Denny's Free Grand Slam Breakfast Day Tuesday
Muni Bus Nails a Fire Hydrant
Prop 8 Trial Judge Is Gay; Should This Matter?
One Dead in Fisherman's Wharf Nightclub Shooting
Marina Yoga Studio Donates Old Mats for Haitian Relief
While it's technically still too close to call, it looks like the same-sex marriage ban, Prop. 8, will prove victorious. Why? Well, one reason, according to BeyondChron's Paul Hogarth, might be that "[p]rogressives were lulled into complacency by early poll numbers, and distracted by the Barack Obama campaign." Hogarth goes on to say that "discrimination has been enshrined in our Constitution" as of this morning. (Read his thorough take on how it won, right here.)
Also, loads of money coming in from Utah helped the marriage ban win. If you recall, Mattymatt predicted that if it passed, "then a group of Utah Mormons will have seized control of the California Constitution, giving themselves the power to veto any California marriage they want." Which? Seems to be the case.
A jarring response to Mayor Gavin Newsom's issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples in the San Francisco, Prop. 8 lost in every Bay Area city but Solano. Gay marriage bans also won last night in Florida and Arizona.
Update I: Prop. 8 officially passes. City Attorney Dennis Herrera plans on filing a lawsuit in the California Supreme Court.
Update II: There will be a community gathering at City Hall tonight for any and all No On 8 folks. 6:30 p.m., City Hall, 1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place.
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
tweet this
post to facebook
O'Bama wasn't distracted. That one and Biden explicitly did NOT support gay marriage. The fact that you saw his portrait on a few ads a few days before the election was just another effort to convince people that the Democratic ticket was somehow the progressive ("left leaning" or "far left" in Chronicle-speak) ticket.
What we've really got is a moderate, ambivalent president, and an evil right leaning veep.
Pardon my enthusiasm.
Look no further than what Biden said during the VP debate. This can be squarely placed on the top of that ticket, for not displaying true leadership. One guy could have stopped this and STILL been elected, but he chose to stay nearly silent on the issue.
Gavin was arguably a large part of why Kerry lost in 2004 (driving up evangelical turnout in numerous states that had gay marriage bans on the ballot), and he's arguably a large part of why 8 passed today ("WHETHER YOU LIKE IT OR NOT!"). Thanks a lot, you slimy Patrick Bateman-looking piece of shit. I'm not even gay or know any gays who want to get married, and I'm fucking infuriated.
I hardly think it's fair to blame "progressives" for Prop 8. Prop 8 passed because 70% of black Californians voted for separate but equal. SUre, they were lied to by the Mormon Church, who will come to regret its disgusting bigotry. The sad irony is that two groups who so recently suffered from patent prejudice joined together to say separate but equal is right. And as much as I love Barack, it was his voice and his words: Marriage is between a man and a woman.
Shouldn't the Mormon Church have its tax-exempt status revoked? This amount of money into a campaign has to qualify it as a political entity.
And brought to you by the same folks that funded Yes on 8:
http://movies.yahoo.com/feature/zackandmiri_blog.html
Let's not forget, people, that the wealthy gay community in this state waited until just a few weeks ago to hold their star-studded gala fundraiser - that money should have been extracted from these people earlier, and put to good use. Arnold should have been forced by a powerful gay lobby (yeah, I'm sure dreaming) to provide more than his piss-warm opposition to the amendment.
I also think right-minded people need to publicly shun Catholics and Mormons who worked with their church's pro-Prop 8 machines.
And I should have fucking made more phone calls, given more money, and taken my ass into the interior counties to knock on doors.
Obama? I could give a rat’s ass. He’s not opening any doors for gays and lesbians, so remind me why I should give a shit.
"whether you like it or not"
"teachable moment"
those ads were powerful.
Quit your Mormon bashing you whiner. Even if the Mormons didn't get involved you still wouldn't like them. So now that you don't like them even more you think your voice matters? Get real.
So it's OK for me to shun Catholics, jplumb, just not Mormons? Oooooooookay.
You can't shun Mormons anymore than they already are. Think about it. They've been shunned all their lives. You're telling me you didn't shun them before Prop 8 lost. Where do you people come from? You hated Mormons before and now that Prop 8 has passed you hate us still. Wake up and and look in the mirror!
Mormons are sensitive, they moved most of the way across an undeveloped continent just to avoid a little persecution.
No. You shouldn't shun Catholics either. There does that satisfy you?
Like the sign says...Prop 8 is UNFAIR and WRONG
It would be even if 100% of the people voted for it.
It's not really about the Mormons. It's about a bunch of boring people who get a thrill out of controlling other people. They're too repressed to look at their own issues, so they focus on others people's perceived "issues." It's pretty perverted, when you think about it.
Oh, so if it's wrong even if 100% voted for it we should just not vote or hold elections in your view. That's real American. Even if it failed, we would abide by the law. How about you? Are you going to do the same?
Yeah, yeah, blame the usual boogiemen: Newsom (the guy who stuck his neck out for the issue in the first place), Utah Mormons (fuck 'em), but that's not the problem.
The standard-issue Dornan/Nixon/Reagan OC/ Republicans didn't hold enough firepower this election to carry Prop 8. This was carried by Obama voters, many of them of color. Check the demographics. Nobody was "fooled"; it comes down to blind hate.
So if you're not homo you're boring? WOW. That's not narrow-minded is it?
Yes indeed. Giving Mormons 85K square miles of land for their own state is shunning. Electing a Mormon to the governor's office in Massachusetts is shunning. Appointing a Mormon as Senate Majority Leader is shunning. I'd tell you to get down off the cross, but that's probably too Catholic for you.
There is nothing wrong with questioning the tax exempt status of a religion when it is doing things that are political in nature.
I've got nothing against mormons, but I do have something against people who want to take away rights from other people. That includes a large number of mormons. Still, I believe most mormons were deceived on this issue like many other Californians. My mormon acquaintances told me all of their grievances, and I attempted to allay those worries by writing up a legal memo for them detailing the law. I don't know if they bothered reading it, but I hope they did. I honestly believe people can be swayed by the truth. The problem is that the truth is sometimes harder to understand than simple hate slogans.
Mormon trolls are boring.
Thanks Leanne. My entire family is Mormon and I have to say that not one of them (over 100) contributed to YES on 8. It is really very silly and ignorant to blame the "Mormons" as a whole.
I'm wondering if you mean by equal rights, that all forms of consenting adult marriage should be allowed polygamy, bigamy, marriage to ones adult relatives. Just wondering if there is a definition in your mind as to what marriage should be?
Hey, jDUMB!
Poll results don't change the "rightness" of something. If 100% of the people voted that murder were legal, would that make it right? Of course not. Preventing same-sex couple from marrying is UNFAIR and WRONG no matter if 0, 49, 51, or 100% of the people vote to do it. Sure, the prop passed and our government will go into compliance with that but it is still UNFAIR and WRONG.
I'll bet you were or are opposed to all the Mormon successes you sited. So you inciting others to shun Mormons is nothing new. You are a dime a dozen. Mormons are used to this. When Mormons have successes I'll bet you can't stand it. You should congratulate them and celebrate.
Largo1, nicely put.
The Mormon Church is kind of like the KKK with more money and college degrees. There are plenty of Mormons who were against Prop 8, but since the Church is run like a cult and requires you to give $$$$, even if you oppose Prop 8 you were funding it. I was raised Mormon. Any dissent has serious consequences. Questioning authority is completely prohibited. Note the very strong correlation between education and voting on Prop 8. Which is pretty much why the Mormon Church's #1 goal is to control the flow of information to its constituency, because education = intelligence = fighting bigotry.
Prop 8 passed because of arrogance and stupidity on the part of its opposition. The mayor of SF essentially said "We won, F--- You!" to people who were disturbed by the California Supreme Court's ruling. That was arrogant. Bringing a first grade class on a field trip to see their lesbian teacher get married was stupid.
When you create TV ads for your opposition you have to expect to lose. Remember John Kerry's "I voted for the bill before I voted against it." You have to expect your opponents to take advantage of your mistakes.
Actually, mythoughts, we want all that and MORE! We want dogs to be allowed to marry pigs, pigs to be allowed to marry birds, birds allowed to join NAMBLA and take nine year old boy brides. And we want to do it in your neighborhood Mormon temple or Catholic church in the middle of a fiery pentagram while sodomizing your mother.
Why'd you ask?
Hey porkbut!
We're not talking polls here. 8 actually passed in case you missed it. Evidently, just because the majority of the judges said no didn't make it right either.
I asked because honest dialog is a way of trying to understand important social issues.
It also didn't help the prop 8 cause that many of its most ardent supporters have been donating to, and spending their free time going door to door in Nevada for, or phone banking to support an election that was a forgone conclusion a month ago, instead of doing this same work for one that would most likely have a greater effect on their neighbors', their friends', and their lives.
You'd have a better go of it after your rectal-cranial inversion reversal procedure is completed.
dantsea, You need some serious couch time with your therapist. You are way to hostile to function in a modern society where there are more than just one view.
I personally cannot wait to marry my toaster. If only we could end this bigotry. :-(
To the contray mythoughts, dantsea makes perfect sense. Also really funny stuff. Thanks dansea.
jDUMB, "polls" is another word for "election results"
Your other point- that judges can't make something right- is what some Yes people tried to frame this argument as. The judges didn't make same-sex marriage right. They only said that constitutionally a marriage cannot be limited to man-woman. It's about equal access for all people.
To discriminate against people is unfair and wrong. No matter how many people vote for it. No matter where you insert it into law.
Marry your toaster? Wow, the sex would be HOT!
I would love to see a trend of public "civil disobedience" (if you know what I mean) in Provo.
That said, everybody knows Mormons are insane. Why do you think they segregate themselves?
But I think at the end of the day Gavin may have torpedoed (or delayed) his Governor plans. For a good cause, sure, but still...
This isn't about Mormons, or Catholics, or any other group of people, this is about each and every one of our friends, family and acquaintances who are still, sadly, scared of one another, of us, of the world outside of their comfort zones. Keep in mind: individuals voted, the churches did not.
This is about us, people, and our interactions with one another, EVERY SINGLE INTERACTION.
This is about those of us who skim across middle America like its the land of idiots, treating those with a "twang" with disdain.
This is about those of us who endeavor not to understand one another but simply say "dont like it? well then f*** you!"
This is about the No on 8 people at 24th and Mission last night, who accosted the ONE guy with the Yes on 8 sign en mass, as if he didn't have a right to his opinion as much as they did.
I participated in angel action during Laramie Project showings in the East Bay during high school, and I saw how hate begets hate. We kicked angels out who would turn around and shout back at the protesters.
We can scream and yell at any group we damn well please, but until we start shutting up and bridging alliances on common ground, nothing will change. Sometimes, we can be just as bad as those who oppose us.
Mythoughts: Since the idea of marriage as a legal institution is essentially a set of contractual rights granted by two individual to each other with the blessing of the state, that is what it should be. You can't have polygamous marriages here, because it is a bilateral contract. Two people. The fact that it is a contract also requires consent. Minors statutorily cannot consent. So there is your answer to your question about Polygamy and NAMBLA. No slippery slope. Two consenting adults regardless of sex should be able to receive those contractual rights if they agree to. That is equality in marriage.
What churches want to do with marriage is a separate question. States cannot tell a religion how to go about its religious ceremonies. But I as someone who isn't part of your church shouldn't have to be held to your church's standards of what marriage is.
mythoughts, you might be better suited at handing out advice when you can learn to make a statement instead of leading with a loaded questions. Now sit the fuck down and shut the fuck up, the adults are talking.
Where are you getting this Mormon segregation from? Is it a lack of knowledge or are you just stupid?
prop 8 is discriminating if you believe being gay is genetic, like gender and races. It is not discriminating if that's a lifestyle by choice.
So then it's not discriminating if we do the same for religon, ppo? YAY!
religon, even. Damn my choice of typos!
largo01, I did not mention minors only consenting adult relationships. Why not more than 2? Does holding the deffinition at 2 individuals violate the rights of those that are in a bi-sexual relationship and are considering marriage or a polygamous marriage? Where is the line drawn? Who draws that line?
As it is certain Churches do not accept all marriages. According to the Catholic Church, only marriages performed by the Church are valid and they control who they allowed to be married by the Church. The denomination that I was a member of (UCC, also that of BHO) actually supports same sex marriage and choses to recognize and perform such unions.
mythought, if law-abiding, tax-paying, CONSENTING ADULTS want to marry each other, then yes, they should be able to. If someone wants to enter into a polyamorous relationship, who cares if they are CONSENTING ADULTS. That is the key.
I also, again, as those who support prop 8... How has YOUR life been adversely affected over the last few months since the Supreme Court decision. Take a moment to think about it. Other than lobbying for Prop 8, has it been affected at all?
For me, a straight woman, my day-to-day life hasn't changed adversely at all. On the positive side, I have gotten to see more happy people, and couples I know have gotten to realize their dreams.
I wish people would have really thought about things like this before stripping people of their rights.
so do you know if its genetic or by choice? @v
I'm really upset that this passed. I knew it was polling fairly close but I suppose since everyone I know and associate with was against it I just assumed it wouldn't pass. It did. Depressing.
On the bright side, if you look at the demographics of who voted for what you see that young people were strongly against it (64% against in the 18-24s, 59% against for 25-30s), middle aged people were very slightly pro 8 and people over 65 were strongly pro 8 (61%). Those old bigots won't be around forever and the younger generation has a better outlook.
Another interesting fact is that African-Americans were overwhelmingly for prop 8. (%70!) That demographic was out in full force to vote for Obama. If that demographic had been split 50-50 prop 8 wouldn't have passed. I find that terribly depressing. The parallels to the fight to legalize interracial marriage are so obvious and so long fought for. Its not that often you find 70% of African-American voters on the same side of an issue as the KKK but they were together on prop 8.
Anyhow, looking forward....
How do we get an initiative to change the state constitution on the ballot? Its not that huge a disparity between pro and against. If at first you don't succeed....
Don't give up.
Cheers,
Greg
Oh, here is a link to CNN for those statistics I put in there. Its from an exit poll.
http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/results/polls/#CAI01p1
bananaanna, I have to ask because you are the first that has said polygamy should be allowed (nobody was very vocal when the raids in Texas took place earlier this year). Does that also mean insestual marriage between consenting adults? There has to be a definition.
@ppo: At this time, the only thing we know for certain is a choice is religion. So going by your interpretation that "it's not discrimination if it's a choice," then we can strip away religious protections.
Nice to see that the haters are here on SFist too.
Ultimately we can play the tactical blame game all we want, and there are a lot of important questions to be asked about Newsom's sound bites, the No campaign's tactics, the first grade trip (really just a tragic consequence of something that should have been nice, but when you are dealing with hateful bigots who will stop at nothing on the other side, you have to be extra careful), the lukewarm opposition by Arnold, and more.
But ultimately the ones who made this happen are the people who voted yes. These voters, every one of them, proved themselves to be no better than voters for the three fifths compromise, or Jim Crow, or apartheid, or whatever other discriminatory measure you can think of. Shame on them. Shame on YOU if you are a Yes voter and reading this page. There is no reason other than pure anti-gay bias to support this measure.
Certainly this is not the end of the road for this issue, or for equality. But there need to be consequences. Remember the donors database? Now might be a good time to check on whether your so-called friends should stay on that list. Or whether boycotts and other measures are in order.
51% of Californians voted today in favor of hate and discrimination. They need to pay for it.
Hey kids, turnout in so-called liberal SF sucked ass. Bigtime.
So if you want to blame someone, blame the lazy hippie that couldn't be bothered to vote for civil rights.
And you can blame the Mormon church. Next time you see these jerks walking around town in their stupid little outfits, tell them to leave town.
Or better yet, let's put something on the ballot to outlaw Mormons. But then again, since even in a big election like this 50% of SF couldn't put down the doobie and vote, well....
@mythoughts
Polygamy is not a bilateral contract. It is a contract amongst many people and quite different, often times leading to the married pregnant 13yo uneducated women. As for incestuous marriages, there is the whole problem of the non-equal relationship that starts when the limbic brain is developing that can not be changed. These very different things. If you want to support either, than do so, but I hazard a guess that you are just using these red herrings as a way to strike fear in people, or simply muddy the waters about same sex marriages (1 to 1 consenting adult contractual relationship).
@largo and Mythoughts
Voted against 8. I don't see how you can argue for gay marriage but against polygamy. They're both contracts between consenting adults. Polygamy even has a tradition in many cultures of being a form of marriage, which I don't think you can say about gay marriage, so it seem illogical to argue for the one but not the other.
To all all the religious crybabies on here, shame on you to try to tell people its wrong to be who they are and its wrong to be happy with "whoever" they want! Its not like we banned church because there is so much child molestation going on. Mormons practice bigamy but that's ok? On another note, not everyone follows that way of religious practice, and there are religions open with different lifestyles as long as you follow rules of karma and peace. But because of centuries of your bible thumping and murders of pagans, the majority of people are well...like you.It's not all your fault though, you were just raised stupid and brainwashed.You were taught that way because your parents though it was "right" and so you will teach your children as well. But its coming to an end real soon, best believe, because the old pilgrim way of life is getting old and dieing. Soon, a new and free, more tolorant generation is on the rise!
aj: Nice to see that the hate is still in you. Hypocrite.
To all all the religious crybabies on here, shame on you to try to tell people its wrong to be who they are and its wrong to be happy with "whoever" they want! Its not like we banned church because there is so much child molestation going on. Mormons practice bigamy but that's ok? On another note, not everyone follows that way of religious practice, and there are religions open with different lifestyles as long as you follow rules of karma and peace. But because of centuries of your bible thumping and murders of pagans, the majority of people are well...like you.It's not all your fault though, you were just raised stupid and brainwashed.You were taught that way because your parents though it was "right" and so you will teach your children as well. But its coming to an end real soon, best believe, because the old pilgrim way of life is getting old and dieing. Soon, a new and free, more tolerant generation is on the rise!
I think the far more chilling issue is that it's so easy to amend the state constitution. Shouldn't this really require a super-majority? If that was the case we would have won. As it is the constitution is pretty flimsy. Sure it can be declared unconstitutional (e.g. the voters were wrong when they passed the law no matter what the bigots want), but if you can change the constitution as easily as passing any other law there isn't much of a reason to even have one.
sweetmendoza85: You think you got it all figured out don't you? You're full of it and we all know it.
Hey Belgand: If you don't like it put the super-majority on the ballot. Then we'll see who agrees with you. That's why this is America. Or maybe you want the judges to make all the decisions for you. Socialist.
mushmouth, I appreciate your attempt to address my honest questions. Who says marriage has to be a bilateral contract. Wouldn’t it be discrimination by limiting it to bilateral? Who created the definition making marriage bilateral? On the subject of polygamy, I can’t believe you are stereotyping all polygamous relationships as predatory. Incestual relationships have potential to damage future fetal development. Should that make it illegal? Could that type of relationship be acceptable if they were sterilized?
Sign this petition and let's prevent the mormons from having a cash advantage next time:
http://www.mormonsstoleourrights.com/
One need only read the comments of posters to this article who opposed this proposition to know where the real hate exists. The last bastion of acceptable bigotry exists not against the gay and lesbian community, but with the Mormon community.
And you call yourselves educated. What a joke!
Marriage is currently a bilateral contract, that is just the way it is. Polygamy often does result in a predatory situation, that is simply a fact of life, and practice. If you want to support them, do so. I have scientific (social and hard) reasons not to. There are not any of the same reasons to oppose same sexed marriages.
Elcapo, get back to us on that when nomormon's movement breaks the $30 million mark in campaign contributions.
I don't have anything against Mormons per se, but I do have something against those who would abrogate the rights of an entire class of human beings. That attitude is shared by almost everybody I know in San Francisco.
OK, so I'm Not From Around Here, but I've been following this story a bit, and my first reaction was an incredulity that at least Belgand seems to share: it seems like your constitution isn't worth the paper it's printed on. It's not much use for protecting minority rights if all it takes is for 50%+1 to say "OK we changed our minds, we want it to say 'all men are created equal, EXCEPT HOMOS'". So if a majority voted to enshrine segregated schools, or mandatory sterilization for Unitarians into the constitution, would that be cool with you? Will of the People, Democracy in Action, and all that?
mythoughts...I said CONSENTING ADULTS. In the raids in Texas, many, if not most, of the women in those marriages were not of the age of consent when they entered into marriage. Plus, there is a lot of brainwashing and cult-like behavior there, and lack of education. However, had they been CONSENTING ADULTS aware of ALL THEIR OPTIONS, then I would say godspeed to them. In that case, and in the case of many polygamy sects, this is not the case.
And, if a brother and sister want to get married, well...again, if they are consenting adults, who am I to tell them know. I think it's squicky, and I wouldn't choose it for myself, but that's my choice.
Where are you getting this Mormon segregation from? Is it a lack of knowledge or are you just stupid?
Nigga please. I grew up in the Tri-Valley, I know plenty about LDS. You can crow all you like about how your special underwear gives you a more accurate sense of marriage, but the fact is that Mormons do self-segregate. There are aspects of Mormonism that are not palatable to the conventional wisdom and these are ritually hidden from outsiders.
It is a moralistic cult and has benefitted for ages from the open-mindedness of people like me (and The Constitution) who support the rights of all people to their delusions. That Mormons choose to take this tolerance as a path to inflicting themselves on people who do not affect them in the least is very telling.
Which part of the Book Of Mormon says that non-Mormons are less than valid? Trick question, it's the whole thing! Mormons have had a chip on their shoulder ever since Utah was forced to outlaw polygamy in order to receive statehood.
None of this is hate, though it may be cynicism. But you know the saying about cynicism, right? "The power of accurate observation is often called cynicism by those who haven't got it."
In 1954, the Supreme Court ruled in Brown v Board of Ed that "separate educational facilities [for non-whites] are inherently unequal." In order to integrate the schools, the National Guard had to be called in by President Eisenhower to escort black students to school in Little Rock.
If the US had had a national proposition banning school integration in 1954, it would have undoubtedly passed by a majority.
Would that have made it right to keep schools segregated?
Democracy in this country is a balance between the legislature, judicial and executive branches of the government. Historically, some unpopular decisions have been made by the courts or the legislature that have, in retrospect, provoked positive change in our country.
Let's hope that prop 8 gets overturned ASAP.
Whoa manys: For knowing plenty about LDS you are pretty misinformed. I could go on about it, but I don’t have time right now. Please stay out of the “I know about Mormons” topic. You're embarrassing yourself.
manys: i agree with jplumb, stay out of the "i know about mormons topic" please. clearly, you do not.
sweetmendoza: FLDS members practice poligamy. LDS members do not. Please, get your facts straight.
Greg: "outlaw mormons"...who else can we outlaw, while we are at it? jews? christians? people like you?
So, what would it take to the the Mormon church's tax-exempt status revoked in CA? Anyone know? Can we start a ballot measure? I'll start knocking on doors and getting signatures now.
All of the lobying they've done in CA Should qualify them as a political organization. Anyone know the law on this?
"outlaw mormons"...who else can we outlaw, while we are at it? jews? christians?
Good start.
How about: ALL OF THEM.
If it gets knocked down by the courts after being approved by the voters then that will fuel decades of paranoia from the "legislating from the bench" crowd. I supposed it would be something relatively benign for them to fume about; maybe it will distract them from stuff that matters.
And bluecanary with the Palin reference takes the lead!
Joel, Bluecanary, Your hate will dig you an early grave. What ever happened to peace love and unity.
To everyone on both sides of the issue,
I've got to tell you that in reading the comments on this page I can see that within the homosexual community there is just as much polarization as there is in any other.
Some of you have said horrible, cruel and hateful things about different religious denominations because they supported 8. I would remind those of you who have said such things of the type of physical persecution homosexuals face in other countries, to think about how much hate can hurt, and would then ask you to rethink your attitudes.
Others have shown candor and a true-progressive mentality, they understand that people who voted yes on 8 didn’t do so because they hate gay people per say, they did it because they have an obligation to their children and to what they believe is right to promote in society.
I voted yes on 8 but if someone had spoken to me in a civil and honest manor about the issue I readily admit my mind could have been changed. This never happened, on my college campus if you aren’t 'no on 8' your basically equivalent to a Nazi and as a result there has been no forum for honest discussion and more polarization overall.
If there was a measure on the ballots that guaranteed that religious institutions would be protected, that the issue would stay away from schools (perhaps sex education altogether) and that for example; doctors who say have a religious objection to artificially inseminating a lesbian married couple wouldn't get sued... then I don’t think so many would oppose gay marriage.
Unfortunately I believe some in the gay community are sue-happy and just looking to prove a point at someone else’s expense, much like some people have chosen to sue over small breaches in disabled persons access at private buildings, and gotten rich in the process.
From a Judao-christian standpoint (of course there are fringe groups that will say different) the act of sexual relations with a member of the same sex is a sin, and from our perspective you cannot redefine what is and is not a sin nor will we ever agree with something that goes against what we believe is God’s word. (remember interracial marriage was never a sin so those who opposed it were never at any point justified on a religious basis.) But you can get us to live with your own choices as long as you respect our own... this is the only civil way to go about this issue.
I certainly don’t think that gay marriage is the biggest issue we face and I wish that people of faith would come out in mass to support things like the homelessness, single moms and the aids epidemic in Africa, rather then just issues of abortion or gay-marriage but sadly thats not the case. Hopefully someday it will be.
jplumb, cute userid. Perhaps a touch less relevant after the Obama win.
Briefly: I don't hate anyone. I think some dude from Nazareth said something about loving your enemy? It's hard to tell, since the so-called Christians sponsoring measures like this sure don't show any love.
I'm just angry at the sponsors, donors, and voters for this measure (and I presume that includes you). Not hateful. Just furious.
Bluecanary didn't vote to judge my neighbors', who have lived together lovingly for more than a decade, marriage to be worth less than that of a Vegas quicky. I'm guessing that thoughtless, holly, and thumbUpHisA$$ did though. That is the very definition of hate.
hardquestions: You just voted to erase civil rights for a group of your fellow American citizens and you're lecturing us about being mean?
Seriously, go fuck yourself.
hardquestions, I look forward to your submission of, and enthusiastic support of, this so-called measure "protecting religious institutions" while legalizing gay marriage.
We're waiting. Really we are. Since YOU voted to take away our rights, YOU get to fix it, dude.
What ever happened to peace love and unity.
These things tend to scatter when met by religionists.
hardquestions, Prop 8 had nothing to do with schools, church status, lawsuits. It was a limit on same-sex marriage. You may have been motivated by those other things, but that's not what it was about. The end result of the vote was to strip marriage from same-sex couples.
To say "there are other issues out there" is to belittle the impact of this measure on your fellow Californians.
@mythoughts:
Pardon me, but I don't need a sky fairy to teach me "Peace, love, and unity," and religion hardly brings any of those things. More like the opposite, as history proves.
If you feel so free to take away this basic right from people, you should come here to my work, meet my colleague and his husband, and personally explain it to them and their families why it is that they shouldn't have the right to be married. Yet they should have the right to lovelessly marry any woman they meet on the street.
As for why Prop 8 won, it's easy. It had no "red meat." Where were the ads citing that pastor who said "first they came for the jews, etc., etc." Where were the scare ads saying "WHO WILL THEY COME AFTER NEXT? WHERE WILL IT END?" Where were the ads of Fred Phelps picketing the funerals of AIDS victims and showing them that when you vote for 8, you vote for hate?
That is the kind of ads people respond to. Maybe the next time this comes up the campaign should think of hiring some kind of Karl Rove/Lee Atwater type. The kind of ignorant bible beaters voting for Prop 8 aren't going to respond to loving pleas from a gay couple's elderly parents. Your ads have to stir up anger and fear (just like the Pro 8 ads did).
And my final comment on this topic, before I slam my head into a wall:
"From a Judao-christian standpoint (of course there are fringe groups that will say different) the act of sexual relations with a member of the same sex is a sin,"
What part of "we do not live in a theocracy" can these fucking loons not understand? Our country's laws are based on teh constitution, not a book of fairy tales.
yeah, yeah, slam me if you want, I'll burn in hell, whatever, but it's exactly this kind of shit that turned me into the hardcore anti-theist that I am.
@mushmouth; sorry love, i voted NO on 8 and even attempted to knock some sense into my mormon siblings regarding the proposition. nice try though.
BTW if you tithed 10% of your income to the Mormon Church, you spent money on Prop. 8. Just thought you oughta know.
And while I don't like hating on people because of religion, they sure don't mind hating on others. Maybe if they were on the receiving end of a mean spirited campaign they'd realize that when everyone piles on the hate, no one wins.
Ah, but that would require thinking.
Oh well, celebrate away, Mormons! You sure showed us. Now, if something happens to you, I'll be sure to avert my eyes and look away. Since you have your non-Christian religion protecting you, you obviously don't need my help!
looks like there is no room for constructive discussion with some as I mentioned... by the way bluecanary your not going to burn in hell if you dont want to, as long as you ask for forgiveness. we all sin remember.
and we dont live in a theocracy nor do I want us to, i simply vote with what I think is right... as many others did hate me all you want but it doesnt change my vote counting just as much as yours
hardquestions: Stop. Please. At this point you are simply smashing your walrus paws against a keyboard in an attempt to make you feel better about discriminating against your fellow Californians, your fellow Americans. Don't try to rationalize it, you went into the voting booth, decided that hard-wiring the constitution to take away rights was a good idea, and voted accordingly. Once again, go fuck yourself.
it occurs to me that there are so many stereotypes here its ridiculous. those on one side imagine the religious community to be one way... and then those in the religious community do the same. There is so much more to say but I feel I'll be mischaracterized so I won’t.
at the end of the day so much anger is misplaced that nobody realizes who the real enemy is. I understand a lot of people here are pissed, and I guess I should have considered that before I posted.
hardquestions...
other than the religious objections, why do you oppose same-sex marriage? How has your life been adversely affected by the marriages that have occured in the last few months.
I am asking honestly and without sarcasm. Take religion out of the picture for a moment.
Your attitude is terrible, again people like you are why constructive social discussions never take place.
"Misplaced anger" would be bombing the Castro Theater because Proposition 8 passed. Not being kind to someone who admitted they voted for Proposition 8, well, that's what I'd call right on target.
I know, hon. It used to be that I could kick people in the face all day long, smash out their teeth and make 'em all bloody and, why, they'd just pick themselves up and dust themselves off and continue with our nice and polite conversation. People just don't have any manners these days.
A line has been crossed, rights have been taken away. You changed the rules, now you can expect to reap the rewards of unintended consequences.
useless....
Whatever, you homophobic little shit.
^ your answer? Indeed.
Are you gonna rationalize your vote or not, hardquestions?
(To clarify, hardquestions' answer to bananaanna's hard question.)
Geez, attacking someone who is quite obviously a pawn of the religious hierarchy is not the best place to direct the anger (anger totally justified IMO). They're only following orders.
Better to direct it at the original architects of the Proposition. The same folks now telling us to sit down and shut up, it's over:
http://www.sltrib.com/faith/ci_10907306
Hi hardquestions.
I will reiterate my own hard question for you, which I am asking with complete honesty.
other than the religious objections, why do you oppose same-sex marriage? How has your life been adversely affected by the marriages that have occured in the last few months.
I am asking honestly and without sarcasm. Take religion out of the picture for a moment.
EllyMental: Good point and good link. Thanks.
hardquestions: very good post. Thanks for contributing to the dialougue in a positive way. Unfortunately, most here don't want to influence opinion. They'd rather call people names, and type four letter words. In so doing, they show their true colors. And, it's every bit as bigoted and hate-filled as that to which they pretend to object so greatly.
Might I suggest you find another forum with people on both sides that are actually interested in sharing thoughts on the topic.
This is amusing as hell. The people who voted Yes on 8 are whining about the people they chose to discriminate against being mean to them. Does keeping up the persecution complex require work, or does it just come naturally?
All you little panzies that dumped on hardquestions is why Prop 8 won. Get used to it cuz until you can act normal you won't have even the slightest chance winning the vote. You'll have to rely on the judges and lawyers to do it for you.
See? Now that's more like it.
Wait, did hardquestion answer my question? I thought her/his answer was to dantsea. If it was to me, how rude!
If not...I still waiting...
Well, isn't that special, the haters now want us to treat each other with "love." (EllyMental's link.) How nice of them.
Deep breath, everyone.
but furious flamewars are so much fun, brock!!
Exhibit 1: "All you little panzies"
Exhibit 2: "until you can act normal"
This fellow has made himself perfectly clear now.
"and we dont live in a theocracy nor do I want us to, i simply vote with what I think is right... as many others did hate me all you want but it doesnt change my vote counting just as much as yours"
However...if what you think is "right" is homosexuals not being allowed to marry (members of the same sex), and you're BASING that on your religion - then you're voting to help create a theocracy. You're saying "My religion teaches that this is right, therefore the government should make it law."
So if you truly aren't for a theocracy and you want a pluralistic society, we go again to banana's question: religious value aside, why shouldn't same sex couples be allowed to marry?
People, ignore jplumb, it's clearly a troll trying to agitate. Stick it in a corner and let it amuse itself. Don't rise to the bait.
The pro-8s complaining that the anti-8s are being mean to them when they just took human rights away from their fellow humans is just like Tucker Carlson complaining today that people constantly talking about Obama's election as historic is "making Republicans feel bad."
$25 million in mormon money went to this initative, lets face it, this was bought and paid for by Salt Lake City,
Also we as a community were CRAP, we had zero leadership, HRC, LENO, and all of the other so called leaders in our community were a joke. I had a beer in Harveys last night and shed a tear looking at the posters of Harvey Milk, we sure as hell have nothing like him today. Too busy doing the right thing for a seat at the end of the table. Millions of us and we couldn't out raise and out spend a bunch of bigots. We had 3500 volunteers yesterday they had 100,000. Where the fuck was our community?
I am so pissed fucking off, and it was a bunch of bigoted mormons and our incompetence that led us to loose.
I think I will take elcapo's advice and move to another forum where people are willing to talk and not just aimlessly bash
hardquestions, don't make the mistake of thinking you see aimless bashing. What you see is pretty well targeted at your statements.
hardquestions, I don't understand why you won't answer my question.
You ask for open dialogue, and I have repeatedly asked a very neutral, curious question. You continue to shun it.
Which, by your igoring me, leads me to believe you really don't want discussion, but instead want to state your own case and play the poor me card.
Pity, really.
See, when you take religion out of the equation, Hardquestion's got nothing, and he knows it, which is why he refuses to answer under the guise of "you're just bashing me."
Maybe instead of "hardquestion" his ID should be "noanswers."
Stop blaming the Mormons. You are just as tasteless when you lose as when you campaigned. If you would come out of your closet you would notice that same sex marriages were banned in Arizona and Florida. Are you going to blame the Mormons for that too? What about the economy? Was that a ploy by the Mormons to get Obama elected?
By the way, for all of you who keep claiming that anyone who supports Prop 8 is a bigot, consider the following:
A bigot is a person who is intolerant of opinions, lifestyles, or identities differing from his or her own.
Everyone I know who supports Prop 8 is 100% supportive of homosexuals. What we're not supportive of is a change to the definition of marriage. Marriage is neither a lifestyle, identity, or opinion.
Note on 8 supporters, however, have done the following:
Houses of worship displaying "Yes on 8" signs have been vandalized. In one location, a Catholic Church reported that over 100 signs have been stolen from its property. Other reports include accounts of vandalized property and cars, a house defaced with graffiti reading "Bigots live here," and even an assault on a campaign worker. My neighbor was threatened with a knife for displaying a "Yes on 8" sign and, during a rally, a motorist, swerved and ran over a "Yes on 8" sign that was dropped by a 18-year old child, nearly striking him.
The above qualifies as intolerance of an opinion and demonstrates bigotry in it's truest form.
You need further proof, just check out this website that the losing whiners put up:
http://www.mormonsstoleourrights.com/
In addition, just think about the millions of taxpayer dollars they will be spending trying to overturn the will of the people, again. The children is where it starts when a minority trys to influence a majority. No one needs to look past Nazi Germany to see proof of that. It started in the schools as it would have had the majority not spoken.
A hefty 127 comments until we hit Godwin's Law!
Well done, readers. Well done.
I was almost taking that seriously until "18-year old child".
Frankly I'm surprised it took that many! I figured this one for 25 or 30, easy. Woulda lost that bet. :)
Al, you're lying.
Someone who is "100% supportive of homosexuals" would support equality for said homosexuals, and heterosexuals and bisexuals too. (Using your intentional choice of words.) I bet none of these "friends" of yours are gay, or have friends or family who are.
But it's okay, YOUR rights aren't threatened .. unless of course you're in the closet, in which case you have more serious issues than can be addressed on a SF politics blog.
By the way, for all of you who keep claiming that anyone who supports Prop 8 is a bigot, consider the following:
1. Did you vote for Prop 8?
2. If Yes, see #3. If no, see #4.
3. You're a bigot.
4. You're cool.
"Stop blaming the mormons..."
Why? The Mormon Church put ungodly amounts of money into the Yes on 8 campaign (which was an unarguably bigoted campaign, btw). Members of the Mormon Church (ie: Mormons) pay the Church. Therefore, their money is going to the Yon8 campaign. You can't tell me that the campaign wasn't responsible for the Prop passing, and since the majority of funding came from the Mormon Church, which came from Mormons...you see why Mormons (even those who may have opposed the proposition, but whose $ went to fund the campaign) are, in large part, to blame. This is not to discount the CA voters who voted for 8, but it is disturbing that out of state money from a religious organization funded a change in our constitution.
As far as people who voted yes being biggots: how is it possible that they are not? They just don't want to change a definition of marriage? I know this parallel has been used to death, but legalizing interracial marriages used to be illegal...until we changed the definition of marriage to include them. Was it not biggotry to exclude mixed-race couples from the definition of marriage?
Same-sex couples have fewer rights because of this proposition passing. Period. Those who voted yes voted to remove the rights of a group of people. How is it not biggotry to vote to remove the rights of a group of people?
how?
i don't know. it surprised me too. but i feel like i must drop you a personal note. i came to the city last thursday for an event i organized. you wrote about it. here's what you said:
"Head to the intersection of Castro (Market and 17th Streets) today, where Sarah Palin look-alikes will gather to -- sigh, fucking christ -- "fan through the city looking for Joe Six-Pack." Really, if you don't play a character called "Liz Lemon" for a living, then nix the Palin getup. For something groundbreaking, you should try a sexy devil outfit or Frank Chu costume instead."
on that day, i had two other sarahs (and the real frank chu) show up and tell every single news channel (who were also there) to vote no on 8. you could have joined us that day or you could shared the invitation in a positive way, but you didn't. for extra points, your first comment:
"I agree ... they should get their asses over to the No on 8 campaign HQ if they have that kinda free time to help keep discrimination out of the California Constitution for Christ's sake."
i admit it, i am a texan. i moved here a few years ago and i voted no on 8. and i am really disappointed in the lack of community i see every day from californians.
maybe this is why prop 8 passed. i was using my free time to try to rally more no on 8 votes every way i thought might work. yes, you could have too, but you didn't. so the question i have isn't how, but why? why do you push each other away so joyfully, instead of coming together?
wait, what? bright strangely, are you saying sfist did nothing to help defeat prop. 8? that's just not the case.
are you.... what?
also, there is a lot of community in sf and in the state of california, by the way. some transplants suggest otherwise, but it's here. it's just not as obvious. and i like that.
Another thing, do you think any person at that castro street intersection who yes on 8? If you're that serious about coming together, or rallying, hows about rallying somewhere that isn't announced on a blog? Hows about rallying in Solano county?
Don't blame the arch tone of a blog for your laziness. Please.
ok, let me give you a demonstration. just look at the first 4 comments you've gotten here:
"That one and Biden explicitly did NOT support gay marriage."
"One guy could have stopped this and STILL been elected, but he chose to stay nearly silent on the issue."
"Thanks a lot, you slimy Patrick Bateman-looking piece of shit."
"I hardly think it's fair to blame "progressives" for Prop 8. Prop 8 passed because 70% of black Californians voted for separate but equal."
personally, i was trying to do everything i could think of. maybe i missed some things, but you personally shot down my event when you could have claimed it and joined in. why did you do that?
and i'm not claiming participating with me would have changed the election, but what would have? seriously?
your archness didn't blow my marriage rights. we could be in this together. you could have suggested an event the following day in solano, but you didn't. i live in the south bay, and i was protesting other days in my neighborhood. what did you do?
on the day of the election, you were busy wondering when cindy sheehan was going to start work at happy donuts. way to go. yes, we can apparently be very bitchy when we put our minds to it. you also found time to invite people to the victory party in the castro.
and here you are, the day after the election, wondering what happened and calling the strangers who tried to help before it was too late, lazy. good work, arch blogger.
Actually after reading this little article there are in fact some falsehoods here in itself. The LDS church did not ship in any money from Utah for the Yes on Prop 8 campaign. Actually I think the only donations from the church itself was just a little over $2,000 and was for some traveling expenses. Any funds that actually came from the church came from the church members themselves. These were funds voluntarily donated and was money that was not tax exempt. Those tithing funds that LDS people pay did not go towards the campaign. In fact, only 5% of California's population is LDS. And even then, not all of those are currently practicing in the LDS faith. So why is the blame put on these people? Is is just someone to blame? Especially when there were still those LDS people who voted No on Prop 8. For people that say "No to hate, no on 8", there sure is a lot of hatred towards those who voted yes.
For people that say "No to hate, no on 8", there sure is a lot of hatred towards those who voted yes.
Oddly enough, there's a quote from the Bible I think might answer your question. Galatians 6:7. Let's go with the King James translation...
"Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap"
As far as I'm concerned, the folks who voted "yes" on Prop 8 sowethe-ed first.
The LDS church did not ship in any money from Utah for the Yes on Prop 8 campaign.
Oh, well, that makes it all better!
Well dantsea I was correcting the article. There are lies in it, just like all over the no on 8 campaign. And the whole quoting the Bible by BeejW. I don't remember when those that voted yes on 8 were coming out and standing in front of your homes calling you names of being a bigot, a hateful person, and other names that go along with that. So how did they sow anything hateful things? Stop blaming people because you didn't get your way.
Stop blaming people because you didn't get your way.
Yeah, all you did was take civil rights away from a group of your fellow citizens.
Like many of your fellow Yes on 8 friends, you lack the mental capacity to understand what you've done and why people are so angry. That's okay, though, because you'll be experiencing the effect of unintended consequences from your decision for years to come and that, my simplistic friend, will be far more satisfying to me than any words I could type here.
Tactically, I'm not sure that pointing out the obvious (supporters of Prop 8, even though they may be fine upstanding citizens in many ways, are most certainly anti-gay bigots who oppose equality) helped the campaign.
But now - now that these guys have won, demanding a certain amount of accountability for this vote could not be more just.
Tout abus sera puni.
I cannot wrap my head around the slippery slope argument. How is allowing two consenting adults the right to marry the same as bestiality or polygamy or pedophilia?
My conjectures:
1. People don't like the idea of married priests
2. Straight guys of the "Help stamp out gay sex; legalize gay marriage" persuasion realized that the failure of Prop 8 could spell the death of lesbian porn.
3. Peole hate Gavin Newsom so much that they voted for Prop 8 jut to spite him.
4. People love Obama so much that they wanted marriage to be between a man and a woman, just as he does.
get your asses in gear next time knock on doors and make that phone call. GRASS ROOTS good luck