<p>Proposition 8 in California passed,
Proposition 102 passed in Arizona,
and Amendment Two passed in Florida.</p>
<p>:(
If nobody knows, basically they are all to define marriage as between one man, and one woman. FL & AZ already had laws, but this amendment passing strengthened the chances of gay marriage not being legal, at least for awhile.</p>
<p>The big shocker was California. I honestly thought Gay Marriage would stay in Calif., but, oh well.</p>
<p>Gays & Lesbian got Obama though, so it wasn't exactly a total loss. But it did hurt. I know here in Florida only but 1 county didn't favor the amendment. I think in time Gay Marriage will get back in California, but will take awhile in Florida.</p>
<p>Oh & Arkansas won theirs, to prevent Gays & Lesbians from adopting children.</p>
<p>Conservatives lost McCain, but target at Gays and Lesbians worked.</p>
<p>Gay rights activists fighting it saying that they shouldn't have the right to make such a drastic change in the law. I have a feeling Gay Marriage will be back soon in Calif.</p>
<p>Although, if you think about it 48% approval of GAY MARRIAGE in a state is a lot. I'm proud to be able to hear that. If it were gay rights obviously it would be much higher, so it's still nice. Marriage and gay rights are totally different things, but some of the hate that went on in California seemed pretty ridiculous. Reading some articles between fights of the people on the yes and no sides.. it was shocking.</p>
<p>Yeah, I find it sad that people are still against gays, but what can we do...I guess it's a thing to look forward to that they are getting more accepted and the situation is improving, instead of going backwards.</p>
<p>It <em>is</em> very ironic that the segment of society that overwhelmingly voted for Obama to see a "change" and whatnot overwhelmingly (70%) voted to ban gay marriage in CA...</p>
<p>My aunt and her partner spent years looking for doctors to artificially inseminate her partner in Mississippi. My dad's med school friend refused them, and so did most doctors. They finally found someone, had a kid, and yet, my aunt's not allowed to sign school forms or do anything else as his legal guardian. </p>
<p>So it's pretty sweet that now prejudice is legal.</p>
<p>I'm black, but it's things like that and many, countless others that make me feel really bad and not wanting to identify with that certain culture. It's just so ridiculous, and I see the Yes on 8 signs around my neighborhood sometime. Religion man...:(</p>
<p>I know. It's unbelievable they are conservative enough to OVERTURN gay marriage.. but liberal enough to vote for a black president?
Double standard?</p>
<p>Marriage should and forever be defined as a union between one man and one woman. You change that definition and you rewrite a lot of books. Yes, we Chiristians oppose gay marriage because God said it was wrong. You overturn Proposition 8 and then you have a lot of anti-Chiristians, blowing up on any kind of Chrisitan moral that this country was founded upon.</p>
<p>I support defining "marriage" to be between a man and a woman, in order to placate people who whine about their "sanctity of marriage" (WAH WAH WAH), and then granting civil unions, with the exact same legal rights as marriage, to any desiring adult couple. :] </p>
<p>I'd be willing to sacrifice the WORD for the rights.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Marriage should and forever be defined as a union between one man and one woman.
[/quote]
...according to? Yourself? Sorry, but my opinion weighs more than yours, because I'm sexier!</p>
<p>
[quote]
You change that definition and you rewrite a lot of books. Yes, we Chiristians oppose gay marriage because God said it was wrong. You overturn Proposition 8 and then you have a lot of anti-Chiristians,
[/quote]
I don't even know if I should reply to this seriously, but one thing: ...change?</p>
<p>
[quote]
blowing up on any kind of Chrisitan moral that this country was founded upon.
[/quote]
In addition to change, I think that the fact above is false: lots of founding fathers were Deist, and did not have specific Christian "morals". </p>
<p>It's ok. For the hilarity value, you have won my cookies.</p>
<p>There was also an idea of religious freedom when this country was founded.</p>
<p>And actually, you already had angry christians. Proposition 8 WAS to overturn the gay marriage.</p>
<p>There are also angry christians who say gays shouldn't have any rights. When do we stop letting religion influence our laws. Soon, we will. Gay Marriage will be legalized, I don't know if in my lifetime, but I'm pretty sure it will.</p>
<p>I really have mixed feelings about Prop 8 passing, probably because I got to enjoy seeing the ads continually spammed on TV during the last four days of the election. Both sides were way over the top, and neither was really endearing to an undecided voter. I see how it is discrimination, but simultaneously, I don't think treating gay couples exactly like non-gay couples (i.e. with terminology and such) is fair either. I just hope the Californians are intelligent enough to discard everything previously, write new legislation, and adopt the system Poseur mentioned.</p>
<p>Huh... this is the first time I ever heard anyone support 'no on prop 8'... </p>
<p>My entire neighborhood was littered with 'pro' signs... I have never, ever, ever seen a single, even a single sign saying 'no'... I assumed it'd get passed with a devastating margin... but the results were close. </p>
<p>My neighborhood is hilariously serious... :)</p>
<p>I am horrified that anyone would even consider voting for something that began with "eliminates the right..."</p>
<p>And keep religion out of this. Keep the Bible out of it. Keep God out of it. Keep "sanctity of marriage" (a religious idea) out of it. Is America a theocracy? Didn't think so. And there's a little thing we have called separation of church and state.</p>
<p>Now, in 2008, we look back on our actions in the 1960's and we are disgusted to see that we were capable of such discrimination. 40 years from now, we will look back on 2008 and wonder how we could have been so ignorant.</p>
<p>
[quote]
And keep religion out of this. Keep the Bible out of it. Keep God out of it. Keep "sanctity of marriage" (a religious idea) out of it. Is America a theocracy? Didn't think so. And there's a little thing we have called separation of church and state.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Marriage is itself a religious institution, so if you are arguing about marriage, keeping religion out of it seems difficult. A true separation of church and state would see the implementation of Poseur's plan, with a distinct ceremony dependent on religious affiliation entirely up to the discretion of the betrothed/couple.</p>
<p>
[quote]
40 years from now, we will look back on 2008 and wonder how we could have been so ignorant.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Something effecting every aspect of of over 10% of the populace's lives is different than something effecting less than every aspect of less than 2% of the population. It won't been seen as the same, even if that is wrong.</p>
<p>I like this post from another forum I go to. It pretty much sums up my opinion on the issue.</p>
<p>
[quote]
All these arguments about how marriage is a religious ceremony would be well and good except for the fact that they just aren't. You go back through history and marriage was initially a recognised bonding of two people by the society at large. It wasn't sanctioned by the angry volcano god, it was sanctioned by the populace. And it still is.</p>
<p>A priest marries you, but do you sign papers for the church that make it legal? Nope. That's the state. You're signing legally binding documents, not saying a prayer. A church can claim the ceremony--and lord knows they will try and act like that's the important part--but they can't claim marriage. Marriage is a state of being recognised by the state for tax and census purposes. The church did not invent the word. Hell, look up the etymology far enough back and you find it had ties to animals and fruit in the latin. And no, I'm not running for the etymological fallacy, I'm just pointing out how asinine it is to say the church has some claim on marriage. They don't. The church doesn't have to marry gay people, but they have no right to say gay people can't get married because only the church can claim the word MARRIAGE. </p>
<p>It's idiotic and the fact it's even being discussed speaks volumes of how otherwise intelligent people are easily derailed by intellectual fluff spawned from absolute morons. Does it really have an effect on your life, one way or the other, if Mike and Tom are married just like you and your wife, Zeph? Are they going to be somehow less functional? Will they put a bad spin on marriage? Will they somehow hurt the institution? Because last I checked, most gay couples I know haven't had one partner arrested for domestic abuse. Gay couples didn't make the divorce rate above 50%. If you're looking for something that will cheapen marriage, take a look at people who get married young because of pressure not to have a child out of wedlock, or because they can't **** before marriage without going to hell. People who get married for stupid reasons. Not at people who happen to like the same genitalia they were born with.</p>
<p>There's no solid ground for the anti-gay marriage group to stand on, and it gets more obvious whenever someone tries it. There's no logic, no rationality behind it. It's just "man, gays make me feel ookie." Too ****ing bad, people. That's not a good enough reason.