Internet effort launched to repeal Prop. 8 and legalize gay marriage

A group called Love Honor Cherish launched an Internet-based effort today to collect enough signatures to place a measure repealing Prop. 8, the anti-gay marriage law, on the state ballot by next year.

The signature-gathering drive will use social networking tools such as Facebook and Twitter, organizers said in a statement.

“We’re taking names,” said John Henning, who is heading the SignForEquality.com effort launched to collect the signatures. "People throughout California can now help us win marriage back by the simple act of signing and collecting signatures.”

Prop. 8 was approved by California voters a year ago, reversing a California Supreme Court decision, which held that same-sex couples were guaranteed equal marriage rights under the state Constitution.

Love Honor Cherish, based in Los Angeles, has 150 days to gather approximately 1 million signatures. The signatures are due April 12, 2010.

-- Jessica Garrison

Use The Times' interactive map to track changes in rights for same sex couples in the U.S. since 2000

More breaking news in L.A. Now:

4.6 earthquake hits in San Bernardino County

New brush fire burning near San Juan Capistrano [Updated]

L.A. mayor and teachers union to compete for control of Jefferson High

L.A. County prosecutors to open 24-hour dog-fighting tip line and reward program

USC again has most foreign students, followed by NYU

Hollywood A-listers host bash for Jerry Brown

L.A. firefighters battling blaze in Sepulveda Pass

Janet Jackson: Doctor is 'responsible' for Michael Jackson's death

Medical marijuana groups threaten to sue if L.A. bans sales

Workday commuters ride Gold Line extension for first time

Comments

[Stop The Madness]

WE ALREADY VOTED ON THIS! The people signing this petition should have gotten out the vote last year! If this actually makes it to the ballot again next year and is rejected by the voters, THEN WHAT?? Will it sink in then?

[Matt]

Are you worried, "Stop the Madness," that perhaps voters will change their mind? It's been known to happen before.

Maybe if they hadn't been mislead by patently false Prop. 8 commercials, they wouldn't have voted for it in the first place.

Funny how the Prop 8 folks claimed it was all about "traditional values" but lied through their teeth to get people to vote for it. Didn't know lying to the public was a traditional value.

[Joe Mustich, JP]

Onward towards equality! It's time CA.

Cheers, Joe Mustich, Justice of the Peace,
Washington, Connecticut, USA

Congrats to all the couples coming to CT to wed from all across the country.
Kudos to CT.

Can I vote on your marriage too? (LOL)

And to the marriage police and sexually phobic, please find something else to do with your time, because life's just to short. Find love.

[Mark]

To "Stop The Madness: There is a legal right to bring this to a vote again, whether you like it or not. If the people against same-sex marriage want to keep it that way, they're going to have to vote on it again. Sorry, but that's how democracy works in California.

[Jere]

Are they expected to get enough signatures? How many people voted against Proposition 8? Are there any current polls about this issue? It would be interesting for the Times to put in a brief analysis on weather this is expected to succeed or not. I'm kind of curious why this info wasn't already included.

[Brian]

In response to "Stop The Madness":

I don't think the lack of equality will ever just "sink in". As long as there is inequality in the law, people will continue to fight. When do you think that will "sink in" for the majority of people who want to continue to deny equality to the minority?

[AnonLA]

That's the beauty of a DEMOCRACY, Mr./Ms. Madness. We the people can bring this to a vote however many times we can gather the signatures for it to qualify, and NO, we will not quit until marriage equality is the LAW.

[MichaelF]

@Stop the Madness, in CA there is a ballot initiative that allows for things to be voted on over and over again -- even things like civil rights and basic equality! Whether or not this is on the ballot in 2010 or 2012, you can be sure that you'll get a chance to voice your hatred again and again. I'm surprised you're not excited about your chance to "protect the children" once more.

[Richard Cortijo]

In reposnse to 'Stop The Madness'

Then we will go back to the voters in 2012 and 2014 and 2016 etc. if we have to, until our rights are respected and the MADNESS of begging the majority for the minoities rights is over.

Thank you

[Tom]

I'd LOVE to see someone hack the site and disseminate the names, home addresses, and telephone contact data for all of those who sign this on-line petition. Turnabout (and invasion of privacy) would be fair play. Remember, the self proclaimed "pro tolerance" side started it!

[Holly Star]

Enough already! Californians have voted on this twice, and you've lost at the California Supreme Court level in Strauss v. Horton.

The law is clear, the people's desires are clear, and even President Obama was clear on this subject. Stop whining and wasting everyone's time.

Try again in another 20 years if you feel so inclined.

[dave9]

Well, this is California where we have crazy initiative policies that allow this to happen. In the same way that Prop 8 was placed on the ballot, an opposing one can be done as well. Ping-pong.

[thomasAlex]

We will never rest till we are Equally Protected under law. We will continue to put it on the ballot, until it passes. And It will. Gay Marriage gains a %2 approval rate every year. Last year lost %52-%48, do the math. They tyranny of the majority has no right to take the rights away from a minority.

[JD]

So many other civil rights won by women, minorities, etc. took years and years to gain. The fight will not stop until Prop 8 is repealed. There were thousands of Americans just like "stop the madness" who couldn't handle the movement to abolish slavery, allow women & minorities to vote, interracial couples to marry, let people who weren't white sit & eat where they would like... The list goes on and on. We will prevail!

[Against Gay Marriage]

I agree w/ stop the madness. GET OVER IT. Marriage is between a MAN and a WOMAN!If it keeps on being pushed your only gonna tick people off and their gonna vote against gay marriage. LET IT GO!

[Against Gay Marriage]

I agree w/ stop the madness. GET OVER IT. Marriage is between a MAN and a WOMAN!If it keeps on being pushed your only gonna tick people off and their gonna vote against gay marriage. LET IT GO!

[hyhybt]

Once the wrong done last fall is undone, then you can stop putting it on the ballot.

You won't, of course, because only the winning side on *any* issue claims it should never be voted on again.

[Ron]

RIDICULOUS! We already voted on this! People - if you don't like the laws of California - pack up your stuff and move to Massachusetts. Stop trying to overthrow the majority and move on. You are like a bunch of spoiled little turds and if you don't get your way - you tantrum and try to make the World spin just for you.

If you are gay and happy with being gay - I accept that. And if California had voted to let you marry - I'd have accepted that too. But since you won't accept the decisions of the majority - you are the ones that are intolerant. Not me.

[Pete]

Keep the state out of the marriage game completely. Its obvious religion started marriage so let them keep it. States should give everyone civil unions.

[thomasAlex]

So shall we let people vote on Interracial Marriage?

[thomasAlex]

Prop 8 Votes

Approved Yes 6,838,107 52.3%
No 6,246,463 47.7%
Total votes 13,084,570 100.00%
Voter turnout 79.42%

[Dorothy]

I remember when my daughter used to do that, ask over and over and over and over and over and over, until I put my foot down. The only way advocates are going to get the message is if a vast majority of people, mostly those sitting on the sideline keeping silent, come out and close this door once and for all.

You were handed an olive branch, civil unions offered the same benefits as traditional marriage, but you didnt want it, that was your argument for same sex marriage in the first place.

Greed is going to be your demise.

[Zach]

Holly, maybe you missed that Obama spoke for traditional marriage, but against amendments like Prop 8 - imagine that, having values but not forcing them on others. Maybe you conveniently forgot that the people spoke with a shaky, 52% certain voice. Maybe you want this case closed because we both know "separate but equal" has never withstood the test of time.

"Try again in another 20 years?" No, justice delayed is justice denied. What a selfish, arrogant thing to say other people should wait for rights we enjoy.

[Jeffery P. segall]

For all you bigoted, right-winger, religious hypocrites who scream you lost the election: Why don't you remember that when it comes to PRESIDENT OBAMA?

GOING TO CHURCH NO MORE MAKES YOU A CHRISTIAN THAN STANDING IN A GARAGE MAKES YOU A CAR.

[thomasAlex]

@ Ron

"if you don't like the laws of California - pack up your stuff and move to Massachusetts."

Why just Massachusetts?
Gay Marriage is also legal in: CT, IA, NH, VT.

And Civil Unions/Domestic Partnerships in: CA, CO, DC, HI, ME, NJ, NV, OR, WA, WI.

Times are changing. Gay Marriage will be legal Nation wide in no more than 10 years.

[Zach]

"Get over it?" You mean like marriage equality opponents got over gay marriage by putting Prop 8 on the ballot to take the right from gay people? I don't recall them leaving for the heartland because they didn't like the laws of California - no, they brought inequality right to our Constitution.

To them, I say, YOU get over it. Marriage is a tradition older than most religions, it's existed in many forms and in this case, pertains to GOVERNMENT marriage. God said nothing about that, and maybe you enjoyed playing God with the vote last fall, but "get over" the fact that the vote doesn't empower only you. If you don't like how the word marriage is used, use your money to make the government stop using what you think is your word. So long as it uses it, though, it must use it equally for ALL people.

[thomasAlex]

@ Dorthy

I am sorry but you are misinformed. Civil Unions do NOT offer the same benefits as traditional marriage, not even close. Plus Civil Unions create Marriage segregation, separate is not Equal.

[Roy Vanderleelie]

Is it not interesting that the Christian fanatics are opposed to gay marriages, maybe they want to draw attention away from the fact that Jesus was hanging around with with 12 guys for many many years, makes you wonder. And how about the priests molesting choir and altar boys. What a bunch of Hippocrates.

[Brian Hong]

So many in the pro gay marriage movement can't even be "tolerant" to those who share differing views. Wow! Someone disagrees with you!

[JEFFERY P. SEGALL, RN]

"You were handed an olive branch, civil unions offered the same benefits as traditional marriage, but you didnt want it, that was your argument for same sex marriage in the first place.

Greed is going to be your demise.

Posted by: Dorothy | November 16, 2009 at 04:03 PM "

YOU LIE! Civil unions are NOT the same thing. Why don't straights want to share their 65% DIVORCE RATE???

[Vic Fera]

This is too funny! So if the gays win in 2010 we'll just put it back on the ballot again in 2011? Is this how it's going to be back and forth? For all of you who come pare this to racism as such, you are comparing apples to oranges. We don't have a problem with what you look like we have a problem with your behavior. We don't want it in our society and taught to our kids in media or at school. What parents would want this on their children? A bunch of selfish...

[Le Cen]

WE ALREADY VOTED, NO TO GAY MARRIAGE!!!!!!

[Leslie]

2000 Prop 22 and 61% against marriage equality
2008 Prop 8 and only 52% against marriage equality

2010 looks good for marriage equality.

Constitutional amendments for or against marriage equality can be placed on the ballot every year, if enough signatures are gathered.

It's the way popular democracy works. We can vote on the same thing over and over and over. One year married. One year not. One year married, the next year not.

Makes for some very creative life planning.

Prop 8 didn't make 36,000 married people suddenly "divorced" last year.

See you at the ballot box.

[Zach]

Some liken this to their children asking for something over and over again until they "put their foot down." Well, did your children used to go running to Dad when Mom said "no?" Well, that's what the marriage equality foes did when Momma Supreme Court said every should be allowed to marry, running over to Poppa Populace with Prop 8. Hypocrisy!

[jamesincalifornia]

EDITOR: Re: Use The Times' interactive map to track changes in tights for same sex couples in the U.S. since 2000.

I think you mean changes in rights, not tights.

[Malyssa Moran]

stop the madness many people choice to be gay as for all of us we all have equal right...if we have to vote again then we do whether people like it or not and if gay marriage is allowed then there's nothing we can do... all we can do is just respect our ones that made that decision

[The Claw]

Get over it. You lost.

You want to be treated like everyone else? Then act like everyone else. You lost. Move on.

[lbjack]

Of course Stop the Madness is right. And of course he's going to be called hateful and bigoted. I'm gay, and I know what this is about -- it's not about rights but about a loud, screeching subset of gays, who always fancied a wedding, with bride and groom, domestic role playing, feathering the nest and showers and all the trappings. For this they want to invade and redefine an institution that has been heterosexual since the beginning of history. They want if because they want it, and because they have no valid reason for getting it, they declare it a civil right, so consigning anyone who opposes it to the rubric of bigot.

No, I'm not self-hating, no I'm not a homophobic gay. I just know overreaching when I see it. I know what a scam the whole movement is. It's not the stupidity or the travesty of gay marriage that's so repugnant -- it's the rank dishonesty, illustrated beautifully by the hysterics who, after Prop 8 passed, held...die-ins!

How do I feel about the drama queens who just can't leave the stage when their act is over, when homosexuality has been decriminalized and everywhere there are domestic partnership laws? How do I feel about those who pout and stomp their feet when they don't get their way? Who call anyone opposed to gay marriage bigoted, homophobic or "conservative"? Not hate, only pity and contempt, and for the media who pander to them, only disgust.

[joe]

either way, this will all end soon. the case for gay marriage is already in federal court which means the Supreme Court will end this soon enough.

By the Way, six of the nine current justices are devout catholics so guess the outcome.

[Gilbert Rodriguez]

No matter how they twist and churn the truth God refers to their acts as an abomination. They chose their life style and the sanctity of marriage is not a right but a privilege bestowed on those living contrary to that life which they have chosen. To want to be married is hypocritical to their own beliefs that they wish to force on the majority of people. Live you life but do not force me or my country to sanctify it.

[Village person]

I strongly believe marriage should be between a MAN AND A WOMAN. Not a wanna be man or wanna be woman it's extremely distubing to see males ingage in kissing. if they wanna be gay they should kiss at home. If somebody chooses to be gay do you cochinadas at home.

[Tell it]

It's become very evident in this country, so let's just tell it like it is:
CHRISTIANS = HATERS
There, I said it. Now prove me wrong!!

[Michael A]

@ Jeffery P, I am not a right winger, I am not a republican, I am not a religious fanatic, I actually supported civil unions because I thought it leveled the playing field for the gay community to gain the access non gay people enjoyed.

But I am a little confused now, that it has become more than just access that the gay community wants, and seem to be more the term marriage that matters most.

If you want the right for healthcare, estate planning etc. you have that access coming, why is it so important to be considered married?

Interracial marriage is completely different, on traditional, religious, and moral grounds, two people of different races can not change who they are, even though some have paid good money to try it. But,

I know several so called gay people that changed their tune, when the curiosity was over, or the fad changed, and they simply chose not to ride the wave anymore.

If you want people to respect your cause, you have to respect theirs as well. I could not force you to accept me, anymore than You could force me to accept you. The more either of us push, the more resentment will transpire.

Think about it: How much does equal rights mean to you? And, is it worth sacrificing the term marriage?

[tom Bates]

8 won! U lost! 2 Bad!
Back in the closet!!!

[Marcus]

Welcome to the lovely back-and-forth we're going to have for the next decade until the US Supreme Court finally gives gay people their damn rights, the same way they had to do for women and racial minorities.

Newsflash: When the issue of women's suffrage came up, that got voted down initially. Measures to desegregate schools? Same result when put to public vote. It took court rulings to beat it into people that bigotry is bullshit.

[Ifticar]

With the conservative backlash against the deficit and jobs, the November 2010 election is probably not a good time to try this again. The Conservatives will show up at the polls in record numbers while the liberals are most likely to stay at home.

[Holly Star]

Obviously your definition of "justice" does not match mine.

No father ever stared through that hospital window at his baby and thought "Gee, I hope my child is gay". They know their life will be more complicated.

That doesn't mean the child won't be loved or be loved.

But marriage is something special reserved for heterosexuals for thousands of years, hopefully planning on having and raising their children of their own. The survival of the human race is dependant on it.

Yes, you are trying to take something away from heterosexuals by redefining the term- and you know it.

We live in a culture now where anyone using the word "No" is instantly chastised, even if they're correct in doing so.

You can't be a parent without frequent use of the word "No", by the way. Think of it in the "No, you cannot hit your sister" context.

Now before you start mocking me with your "1950's thinking, how everyone else but you is a liar, bigoted, right wing, homophobic" name calling vitriol, consider who may be the real bigot here.

Just because you're angry doesn't make you right. Whether you get 48 or 51 percent of the vote in the future does not legitimize your effort in many people's minds.

[RJ]

For all of those here who are anti-gay marriage, do you forget that you are talking about the rights, benefits, and protections needed for others to avoid financial and emotional devastation in their lives, relationships, and families?

"Traditional" marriage is a crock. In no way will making same-gender marriage legal is heterosexual marriage impacted. In fact, by making marriage more inclusive, you are making it more special by removing from law unethical policies that encourage apartheid ("separate, but equal" is, after all, a form of apartheid law).

You are here and you are very outspoken. Your opinion regarding what you feel to be prim and proper is valid as your opinion, but the moment you let said opinion impact the lives of others is the moment you subject yourself to immorality.

To be immoral, one must commit an act that intentionally subtracts from the well being of another individual.

You are not voting on protecting "traditional" marriage. You are voting on the lives and well beings of other people who do not impact you whatsoever.

There is no reason whatsoever to believe that same-gender marriage has an adverse and direct negative impact on society. There is no credible evidence, whatsoever, that it does. In fact, just the opposite has been observed already in states that have extended civil marriage benefits and protections to same-gender couples and their families.

So, I say to you, please, please, please do not vote on the value and worth of my life or my relationship. If you'd like to see the consequences of your actions by subjecting a minority of peoples to mob rule, I suggest you watch the trailer for "The Mormon Proposition". If you do not see the emotional and financial devastation you are inspiring here, or you see it and are not moved by it, you are either blind or heartless.

Separate but equal is unethical. It is apartheid. It is a losing argument and rendered a minority group of people segregated and second-class. It will lose out in the next decade and we will become a more inclusive, more caring, more liberated, and more worthy country.

[SenSen]

LIFE
LIBERTY
& THE PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS

Republicans clearly don't believe in it, and are collectivists who think that third persons can interfiere in other people's willing, in mutual consent, transactions.

[SenSen]

Funny how republicanoconservatives constnatly complain about "communism" and then talk about "will of the people".

With the same logic, it would simply take a lot of people to vote for it, in order to institute Burgas. With the same logic, a mob could vote Google's assets (or anyone's house) theirs.

This is EXACTLY how communism works. Tyrrany by the majority. Don't forget to designate and a new "inferior" class to kick around.

LIBERTY overides "people's will". That had always been so because "people" have no qualms ripping the lives of others if it gives them a kick.

[Zach]

Michael, it's no surprise that some people can choose between men and women - they're called "bisexuals," and they've been around as long as both homosexuals and heterosexuals, and they're apples to oranges to pears.

Equal rights mean everything in this country, far more than tradition for its own sake. Equal rights does not include the "right" to deny others their rights by popular vote, or the right to have your belief enshrined in law even if you believe it's unchangable or divine. That's not just having a belief, which is your right, it's demanding it be accepted and enforced. In fact, which is really forcing acceptance, saying "Gay people should be allowed to marry who they love," or "Gay people should change who they love to be allowed to marry as we choose?" I only hear one of those forcing anyone to do anything.

Gays were able to marry half a year before Prop 8 passed. When marriage was "sacrificed" at that time, what did it lose? What did Prop 8 restore? And how do you figure that separate-but-equal status is a "level playing field," where actually having the same right is "more than just access?" Since when is the same "more?"

[thomasAlex]

Prop 8 Votes

Approved Yes 6,838,107 52.3%
No 6,246,463 47.7%

Total votes 13,084,570 100.00%
Voter turnout 79.42%

A loss of 591,644 votes.

With a Statistical increase of %2 approval of Gay Marriage each year, the outcome is obvious.

[thomasAlex]

@ The Claw

Tell that to the Blacks, when Interracial Marriage was banned. They lost, they should have moved on.

[ryu]

I would happy with civil unions as Long as ALL MARRIAGE ARE CIVIL UNIONS IN A MATTER OF LAW AND LEAVE MARRIAGE A RELIGIOUS SYMBOLIC CEREMONY.

[ryu]

Prop 8 will end being like Prop 187 or Amdnement 2 in Colorado. Amendment 2 spurred the Romer v. Evans case. Which Justice Kennedy wrote the Majority opinion on it. Basically you guys know you'll lose in the end. Like all the other groups who demand equal rights end up getting it.

[Booyah]

Is the existence of separate bathrooms for males and females in public places "apartheid" or "an unfair separate-but-equal institution"?

[Zach]

Take it to the Supreme Court and find out. Unlike the marriage situation, though, I doubt you'll find using a men's room gets you numerous benefits not afforded those who use the women's room.

[Stop The Madness]

lbjack, you rock! I'm sure your comments have garnered you no favor in the gay community, but I'm glad you had the courage to speak up. My original post said nothing about being anti-gay, and I didn't thump the Bible. My issue is with the abuse of the democratic process!! We've decided as a nation that when we take a vote, whoever gets the most votes wins. If it's really close, we do a recount just to make sure.

Both sides had the opportunity to sway hearts and minds before the election took place. The Mormons should not be blamed for Prop 8's passage. All I recall is seeing from the opposition is a bunch of 30 second spots with celebrities telling us to vote no. We all know that it's going to take a lot more than that to sway a lot of people's views of gay marriage in this country. What the gay community is doing NOW should have been done BACK THEN! How can anyone possibly disagree with that statement?

In any election, one side wins, and the other does not. It is an abuse of the process to ask the electorate what they think, and then be outraged when the vote doesn't go your way. Enough with the "I didn't ask for my rights to be voted on"...I have my opinion as to whether marriage is a "right", but that's another discussion. The fact is, the issue WAS placed on a ballot for everyone to vote on.

It is insulting and childish to insist on placing the same exact issue on the ballot yet again, for the exact same population to vote on. Particularly for this hot-button issue, you have folks that are clearly NOT going to be swayed, so it's time to push it up to some legislative body or another to make the decision, and we'll all have to live with it. But do NOT let the "drama queens" (lbjack's words, not mine) waste everyone's time and money with putting this on the ballot again. Prop 8 supporters will NOT sway people to vote a different way by doing this. All I'm saying is, approach the gay marriage issue from another avenue if you please, but the proposition thing has been DONE!

Albert Einstein said it best; "Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results".

[thomasAlex]

The outcome of the 2 major lawsuits could make Gay Marriage legal nationwide in 5 year or less. It's not a matter of IF, but WHEN.

@ Gilbert Rodriguez
Stop shoving your belief in god down our throats! Your beliefs are NO better than the other 4300 religious beliefs in the World. Separation of Church and State, with Equal Protection under law.

"They chose their life style and the sanctity of marriage is not a right but a privilege bestowed on those living contrary to that life which they have chosen."

Homosexuality is not a Choice, APA has already ruled that. As well as Heterosexuality is not a choice. If Marriage is a privilege, then how is Interracial Marriage allowed? The christian god forbid mixing of races.

[Booyah]

"Unlike the marriage situation, though, I doubt you'll find using a men's room gets you numerous benefits not afforded those who use the women's room."

Interestingly, women tell me otherwise, but anyhow... In CA, what does marriage give you that a civil union doesn't besides an opportunity to thumb one's nose at a moral establishment that thinks homosexuality is wrong?

[Zach]

Madness, people can disagree with your conclusions because your conclusions are not well-informed. You say, "We've decided as a nation that when we take a vote, whoever gets the most votes wins." This is false, the voters do not and never have had the final word on laws, only elections. Laws are made and changed all the time at many levels of govenrment because ththe US has never been a pure democracy. You say, "It is an abuse of the process to ask the electorate what they think, and then be outraged when the vote doesn't go your way," obviously ignorant of the fact that the gay marriage was legal and it was the antis who insisted on a vote. You seem just as unaware that the courts ruled half a century ago that marriage was a right, and believe it or not, that has more legal importance that your opinion.

Booyah, no one gives a rat's hinder about "the moral establishment." Various states offer varying levels of marriage lite alternatives, and while California may offer a better one, some have none at all. Yet, even in California, with DOMA in place certain benefits are still denied gay couples, and that is inequality under the law. A couple just sued over that here and won, if you've been keeping up on the news.

[Stop The Madness]

"What the gay community is doing NOW should have been done BACK THEN!"

"It is insulting and childish to insist on placing the same exact issue on the ballot yet again, for the exact same population to vote on."

Zach, thanks for your condescending clarification (which I disagree with wholeheartedly), but the two issues above are simply irrefutable. Which is, I suppose, why you didn't address them...

So we'll agree to disagree, and I'll see y'all at the ballot boxes next year.

[Zach]

Madness, I made fact-based rebuttals to your arguments, if you "disagree wholeheartedly" then show me the evidence that makes you right. I'm so tired of the opinionated intellectual reletivity so popular today. You don't get to have your own set of facts, you can only choose to disbelieve or ignore THE facts.

If you really want to press those two statements, they're opinions at best. People (not just gay people, remember 48% of CA opposed 8) couldn't very well have pushed for a repeal of 8 "THEN," before it passed. If you meant they should have done more, well, the outcome makes that obvious. So what? They'll do so now, and that's the open exchange of the democratic process - if you think that's "childish" that's your opinion. Mine is that passing a law to make sure everyone uses a word the same way you do is "childish," and what it does to our Constitution is dangerous.

I've got a lot of ballot boxes ahead of me, so I'll see you there, at least until our courts man up and do the job our founding fathers gave them, enforcing the principles those men gave us.

[Mireya Wathen-Mayorga]

Who are we to tell people they cant marry the one they love and want to spend the rest of their lives with? I'm only 16 years old , and it seems that i have more knowledge and understanding about gay marriage then people in their 40's, 50's, and 60's. Why do you care who other people marry, are you really that insecure with your self. Oh well, one day this ballot will be approved, and hopefully that day will come soon. Bless the group Love Honor Cherish, keep on moving forward and dont loose motivation. You guys can achieve whatever you believe.

[Sean]

If Gay marriage gets legalized, what's to stop Man Boy Associations from demanding rights to marry? What about Man and his Horse? Or Man and his virtual girlfriend? Soon it will spill out into rights to "Free Speech" to curse. Next day, it will be the right to walk naked! How about our kids being encouraged to explore their "sexuality" and offered condoms in public schools yet they can't bring a single aspirin on campus?

I'm all for civil unions which provides ALL the benefits of marriage except for only one thing, legitimacy of their relationship with their same sex partner not only with society, but with God.