Top of the Ticket

Political commentary from Andrew Malcolm

« Previous Post | Top of the Ticket Home | Next Post »

Jeff Kent opens his checkbook and takes a stand against gay marriage

Jeff Kent, who played second base for the Los Angeles Dodgers this season, has stepped into the emotional world of same-sex marriage, giving $15,000 to backers of the California proposition on Tuesday's ballot that would ban it.

In a disclosure filed with the California secretary of state, Kent listed his occupation as professional baseball player for the Dodgers and his address as Austin, Texas. He gave the $15,000 in a transaction dated Monday but which only now is public.Jeff_kent

Proposition 8 would ban same-sex marriage by imposing a California constitutional amendment that would define marriage as being between one man and one woman.

With both sides spending upward of $30 million each, the measure has become the most costly ballot measure ever dealing with a social issue, and the spending is by far the most for any proposition anywhere in the country this year.

Kent, a free agent who is considering retiring, is a potential Hall of Famer who is best known for his years with the San Francisco Giants. A Bellflower native, Kent also played baseball at University of California, Berkeley.

A review of campaign records shows no other donations to federal or California state campaigns by Kent.

Frank Schubert, managing the Yes-on-8 campaign, said he was unaware that Kent had weighed in.

"He has had a stellar career and will no doubt one day be inducted into the Baseball Hall of Fame," Schubert said. "I wish the Giants had kept Kent and traded [Barry] Bonds."

--Dan Morain

Comments () | Archives (51)

The comments to this entry are closed.

Dear Mr. Kent,

I am a dedicated Dodgers fan and I have admired your career.

I am also engaged to marry my fiancé and I am hoping and praying that California voters will defeat this awful discriminatory amendment, so we can enjoy the rights and responsibilities that come with marriage.

Your donation is a direct slap in the face to the thousands of LGBT Dodgers fans who support you each season. I am deeply saddened that you have chosen to spend so much money to make sure that my family will never enjoy equality.

Homosexuals already have the right to marry per the proper definition. The definition of marriage is opposite-sex unions (one man and one woman).

Under this definition, a homosexual male, like a heterosexual male, already has the right to marry a member of the opposite sex. Similarly, a homosexual woman, like a heterosexual woman, already has the right to marry a member of the opposite sex.

No homosexual will ever be denied a marriage license for marrying a member of the opposite sex. Therefore, there is no denial of a fundamental right to marry.

The disingenuous claim that homosexuals are being denied a fundamental right to marry is a bait-and-switch tactic. First, they argue (rightly) that marriage is a fundamental right. Second, they silently rely upon their own wrongful presupposition, namely that the definition of marriage already includes same-sex unions. Thirdly, and finally, they (incorrectly) conclude that they are denied the fundamental right to marry, but they never state explicitly what the definition of marriage actually is!

The bottom line here is that the homosexual lobby is attempting to CHANGE THE DEFINITION of marriage to include same-sex criteria. It knows that without the definition being changed, it cannot logically claim that it is being denied the fundamental right to marry.

It is the homosexual who should change his tune rather than imposing his perverted definition of "marriage" on the rest of Californians.

Dear Reed,

Your ignorance of sexual oreintation is severly misguided. If you could understand the concept that being gay is not a choice but a genetic predisposition you might think differently.

Many gay people have chosen to marry people of the opposite sex (usually out of fear and confusion) with often disasterous results that rip apart families. But if that is what you truly believe and wish that gay people should marry people of the opposit sex, I hope your daughter,grandaughter or son,grandson find a lovely gay person to settle down with. Wishing you all the best!


Regardless of what Prop 8 supporters say it does in fact take away rights like:
1. Pension plan survivor benefits
2. Guaranteed leave when a family member is ill
3. Long-term care insurance for public employees
4. Tax exemption of inheritance
5. Spousal veteran benefits
6. Ability to not testify against spouse
7. Property tax and home value can be reassessed after death of spouse (meaning taxes can skyrocket)
8. Tax exemption of assets over $11,000 between spouses
9. Shared property
10. Marriage

great donation jeff kent

i admired you alot as a player and now standing in and been a man of your ideas is a good thing to see you make this donation and make your donation that they can stop this marraiges.

great to see that you had a good concept of the word on marriage keep on the good work kent and please come back for another season with the dodgers alot of us are very happy and proud to see one of our players step in, in this issue and been in the right side in this thing

god bless you jeff kent

Prop 8 does not disavow homosexuals of any rights. Domestic partners are granted equal right to married couples in california. It does define marriage as between man and woman and that is the issue. The definition of marriage. If the definition of Marriage is M/F then there is no right being denied. If the definition is MM or FF, then there is a right being denied, only one right, the right to Marry.

It's ironic that religious fundamentalists oppose premarital sex and cohabitation among heterosexuals while insisting that same-sex relationships take place outside marriage.

Anyway, hetero couples need not fear: they'll still be able to marry if Prop. 8 fails. My wife, Carolyn, and I are voting against it.

I am friends with another Dodger player...he lives next to my brother in Manhattan Beach....My brother was a fan of Jeff Kent until he heard this last night. My bro, supports me and now thinks, Jeff Kent is an a-hole..he talked to his neighbor, name I will not mention and he and other players or not happy with him doing this....and I am personally pissed and will not go to anymore Dodger bro and his company have a box...he is the owner of company and will cancel box ...unless the Dodgers and or he changes his bad decision and gives 15K or more to in Support of NO on in the world could be spend his $ on such a hateful way....Guess, I will become a Lakers Fan!! No on 8!

Good for Jeff Kent. I wish more public figures in this area were less intimidated by "Hollywood" and its radical ideas and would support traditional marriage and family. Proposition 8 does not excluded same-sex couples from any rights they had under domestic partnership laws in California. Proposition 8 does only one thing--it keeps the meaning of marriage from being redefined.

Good job Jeff.
Support the cause.
Vote YES on 8.

so much ignorance and stupidity here, so little time. Who says marriage is only valid if between a man and woman. Your church? If that's the case then get out of here-keep your religion out of my rights, like you want me to keep my libeeral ideas away from you. States have no business in sanctioning marriage-they have no business deciding who can marry. States should only promote civil unions, for all, and let churches, synagogues, mosques decide if they want to limit marriage to man/woman. And hey, you straight married people, wtf are you afraidof? how does this demean your scared committment. not one bit, y'all are just a bunc of insecure fraidy cats. Boo!

Jeff Kent is unAmerican. Doesn't understand what freedom is. Doesn't get "liberty and justice for all." Clueless when it comes to "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." Completely ignorant, apparently, of the First Amendment freedoms of religion and association--which apply to ALL Americans. Unaware, it seems, of the Fourteenth Amendment guarantee of equal protection under the law for ALL citizens.

Jeff Kent is unAmerican.

another cool move from the self proclaimed "leader" of the dodgers. jeff kent is baseball's biggest hero since john rocker. vote against prop #12!

Jeff Kent has inspired me to give to the No on 8 campaign, and to encourage all my friends to do the same. If someone who lives in Texas thinks he's going to help institutionalize discrimination against my fellow Californians just because he's scared of married gay people, he's dead wrong. Many of us have friends, family members, co-workers, hell, even enemies, who are homosexual. They're all just as human as me and my boyfriend, and they deserve to choose the rights that come along with a state-sanctioned marriage, just like we do. So thanks for the kick in the pants, Jeff.

Kent wrote a check, he didn't take a courageous stand. Because of disclosure laws we know he gave money, even the Yes on 8 people had no idea!

Kent suggests Vin Scully (Vin Scully!) isn't a real Dodger and financially supports a bigoted cause. Last year he acted like a jerk to his teammates, and then at the end of the season attacked them for some reason. Way to stay classy!

The way he played this year, Kent should donate all his money. And for those of you who haven't noticed, Hollywood's "radical ideas", like supporting gay marriage, only seem radical now, much like allowing women to vote, allowing marriage between the races and voting in a black president seemed ages ago.

a bigot is a bigot is a bigot. no way to warm-and-fuzzy it, people.

I am a big Dodgers fan and I think it is great that Jeff Kent did this. Jeff is a future Hall of Famer and a true professional on and off the field. Despite what others have written on this blog, who probably have no idea how to play the game, anyone who actually watched him play would know that despite it not being his best season, Jeff made as much good, consistent contact with the ball than any other Dodger except for Manny and maybe Ethier. The guy can just flat out hit when healthy.

Anyway, it seems like everyone in the spotlight these days wants to be Politically Correct. It is nice to see guys like Jeff who are willing to stand by their convictions.

Good Luck, Jeff, no matter what you decide to do next season.

Dear Rick Knee,
"It's ironic that religious fundamentalists oppose premarital sex and cohabitation among heterosexuals while insisting that same-sex relationships take place outside marriage."

Where do you get the Idea that fundamentalists insist that same-sex relationships take place outside marriage. Same sex relations should never happen. Just because something feels good does not mean it is ok. God ordained marriage between a man and a women. Even if you don't beleive in God the when you look at the natural order of things, the fundamentals of a society begins with the family. How else would society prosper if it not for a strong family, which begins with a strong bond, or marriage between a man and a women. If you change the true definition of marriage to include man and man or women and women, does that mean you need to include a mother and a son, or father and son, or man and his 5 wives, or man and his dog. Where does it end? Domestic partners get the same benefits in california as married couples do. And if you change the definition of marriage to include same sex couples, then they will force their view on those that know that homosexuality is a sin. I know that will happen because they already do. If somestands up and says homosexuality is wrong and is a sin, they protest and try to force an apology. People are not born homosexual, that is a lie, it is a decision they make to follow their feelings. There is no homosexual gene. Who started it all by saying people are born homosexual, them. A society is destroyed when the core fundamentals of it are destroyed, which begins with the family, which begins with the marriage between a man and a women. And this nation was built on strong family values and Biblical views. Thats why this country has prospered. But since this nation been moving away from that strong foundation, it has been in decline.

Eric, you painfully forget to mention the thousands of same-sex FAMILIES in this state. There are thousands of same-sex couples raising children in California. Denying them the right to marry seems to be in direct opposition to your desires to create strong family bonds.

Where does it end? It ends with the simple proposition that marriage shall be between two consenting people. Proposition 8 doesn't allow marriages between three people. It doesn't allow marriages between men and animals. It's simply changing one rule, just as we did when we allowed mixed-race couples to get married. Nothing "fundamental" is changed.

If nobody is born a homosexual, it's frightening why anyone would choose to become one, given the bigotry gays and lesbians face every day.

Vote No on 8.

The argument that denying same-sex couples the right to marry protects "traditional" marriage is simply asinine. Marriage has throughout history changed within the context of social mores. For hundreds of years, "traditional" marriage meant that women were property of their husbands (ask any lawyer). Women could not hold jobs without their husband's permission, could not own property, could not gain custody of children, nor could they refuse in bed. But thankfully, around 1850, that view of "traditional" marriage began to change. Anyone who votes Yes on 8 to protect "traditional" marriage is really voting to once again make women property of their husbands. But maybe that is what the ignorant misogynists really want.

Discrimination hid behind a book of fairy tales is still discrimination nonetheless. NO on 8!

I don't live in California, but have been a Dodger fan for as long as I can remember, and have always admired Jeff Kent as one of the stellar players contributing to the Dodger success of late.

The news of this contribution deeply saddens me as I am one of the many Dodger fans who are also part of the GLBT community. Proposition 8 is pure discrimination. Why should Jeff Kent care about my ability to marry the person I love? I'm not against his right to marry, so why should he be against mine?

I don't fault Mr. Kent for his personal views and believe he is entitled to those, but I am dismayed at how he clearly has no regard for a significant fan base. I'll think twice about the next Dodger ticket I buy, and I hope the Dodger organization recognizes that this is very negative PR.

Another homophobic bigot in the sports world. Is anyone really suprised?

Vote NO on 8!

Jeff's homophobic attitudes are way out of date.

He's insecure, superior-acting, brittle, angry and arrogant. I, for one, am glad the Dodgers are done with him. As far as I'm concerned, the state of Texas can have him.

Go Blue in 09! Come back, Manny!

Are we all that surprised that a ball player said something dumb? We have a saying in Detroit....Remember the Sheff....

But that's still a shame. Saying something ignorant is one thing, politcally supporting it when millions of children look to you for guidance is another.


Unbelieveable!!! Now I Know Why Everyone Hates Him.
I Actually Cheered For Him This Season Even Though Everyone Said He Is One Of The Most Selfish Baseball Players EVER.
Im Just Hope He Doesnt Play With The Dodgers Next Year or I'll Boooo Him every Time He Comes To The Plate.

The problems arise not from some "perverted view of marriage" by das dumkopf Reed Huestis, rather it's from the "official" discrimination levied upon same sex couples by laws regarding end of life/dying loved one/spousal privilege/etc., where the denial of "fundamental rights" comes into play. Anyone same or opposite sex who has taken care of a loved one particularly during a devastating terminal illness deserves the same consideration, that's basic human compassion. Anyone with half a brain, something I seriously question in messer reed's case, can understand that argument in favor of same sex unions. If you want to live in a religious theocracy reed, I'm pretty sure one exists in Iran along with some of the other stone age reasoning you employ, so feel free to immigrate there and good luck with imposing your will and mindset there. One thing I notice about people who think and talk like reed, they're pretty quick to legislate morality when it comes to their beliefs and opinions but even quicker to scream about the growth of big government and that the government shouldn't be legislating morality when it's something they don't agree with. Your sophistic argument is pathetic reed.

Mike, why do you capitalize the first letter of each word in your post? That's all wrong!

I think I understand the argument here... Gays and gay sympathizers can't understand why the morally conservative and religious groups are vigorously opposed to a bill that would promote monogamy among the gay population while treating gays, lesbians, etc. with one more right accorded to the straight population.

The morally conservative and religious groups are disgusted by homosexuals and feel like marriage acknowledges them as equal citizens, while their various religious texts abhor the homosexual lifestyle.

My personal feelings lie in line with the above poster who likened homosexual marriage to interracial marriage, but that's still a very extreme position to take, as the interracial marriage issue extended to human rights being denied to people on the basis of their skin color and this merely prevents people who can exercise all their rights from describing themselves as married. The fact of the matter is, marriage is a legal and religious union, held in extremely high regard by almost every culture on earth, across the board. The rite is different all around the world and the respective cultures usually seem willing to fight and die for their concept of marriage to continue.

In America, for example, we won't allow fathers to marry their daughters, brothers to marry their sisters, or men to marry more than one woman at a time, and up until recently, we haven't allowed men to marry men, or women to marry women. It's just been a fundamental notion of an ancient religious ceremony.

As an atheist, never having spent any time in a church, I don't really care about the religious ramifications of marriage. Frankly, if all those legal rights mentioned in an earlier post are already extended to civil unions, I don't even understand the need to GET married. If not, I can understand the issue a little more clearly. However, all those tax and property laws WERE drafted to help families with children. Eh, even if the proposition fails, the opposition won't change their minds... It'll likely work itself out like the abortion issue... This is going to end sadly however it ends, dividing our country ever further.

Since I grew up going to Angels games in the OC, I never liked the Dodgers (shoulda stayed in Brooklyn). The last time they had anybody good, I think Davey Lopes, Steve Garvey, and Ron Cey were playing. BTW Kent's a Mormon, so this donation shouldn't come as a shock. Still a man who'd diss Vin Scully and Manny least Chavez Ravine doesn't have to put up with him anymore. Glad he's moving to TX: they have lotsa boys like him there.

Some "choose" to be homosexual.

God gave man the freedom of choice.

God strongly was against homosexuality.

Why are we even voting?


Mr. Kent,
I just wanted to briefly let you know that everyone has a right to their opinion, including you. Please understand that the fight against Prop 8 is simply about equality and nothing more. You have chosen to use a large sum of money to support something that is driven by opinions and hate. What a shame it is that you couldn't find any other charitable cause for the money that you earned being someone that noone can vote against you on. I have no ill feelings towards you or anyone else that wishes to push Prop. 8 through BUT remember we have the same drive that you have when you're out on the field doing something that you love to do.

Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr. stated

"Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere."

Proposition 8 is UNJUST and UNFAIR. STOP DISCRIMINATION COLD, and VOTE *NO* on Proposition 8 on Tuesday 11/4.


It doesn't bode well for the Prop. 8 crowd that the most misanthropic man in baseball-- his generation's Ty Cobb-- supports their cause.

Proposition 8 is a hateful initiative. Please vote against it. Live your own life and let others love and marry whom they choose. Don't stoop to Jeff Kent's level.

Dear Bill,

"...It is depending on those who are illiterate and ignorant to propagate their filth." I would ask that you go towards the beginning of this blog and read Carlos' post, and then ask yourself who is "illiterate and ignorant." You should perhaps be in touch with Carlos and let him know that the word is "being" not "been" and "alot" is not a word at all! From many of my GLBT colleagues who are Ph.D.'s I would suggest that you chose you hateful verbiage more carefully.

Jeff Kent has a problem with 2 guys or 2 gals marrying? Because marriage is for 1 woman and 1 man? Let me guess.... he is married and banging only 1 woman? Very hard to believe! Jeff Kent is a hater.

What is a bigot? a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices ; especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group with hatred and intolerance (Webster's).

So the fact the Jeff Kent has a moral view opposing gay marriage makes him a bigot? How has he treated a group with hatred or intolerance? He showed no disrespect to any group. Tolerance does not mean acceptance of what one considers to be wrong. Tolerance means to still love that person or group even if you disagree with what that person or group is doing. Do I hate homosexuals? No. I try to love all people. Do I agree with or accept homosexual activity? No. Does that make me a bigot? No.

It seems to me that most people commenting here are bigots. They see a person or group (those for prop 8) and they automatically hate them and try to deny them their right to certain morals and opinions. Who is the bigot?


The reality is that for people on either side 8 is potentially a moral issue. Those supporting 8 will argue their morals define marriage in a specific way, those (such as myself) who oppose it are also equally likely to find the freedom to marry a moral issue. I find it immoral and reprehensible to deny a portion of the population the same freedoms we allocate to others. In my book believing some people aren't equal makes you a bad human and a bad Christian (I can't speak to other religions as I don't practice them and don't know their core beliefs) - don't like it? Sorry, that's what my gut and my moral centre is telling me and I'll vote the way that gives my soul peace and I suggest you do the same.

As for the bigot issue yes, I'm sorry, you ARE a bigot if you vote yes on 8. You just are and if you don't see how that is then you need to look up the term in a dictionary. The people here disagreeing with Prop 8 aren't trying to 'deny [pro 8ers] their right to certain morals and opinions'. No one is denying you a moral stance or an opinion, we're refusing to AGREE with you through a fair and democratic process. We might be disgusted with your opinions, but we're certainly not trying to prohibit them. You have no right to be agreed with 100% of time.

Notice that not one of the people who commented on the pro 8 side of the campaign called anyone on the anti-8 campaign names. Having worked on this campaign I have been cussed out, called intolerant and a bigot. All of which is not true. I have family members whom I love of the homosexual orientation. Tolerance is not about uniformity of opinion it's being able to have different opinions and tolerate each others' view point. I firmly believe that marriage between a man and a woman is essential for the raising of children. Studies have shown time and again that a child raised by both a mother and a father grow up to be better adjusted productive adults. The definition of marriage is essential to the future of our country. I applaud the courage that Jeff Kent demonstrated in donating to this campaign.

Your right - everyone is a bigot who wants to define marriage the same way it has been defined since...well, since anyone knows really. I for one have been wanting to marry my Goat, whom I love dearly and have for such a long time, but have not been able to Marry him (yes, I am a man and I love my manly Goat) because of cruel bigots who want to define marriage as only between a man and a women! And then I can get some great tax write-offs as well, being a 'married couple'.....

I am whole-heartedly, 100% in support of prop 8. I am not a hateful or discriminatory person at all. Marriage is just a sacred thing to me, and the definition should not be changed for anyone; not homosexuals, not a brother or sister, not anyone. I disagree/agree with several propositions that were or were not passed, but I'm not criticizing or writing hateful blogs and comments to the people with different opinions. This is my biggest problem with the people who are agains prop 8. You say that we are the hateful, biggoted ones, but listen to YOUR WORDS. All I hear is hate. We live in a democracy and the people have spoken. As far as I know, you have the same rights with civil unions as heterosexuals do with marriage, so why do you incist on changing the definition?? If your rights in a civil union are lacking then maybe thats what you need to focus on.

Why is it if you do not agree with people choosing to be homosexual that you are "Homophobic"?

"genetic predisposition" has never ever been proven, but Homosexual's like to use it as an "excuse" rather than just be honest about their choice.

Truth is the majority does not agree with homosexuality as a lifestyle. It is true the majority is not always right, but they are not always wrong either.

This should never have gone to a vote. The law that needs to be changed is how we can freely designate who benefits from our death, support and benefits, not the definition of marriage.

yeah, i don't know why so many people are making jeff kent out to be "hateful" and "homophobic". you have your opinions, he has his.

i know where i stand on the issue of gay marriage in general (not for it) but i have yet to determine where i stand on the issue of gay marriage being legal or not. (separation of church and state?)

regardless, i have respect for someone supporting their beliefs, even when it may be criticized by the public. no wonder he didn't make this super public, everyone jumping all over him.

i wish that political issues didn't have to be emotional issues as well- that we didn't have to get pissed off at someone that had a different opinion than us.

just some thoughts...

"Tolerance is not about uniformity of opinion it's being able to have different opinions and tolerate each others' view point." while oppressing them. OK, i agree that the yes on 8ers were "tolerant" freedom-haters. :-)
Hitler loved "The Jews", slavery set Southern Negroes free. Koolaid will keep you smart. All bow to rightspeak!

Where in the Bible does it say that "believers" should try to manipulate laws to reflect their beliefs, however basic these beliefs may seem? Last I checked, Jesus led by example, not by legislating his adversaries out of the picture.

anon: "yeah, i don't know why so many people are making jeff kent out to be 'hateful' and 'homophobic'. you have your opinions, he has his."

It's for the same reason Strom Thurmond is remembered as the senator who in 1957 conducted the longest one-man filibuster ever.... against the Civil Rights Act. Sure, he and his constituents were entitled their opinions, but today we realize that they were just bigots. As a people, we have belittled their deeply held, sacred opinion and accepted the opposite as truth. In 50 years, the same will be true of homosexual unions, and all those who oppose it today and tomorrow will be regarded as bigots. (As a sidenote, on the evolutionary scale, a bigot is somewhere between maggot and roach. That especially applies to the unique "stupid bigot" breed, the ones who deny evolution.)

Mormons, the Mormon Church and other hateful NON-RED-LETTER Christians, now in this day and age, like to choose gays and lesbians to hate and scapegoat; ...and they seem to feel this evil, hurtful, hateful, non-loving expression of theirs’ are somehow moral.

These confused, evil, ill-moral, hating Mormons and other Christians forgot and abandoned the most sacred and blessed teachings of the Bible, while believing and expressing and acting for such evil hate!

The Bible dose speak against a man lying with a man the same as a woman (an impossible thing physically-sexually, anyway), but dose not speak against or ask for a ban on same-sex marriage, only speaks for marriage. Same-sex marriage has been a part of life on this planet since time was first recorded; if your church dose not want to sanction it for itself, fine; but, it is a lie (false witness) to claim same-sex marriages are something new that redefines marriage; and, it is a lie to claim that banning loving, committed same-sex persons from marrying, will somehow ‘redefine’ and ‘save marriage’, ...when only a ban would redefine it and only LOVE can SAVE marriages, and us all!

The Bible dose also speak against other things, and these should always be considered by a TRUE Christian, when considering their hate and witnessing against gays and lesbians; here are two: First, a wife must do as her husband says or orders; so, being gay or lesbian is then considered a sin or bad, like it would be bad for a wife to report or act against her husband raping their preschool children after the husband ordered his wife not to. Second, shell fish must not be eaten, and the flesh of a dead pig must not be touched; so being gay or lesbian is then considered a sin or bad, like it would be bad for a dad to throw a football (pigskin) with his son; or, like a Christian church serving a homeless person a bowl of clam chowder soup; or, like a grandmother serving her grandchildren beacon and eggs for breakfast, or a ham sandwich or and American hot dog! Being gay or lesbian then, would be considered bad like reporting and stopping child abuse, like feeding the hungry or like a dad spending quality time with his child, ...sounds likes its not really bad at all!

The Bible speaks of: ‘those of other flocks’, ‘turning the other cheek’ and ‘love’, if this is not what you and your children are learning from your church or religion, then your simply listening to the wrong and evil side! I pray for your guidance and wish you love!

The haters like to say that they don’t want the government or judges changing the definition of marriage; but, then they spend thousands and thousands of dollars to do just that! The law suit and actions against the Mormons and others are right and just; if they want to speak freely with their actions and money, they must accept that others may do the same.

Marriage is about bringing loving, committed couples together, it is not about discriminating against couples simply because one is or is not a man or a woman.

‘Same-sex marriage discrimination’ is ‘sex discrimination’; if all that is needed is for one of the persons to be another sex, that’s ‘sex discrimination’, children! Although, I’ll guess that calling it ‘gay or lesbian or homosexual’, gives ugly, evil, NON-RED-LETTER Christians a warm and cozy, false feeling or morality inside, doesn’t it, ...kind of like a witch burning or a stoning or lynching, eigh!

Hooray for Jeff Kent! Personally, I don't care one or the other what the homosexuals folks do with each other! But, they need to keep it to themselves. What I do care about, is the way that some of the homosexual community try so hard to force their behavior on other folks. They also try to make others feel that their is something "wrong" with them if they aren't homosexual.

GO JEFF KENT!!! Not only are you one of my hero's as a baseball player, but have always been one of my hero's as a person, but this just made me that much more of a fan of yours Jeff Kent!!! GO JEFF KENT!!! Whatever you do, whether it be retire or continue playing, i pray the best for you. God Bless!

Jeff Kent belives on what he believes in.
Why do No on 8 supporters have to be so mean.
The California Penal Codes states that domestic parters have all the rights. The Yes on 8 vodters arent haters they are just speaking on what they believe in.

1 2 | »


Recommended on Facebook


In Case You Missed It...

About the Columnist
A veteran foreign and national correspondent, Andrew Malcolm has served on the L.A. Times Editorial Board and was a Pulitzer finalist in 2004. He is the author of 10 nonfiction books and father of four. Read more.
President Obama
Republican Politics
Democratic Politics



Get Alerts on Your Mobile Phone

Sign me up for the following lists: