do such a thing.

*sigh* a penis was designed for a vagina. When the two come together another human being is the product. When a penis and an anus come together no life can ever occur. But hey we live in a world where you can go to a sperm bank and get artificially inseminated if you're a lesbian and have a surrogate mother receive your sperm if you're a gay male and both parties can always adopt. So hey who needs a penis in a vagina to keep the world populated, right?

We want to take the church out of the equation which means we want to take Christ out of the equation. Well in the absence of Christ the Devil takes root. And there are a whole lot of things that are just devilish and satanic about the way our society is.

Soo a homosexuals right to get married like a straight person is just one more notch on a long list of reasons why this country is in a downward spiral. Who are we to try and stop that? That's a rhetorical question by the way.

[Johan]

Mateo,

You said: "The gay culture, on the whole, is not about committed, monogomous relationships and you cannot blame the stright, conservatives for this reality."

If that's the case, then for what other purpose would we be asking for the equal recognition of our committed, monogamous relationships? That's what marriage is, and thousands of us have availed ourselves of the right since the Court's decision to uphold the state constitution back in May.

Also, since you're such an expert on the gay community, you've obviously taken much time to study it. Please feel free to share your research, with citations from papers published and studies conducted by your peers in the field.

Not that I expect you to provide any evidence to back up your bigotry. How presumptuous!

[mike]

"Say 'Yes to God'"? If you really want to say Yes to God, let's move to strike down the 13th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution which prohibits slavery. After all, slavery is allowable in the Bible!

Let's see how many african-american bible thumpers say Yes to God and jump on THAT bandwagon.

[mike]

"Say 'Yes to God'"? If you really want to say Yes to God, let's move to strike down the 13th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution which prohibits slavery. After all, slavery is allowable in the Bible!

Let's see how many african-american bible thumpers say Yes to God and jump on THAT bandwagon.

[Stephanie]

I may not believe in homosexuality but who are we to tell people how they should live their lives. What they do is between them and God, not the government.

I am quite sure that if you opened the closet of some of these high and mighty bible thumpers, you will find plenty of skeletons.

[josh]

"What Jesus does will be in accordance to God's will". You want to have a law based on what Jesus did. Jesus is one figure out of thousands in ancient stories. Why would you want to have laws based on this one figure? Couldnt I say that "whatever Ogun (Yoruban god) does is the will of god"?
Im not going to call you ignorant because that would excite your sense of martyrdom, but I am going to say that you are making a grave mistake in taking a literal translation of a spiritual work. If someone in our modern society started righteously asserting that Ogun is god and we must burn wood and sacrifice a goat on the third full moon of the year and all who didnt would face the wrath of Ogun because the script says, we would lock him up. Your assertion of Jesus being the only is just as far fetched.
You dont have to be religious to be morally coherent. In fact, taking religion in the literal way that you do skews moral coherency and logic. Religion can be a great propaganda tool when its used in this way.

I still want a good answer why gay marriage will degrade human society.

[Mateo]

You are blaming the straight conservatives for the promiscuity and the AIDS epidemic? What?

Hollywood and the media always try to portray this committed, monogomous gay couple. The public is refusing to buy off on this image being forced on us because we know it is not a true representation of the gay community. The gay culture, on the whole, is not about committed, monogomous relationships and you cannot blame the stright, conservatives for this reality.

Do you (and Hollywood and the media) think we are a bunch of idiots (in addition to being bigots, hatemongerers and religious fanatics)?

[Johan]

Susan,

How Christ-like is it to force your beliefs, by law, on people who do not share them?

How Christ-like is it to blindly accept the narrow interpretations of scripture given to you by others without digging deeper for truth?

How Christ-like is it of you to sit in judgement on two people in a loving and committed relationship simply because you fear what it is you think they do and you make no attempt to understand it?

If you support Prop 8 on religious grounds, you are applying your cultural understandings to an English translation of ancient Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic writings. Have you ever thought about the social, political, and economic changes that human civilization has experienced over just the last 100 years? Magnify that on a scale of 2000+ years, and focus in on a part of the world and a culture that is foreign to you, and you may begin to understand how much historical and cultural context is missing from the Biblical interpretations you've been given.

Its not my responsibility or my place to tell you how to interpret the scriptures behind our shared religious tradition (I too am a Christian, Susan...), nor would it be appropriate for either of us to condemn the other's faith. Instead, I urge you to study the matter, from a variety of different sources, with a variety of different viewpoints, using the intelligence that God clearly gifted you with. Come to a conclusion yourself, or keep an open mind, but please please please stop regurgitating arguments that were so clearly spoon fed to you by others.

[P J Evans]

I wish people would stop trying to tell God what to do.
I think that those who keep telling us that Jesus condemns [fill in blank] would read the commandments he gave - they're in the first four books of the New Testament, the ones they don't seem to have read - and try following them, instead of trying to make us follow the narrow, twisted views of their own churches.
(*Don't* tell us how much Jesus loves us, if you're also going to tell us we're condemned for not believing like you.)

[john]

It is unfortunately easy for me to believe there are still people out there who seem unable to live and exist in peace without foisting their moral dictates on others. ie. Osama bin Laden or the bigots in favor of Prop 8 which shouldn't even be an issue in this day and age.

[Patrick]

The chilling aspect of Proposition 8 isn't so much the part that denies a segment of our population equal rights, even if people disagree with them (think mixed race marriages in the 1950s), but it is enshrining religious beliefs into laws.

That's one of the things the Founding Fathers didn't want to see---well, people can make their own judgments about what they intended. If 90% of the churches are opposed to same-sex marriage, and 10% of the churches support it---why should, what is essentially a law violating people's religious freedom, be considered "good law?"

The anti-marriage/Prop 8 folks claim that the simplicity of the Constitutional Amendment means it's okay. "Only 14 words!" I can think of Laws we could write, that would be simple, and wrong. "No Blacks shall be allowed to vote in the State of California." Or "No marriage between mixed races shall be recognized in the State of California." Or "Marriages between people of different religions shall be void in the State of California."

It's easy to make a law against people you "ain't", and harder to stand up for a minority. Proposition 8 is BAD LAW and it's law driven by religious institutions to put into law their specific religious beliefs. (Mormon Church, Catholic Church, Evangelical churches.)

What's next? A law forbidding the working on Sunday? Laws forbidding the sale of alcohol? Laws forbidding the sale of books and literature condemning certain religions? Laws against the cartoon portrayal of religious figures?

Even if you disagree with homosexuality, people have to realize the ultimate unfairness of this Proposition. It's not law based on expanding rights, but on restricting them to a select group of people. Nice if you're that group of people, but not so nice if you're not.

Don't vote for this proposition thinking that real people and real families won't be affected. Don't vote for this proposition. Don't vote for Prop 8.

[lurch]

Gays have the exact same rights as heterosexuals. They can marry one person of the opposite sex. If the acid test to allow marriage is "love" than all kinds of inappropriate marriages must be allowed. Gay marriages cannot point to the long history of benefits to society that heterosexual marriages can. It is at best a social experiment with children caught in the middle. Not all forms of sexual expression are equivalent or worthy of societal approval.

[cctv]

What Jesus does will be in accordance to God's will. For God detests homosexuality, it is obvious and certain what Jesus will do. Homosexuality is a sin, a wickedness of men. Do not be deceived. Repent now and turn to Jesus while you still can.

[Eli]

Exodus 21:7-10 says men can sell their daughters into slavery

Clothing made of more than one type of fabric (e.g. nylon stockings) fare no better:

"Ye shall keep my statutes. Thou shalt not let thy cattle gender with a diverse kind: thou shalt not sow thy field with mingled seed: neither shall a garment mingled of linen and woollen come upon thee" (Leviticus 19:19).

Men aren't allowed to trim their beards or shave their heads (Leviticus 21:5)

"But all in the seas or in the rivers that do not have fins and scales, all that move in the water or any living thing which is in the water, they are an abomination to you." (Leviticus 11:10)

"They (shellfish) shall be an abomination to you; you shall not eat their flesh, but you shall regard their carcasses as an abomination." (Leviticus 11:11)

"Whatever in the water does not have fins or scales; that shall be an abomination to you." (Leviticus 11:12)

I know you all eat shellfish and ware poly-cotton blends. So do you really want to take the bible for its word?

[JJ Lewis]

I meant to say stood behind you not standed behind you haha
im ANGRY

[JJ Lewis]

First of all, let's not forget that churches said it was a sin for interracial couples to marry not that long ago. In fact, it was still illegal for blacks and whites to marry in 1998. YES I SAID 1998. I can't believe that a community who has been discriminated against in so many ways is now passing judgement and trying to make laws to ban marriage for someone who is different than they are. I am not a christian, muslim,jew, scientologist, mormon or anything of the like. I am however in favor of equal rights between all religions. Passing Proposition 8 because of religious beliefs is a violation against the constitution which was founded by people who were fleeing religious persecution. If we all had to live by laws that were decided on because of religious beliefs than all americans would be living by christian laws! Why should I have to live my life with less civil rights than african american christians who are voting yes on 8? And, when did the african american community decide it was ok to discriminate against the gay community? Does this then mean we should go back to segregation? Passing Proposition 8 is DEFINATELY a step back towards segregation! If I were African American or a Christian I would either vote NO or undecided on Proposition 8 because at least I could sleep at night knowing that some other fellowship wasn't creating a law against my civil rights just because I was different. WAKE UP PEOPLE! Proposition 8 is wrong and you should stand behind the gay community as they have stood behind you!

[josh]

Im wary of anyone who "knows" the will of god. Is this based on a literal interpretation of a writing 4000 years ago? Translated through a few different languages and cultures, subject to the whims of statesmen and clergy through history, and then interpreted by a person who "knows" the will of god? Tell me how marginalizing a group of people who did not choose their sexual orientation any more than you did secure family values? Im not sure I understand how gay marriage is going to degrade society. Could you please explain?

[J. Woode]

One person can not have a right that another person can not have.

[Billy Bob]

You're reading a translated, English version of Corinthians 6:9. If you were to stop taking passages at face value and consider the context behind said passages, you'd see that Sodom was no more about homosexuals than it was about male rapists who committed extreme sin. Example: Prison rape happens all the time...does that mean that rapists are homosexual?

Similarly, the Cor. 6:9 translations of the terms "malakoi" and "arsenokoitai" do not have a direct English equivalent, which is why it lead to a vague (and somewhat inaccurate) English translation into the word "homosexual". Perhaps a more correct term could be "perverse offender", but then again, such people aren't only homosexuals, are they?

If you decide that love is equivalent to sex, then you've already misunderstood.

[J. Woode]

One person may not have a right that another person can not have.

[aggie]

I think anyone with a brain sees the hypocrisy and twisted logic that goes into firing a priest because he is voting NO on prop 8 and then transferring, covering up and enabling hundreds of priests to molest innocent children. This type of "religion" is destructive, devisive and most of all, immoral. I would not be surprised if agnostics beome an entire voting block over the next two elections, because of these types of issues.

How do we "restore" marriage? Some things come to mind. Consume less and spend more time with the kids and spouse. Do not get married unless you do some deep soul searching about the awesome responsibility it is to start a family. Have an unrelenting committment to the well-being of spouse and children. Stop drinking, snorting, having affairs and watching porn on the internet. Help with laundry and the kids homework. Get a job. Admit mistakes and do something about them. Ok....the list is ndless. The 50% divorce rate, and the dysfunction is not the fault of gay folks....be honest.

[David Dement]

No on 8!

Why shouldn't gays have the opportunity to be as miserable as the rest of us?

[John D]

Really? Steve Lopez is against Prop 8? Now, THAT's news. Haven't read his report from the rallies yet, but he'll no doubt bring his usual sense of fairness and introspection to bear.

[Invariant Memory]

Re: 'Pastor Beverly Crawford of Bible Enrichment Fellowship International clarified that in supporting Prop. 8 she wasn't saying no to gays, but "yes to God"'

Uh-huh. I am reminded of how the KKK argued they were not anti-black, just pro-white. The Yes on 8 folks can dress up their hatred of gay people in all the religious homilies they want, but their bigotry is still there for all to see. Vote No on 8!

[Susan]

Jesus would remind people gently that fornication, adultery, homosexuality and bestiality are all condemned by God. I did not say that the people are condemned (they can stop doing their sins and ask forgiveness), just the wickedness that they are doing. Jesus would harken back to Sodom and Gomorrah, reminding us that one of the reasons that God rained down burning sulfur on those cities was because of rampant homosexuality (men even tried to force themselves on angels!) This is all in the Bible for ANYONE to read for themselves, so the question REALLY is: Do we want to obey God's will or do we not? The argument is not with Christians; it is obeying or disobeying God. Finally, note that 1 Corinthians 6:9 says that fornicators and homosexuals will not inherit the kingdom of God (unless they change their ways). Is anyone so rebellious to God's ways that--having been warned--they still choose do their sexual sins and choose a hellish future after death? God loves us, be He hates sin and will not bear with it indefinitely. He gives us time to change, but not forever. (All comments above are substantiated by God's word, in print for everyone to read.)

[Michael Gran]

I contend that the promiscuity and drug use in the gay community that led to the AIDS crisis of the 1980s and 1990s was caused in part by Christian society's inability to allow for shades of grey among those groups that it condemns.

If living is a committed relationship with a gay partner is equally as abhorrent as having uncommitted sex with multiple parners, there is no incentive to chose one over the other. If you will be hated either way, why not take the easy path?

Allowing for gay marriage, even if you believe it to be unbiblical and wrong, incentivizes monogamy in the gay community, reduces disease, increases stability, reduces drug use, and will make life better for all, Christians included.