The effort to invalidate 18,000 gay marriages changed my mind on writing about Proposition 8 –- our new bigotry.
I had not planned to write about the controversy being exploited by each side of California’s Proposition 8. I did not care who voted for it, how much money was spent on it or the margin of its approval. As far as I was concerned the issue would play itself out in public opinion and in time become just another footnote of our culture. While the California Supreme Court is considering whether Proposition 8 violates the State Constitution, it is the effort to invalidate 18,000 gay marriages that changed my mind on writing about the issue to expose it as the sheer, unadulterated bigotry it is — our new bigotry.…
Article comments
176 - Jet
You know this is really starting to piss me off. WHY doesn't American come first in these stupid hyphen?
American-african
American-jew
American-veteran
They're saying I'm an AFRICAN etc. FIRST! and then an American. There is some patriotic blood left in me, and believe me I'm boiling over this issue.
177 - Clavos
I'm proud (proud I say!) to be a curmudgeon-american...
178 - Jet
Of course you are Clavos, that went without saying!
179 - Andy Marsh
Jet - if you put American first, you're not allowed to use the hyphen and without the hyphen, you can't be a proper victim...sorry.
180 - Jet
Veterans are victims? Does GW know this?
181 - Jet
Sorry kids, but I'm an American first-and proud of it.
182 - Andy Marsh
Like I said, it's gets you a few points on the civil service exam!
And actually, it's always been American Veteran, so, probably not...but if I switch it around, then I get to use the hyphen.
183 - Jet
I fantasize about the day that I make a valid point here that doesn't get shit on or belittled.
184 - Cindy D
tm,
Further, what you believe is that anyone can have sex or relationships with anyone including people of the same sex.
As long as there is something in the law that prevents those relationships from being legitimate.
185 - Jet
I think he ran out of quarters at the Library Cindy.
186 - Cindy D
lol Jet
187 - Shadow_Man
Post 171 traditional marriage:
The re-defining marriage argument is laughable for various reasons. First, it does nothing to your heterosexual marriage, nothing would have changed. Second and more importantly, at one time, the traditional definition of marriage was a white man and white woman, black man and black woman, etc. In other words, interracial marriage was outlawed, people were against it, they didn't want to redefine "traditional" marriage. You want to go back to those times?
Second, you are adding a bogus definition to marriage. Nowhere does it say when you are married, its mandatory to have kids. I know many heterosexual couples married with no kids, and no plans to have any. Again your logic fails.
188 - Dr Dreadful
Shadow Man @ #169:
Sorry to take so long in responding: I didn't see until just now that you had posted back.
I think you and I have been talking at cross purposes. I have been poo-pooing the notion that a common anti-gay marriage argument is that gay marriage causes polygamy. I thought that possibly you had gotten the words polygamy and polyamory (and possibly promiscuity) confused.
What you were talking about is the slippery-slope argument that if you legalize gay marriage, you might as well legalize polygamy. (And why not? Unless you're Warren Jeffs or one of his cultists, it's a victimless crime.)
Hopefully that's straightened things out now. (Pun NOT intended!)
189 - Jet
Doc, you forgot that the U.S. will fall like the Roman and Greek empires if gay marriage is allowed, also weddings to animals, not to mention earthquakes in San Francisco, and a resurgence of Anita Bryant music and Jerry Falwell rising from the dead.
190 - Roger Nowosielski
I don't think so, Jet. I used to be of that opinion, but I have acquired a far greater faith in the resiliency of our democratic institution. It's just old mores we've all been grown up with and any departure from the norm appears sacrilegious. But the idea will sink in and eventually spread, at least to the point of not being overly offensive: especially since the idea of "gay marriage" is, at bottom, only a matter of equal rights. Which isn't to say there won't be a problem further down the line in drawing the limits. There'll always be the eccentrics and those on the fringes who will keep on pushing to no end; and then, they'll have to be stopped.
191 - Jet
Any civil rights given to a minority requires bucking the "majority". Black/white marriage, blacks serving beside whites in the military.
Catholics and Protestants in Ireland
Latin American rights.
It's something that goes against the moral fiber of our country, but looking back on the turmoils of 50-100 years ago, some can't figure what all the fuss was about.
Hopefully gays in the military and in public life will find the same fate 25 years from now.
Then again maybe not.
It used to be a sign of devil possession to be left handed.
192 - Roger Nowosielski
I think we agree here, Jet. What goes "against the moral fiber of the country," and the majority, is subject to change. New ideas, initially thought of as preposterous, become accepted and better for the wear. After a while, they're like an old hat. I'm not defending here moral relativism. It's just a comment on historical development of societies.
193 - Shadow_Man
Response to post 189 Jet:
We had another earthquake earlier this year after prop 8 passed. I'm convinced that if prop 8 is not overturned by the courts, Southern California will suffer a catastrophic earthquake of epic proportions.
194 - Shadow_Man
Response to Dr Dread 188:
Yeah, that's what i was talking about. That's a common argument i seen, but its very laughable, because polygamy can be observed at many times and places in history, times when gay marriage was never legal.
195 - apples_alex
Silly uneducated bigots are funny.
Seeing how 50% of heterosexual marriages end in divorce (usually within the first 2 years), I’m not so sure the man/woman model is necessarily the best arrangement for children. If heteros can’t even save their own marriage, they clearly are in no position to say gay marriage is bad for children.
You want to “protect” marriage? Get rid of divorce, infidelity, domestic violence, and those quickie Vegas marriages people like Britney Spears are having….instead of trying to prevent those who WANT to get married from marrying.
Truth is: the EDUCATED people of society (from legal scholars to social scientists"AKA people who can think LOGICALLY) SUPPORT gay marriage/adoption. Survey after survey have shown that the higher the education level, the more supportive they are of gay rights. Clearly there is some kind of correlation here: the dumber you are, the more anti-gay you’ll likely be.
The American Psychological Association, the American Medical Association, the American Psychiatric Association, the American Psychoanalytic Society, and the American Anthropological Association, not to mention the vast majority of law professors/legal scholars, SUPPORT gay marriage. Clearly the more brains ya have, the more enlightened you are.
If conservative/religious/homophobic nuts would spend a little more time in school (and learn some SCIENCE and LOGIC) and less time sticking their noses into other people’s personal lives (which don’t affect them one bit), then they might earn some respect from those of us who are educated and civilized.
Stopping gay marriage isn’t going to make gays go extinct, and it certainly isn’t going to stop them from having gay relationships and adopting/raising children. Get over it and start worrying about more important things in life (such as getting a college education). Yikes!
NEXT!
196 - Clavos
start worrying about more important things in life (such as getting a college education).
Wen did giting a colidge eddycayshun becum impoortant?
197 - Jet
Clavos, that's spelled "gitting"
198 - Clavos
Ewe must bee colidge edykayted...
199 - Shockawenow
What kind of pervert would want to have sex with a man if your a man. Or a woman with a woman. Only idiot perverts and sickos would stand for that.
200 - Dr Dreadful
Shockawenow, the 17th, 18th, 19th and 20th centuries are just something that happened to other people, aren't they?