Not a very good turn out for the gay marriage folks on a warm summer-like day in Los Angeles to protest the passage of California’s Proposition 8 which restored the traditional definition of marriage.
In Los Angeles, protesters clustered shoulder to shoulder near City Hall before setting off on a downtown march, chanting and carrying rainbow flags and signs bearing messages such as “No More Mr. Nice Gay” and “No on Hate.”
The Los Angeles Police Department estimated that 10,000 to 12,000 people attended the event, well below the 40,000 the department had expected.
There were wild-fires in Los Angeles and Orange Counties which did tie up some of the freeways (but not towards downtown) but the heat was not oppressive (despite what the Los Angeles Times or laist said). The No on 8 did NOT turn out a crowd. And, this is why despite a biased ballot proposition language by left wing radical, California Attorney General Jerry Brown and endorsement by every major newspaper in California Yes on 8 passed - banning gay marriage.
Of course, there was the obligatory Christian and Mormon bigotry at the Los Angeles demonstration:
Among other colorful or provocative anti-Proposition 8 signs on display around the state, some making reference to support for the initiative by Mormons:
“If heaven discriminates, I don’t want to go.”
“The same Bible was used to justify slavery.”
“Hmm. . . . What’s so traditional about polygamy?”
“Are you better off now that I can’t marry?”
“Where’s My Gay Tax Break?”
“Joseph Smith had 33 wives. Gays only want one.”
“I was born gay. You were taught religion.”
“My brother is getting married . . . again. Why can’t I get married once?”
“WWJD with $76 m? Not Prop. 8.”
Flap can only imagine the film footage being accumulated for the next ballot proposition regarding gay marriage in California.
But, if the homosexual community wishes to win the next election they will have to turn out more folks and win some hearts and minds of California voters.
Today’s demonstration failed miserably in both categories.
Technorati Tags: Gay Marriage, California Proposition 8
November 16th, 2008 at 12:08 am
You obviously weren’t there to see the protest today, because it was HUGE and in no way a failure! What kind of redneck site it this? Your attempt to include false reports to try to weaken the tide of activism that will ultimately bring justice by overturning proposition 8’s bigoted attempt to strip civil rights from citizens will be seen for what it is: more lies from the gay marriage opponents!!
November 16th, 2008 at 12:38 am
3 is a crowd… 10000? thousands time bigger than a crowd. that is as little attention this article gets. peace.
November 16th, 2008 at 2:32 am
I loved the diversity and the creativity represented in the video. Thanks for showing the multiplicity of the LGBT communities: many walks of life, many bodies, many styles, many people …
November 16th, 2008 at 7:11 am
I agree with the protesters…..every humanbeing has a right to live life in his own way….
Amit businesss last blog post..Osborne faces pressure over pound
November 16th, 2008 at 8:43 am
1,
If you don’t like rednecks then stay away from them and they will stay away from you!:-))
4,
Uhhhhhh……no, they don’t.
November 16th, 2008 at 9:34 am
My favorite is the one were it compares the gay community to the chickens!!!
If you guys were asking to be able to stand up in your cage and move around on a circle, no doubt the voters would have complied! What you are asking is to change the fiber of our society because of your sexual preferences and not even the
chickens would sing on that one.
November 16th, 2008 at 10:48 am
The lunatic left’s mantra is always tolerance for me but not for thee. For five thousand years marriage has been definded as between a man and a woman and they wish to hijack that definition that to their own political ends. It is nothing more than another attempt by people (who really care for others!) to destroy America and install a utopian socialist state.
November 16th, 2008 at 11:00 am
@1
I was not at the protest but was in the Valley as well as Burbank and Glendale. There was no sign of a No on 8 protest.
A 8,000 - 10,000 person “crowd” in Los Angeles is a joke in a 3 million plus city.
Face it Joe. There is no support for gay marriage.
Put it back on the ballot and it will fail again.
Let the court throw Proposition 8 and we will recall the entire court.
There is no public support for your cause. Thirty states have banned gay marriage. Get over it.
November 16th, 2008 at 11:34 am
I was there; it was huge. Your statement “Of course, there was the obligatory Christian and Mormon bigotry at the Los Angeles demonstration” is irresponsible and typical of right-wing divide and conquer strategies (that’s why there is so much focus on the race on voters in the right-wing press). The Bigotry of the Mormons towards gays and lesbians is why we were there. Denying a segment of the population marriage is not only bigotry, it’s an attempt to render marginalized groups less than human.
November 16th, 2008 at 11:38 am
Huge, are you kidding me? Maybe in your own mind. The No on 8 demonstration was a failure. Admit it.
What do you call those signs, Tom?
Your other statements are just unhinged crapola.
November 16th, 2008 at 11:39 am
You are clearly biased, homophobic, and have no idea what you are talking about. Nice try though, unfortunately you fail in making your point…It was a historic day for civil rights and anyone who is interested will clearly see that and learn!!
By the way your “sign” quotes are pretty funny, too bad they are fake. I was there and saw many many signs such as “god loves me” and other pro-religious statements. The only negative comments on religion called out the Mormon church for presenting lies in their campaign, etc.
November 16th, 2008 at 11:46 am
Good at calling me names but weak on argument.
Historic day for Civil Rights? Wow. Give me a break.
And, are you calling the Los Angele Times reports biased, inaccurate or what?
November 16th, 2008 at 11:58 am
@11.
Yes, I am biased. Can you please tell us why you need our permission to hijack the definition of marriage when Kalie-Forn-Yah has same sex partner benefits? Can you tell us how we as straight people will benefit from the glory that will be in ‘Gay Marriage’? By the way, Texas has a constitutional amendment against such tomfoolery that passed two years ago by a three to one margin.
November 16th, 2008 at 12:04 pm
A crowd of 10-12,000 is certainly not a flop!!!
I am not gay, but I have many friends who are. They deserve all of the rights I have.
This is a matter of human decency and fairness. Why do people go so out of your way to hate? Why not put that energy into doing something good, something positive? Help sick children. Help the elderly.
And to #6… “What you are asking is to change the fiber of our society because of your sexual preferences”. The fiber of our society? Give me a break. Over the past year thousands of gays have married in California. How on earth did that change the fiber of our society? In Massachusetts it’s legal and they are doing just fine. Furthermore, this isn’t their ‘Sexual Preference’. How ignorant!!!
People who are gay are born that way. If you hateful anti-gay people would expand your experiences a little and get to know them you’d see it’s not simply a decision they made. Stop fearing and hating what you don’t know - that kind of behaviour has been the root of all evil in our world. Think about it.
Let them live their lives. Leave them alone!
November 16th, 2008 at 12:06 pm
10-12K people is a FLOP demonstration no matter how you spin it.
Leave the traditional definition of marriage alone.
Oh, that is what they have said in 30 states. Gee Whiz…..
November 16th, 2008 at 12:14 pm
To Babsy: WHO says that for 5000 years, marriage has been defined as between one man and one woman? If you ever took a sociology class, you would learn that in different cultures throughout the world throughout the centuries, marriage was also defined as between one man and more than one woman, one woman and more than one man; same-sex marriage was allowed in many native American cultures as well as in European cultures… get a CLUE and stop defining things by your own religion, which by the way, assuming you’re of the Judeo-Christian persuasion, is a cultural import from the Middle East, anyway.
November 16th, 2008 at 12:14 pm
also, babsy-
to answer your (uneducated) question - you have to be legally married to have many rights. Marriage began as a religious ceremony and then loads of ‘rights’, that have nothing to do with religion, were attached to it. A friend of mine lost his partner to aids. They were together for 10 years, and he nursed him as he watched him die. In his final days in the hospital, he was not allowed into the room because he wasn’t married. His partner’s mom was a right-wing nutjob who insisted the hospital follow the law and not allow his partner in as he died because he wasn’t ‘family’ and they weren’t married. According to the nurse, his partner died in tears because he didn’t have the love of his life with him. Only his hateful, judgemental mother. NO body should have to die like this. The surviving partner is still grieve-stricken to this very day, 8 years later.
This is just stupid. Cruel.
That very human aspect aside, you cannot file joing taxes in a civil union as married couples can. Spousal health insurance benefits can be denied, as with Social Security survivor benefits. I know gay couples who have been together longer than most married couples I know. It is unfair that we discriminate against the gay couples.
Everyone, educate yourselves. And please, just stop hating. Being gay isn’t tomfoolery. Geez.
EVOLVE people!!!!
November 16th, 2008 at 12:17 pm
@Tammy
Hospital visitation rights are not at issue in Proposition 8. California already has addressed that issue with domestic partnerships.
Stop trying to change the subject.
November 16th, 2008 at 12:19 pm
Flap, you hateful person. Go ahead and keep telling yourself a crowd of 10,000 plus people isnt much. Go ahead. You must be a foul, foul person. How sad that this is how you choose to spend your time: hating. Discriminating.
You are a bigot. Period.
I hope you try to do some good one day.
November 16th, 2008 at 12:21 pm
flap, that was before the rights were secured via dom. partnerships.
my point was: married rights give more that dom. partnerships/civil unions. You can’d deny that.
November 16th, 2008 at 12:22 pm
@19 Tammy,
Please read my terms of use above and consider this a warning.
November 16th, 2008 at 12:23 pm
Babsy, your version of “traditional marriage” is less than 100 years old–not 5000 years old. You need to do your research. If you wish to be traditional, perhaps you should consider arranging the marriages of your children, to your business partner’s child, or even to your brother’s sons. Sell your daughters off to the highest bidder. Within your 5000 year window there is history of popes marrying, men marrying men, siblings marrying, and polygamy… all legal. 30 yr old men commonly married 12-15 yr old girls. Marriage for thousands of years were between individuals for financial reasons, religion wasn’t involved until the 1500’s and the state wasn’t involved until the 1700’s. Love as the motivator wasn’t the norm, even in THIS country until the 1900’s. Stop believing everything you see in the movies. You obvious are oblivious to the history of marriage in the world, this country, and assorted religions. If you educate yourself on these marriages, you’ll see your version was popular in the 1950’s, and that marriage like all other things evolves with the needs of humanity. Of course you have to care about anyone besides yourself to be willing to accept change and growth. Your religious beliefs should have no bearing on another’s legal rights.
November 16th, 2008 at 12:26 pm
@20 You are incorrect. Not in California.
@22 Got any links to substantiate your argument?
November 16th, 2008 at 12:29 pm
flap
-don’t worry, i’m signing out from this now. you clearly aren’t listening to any side other than your own, so honestly, I don’t see your purpose. all this negativity is all i can handle for one day.
November 16th, 2008 at 12:30 pm
Ok…I dont know who wrote the “summary” of what went down yesteday, but it was in no way a failure and as for the poor turnout, well I dont know what the author is talking about. It was wall to wall people for several city blocks. As a matter of fact I took off a little early because I was starting to feel a bit too claustrophobic. Who wrote this the head of the Mormon church?? It was an awesome display of unity and I hope that we dont stop until the California Supreme Court overturns this ridiciulous ballot measure. Can you imagine the outcry if this law was aimed at any other minority? Imagine if they told the black community or hispanic community or the Jews that they couldnt marry who they wanted. Can you even fathom something like that? The best measurement of whether or not you think this ballot measure is ok is if you can imagine yourself being ok with the results, if the results effected YOU. Would you still be ‘alright” with the way this has turned out if the results took something away from you? (Its a good equation to see if you would still feel the same way). Something else to consider is this: I have heard many people saying that “well its been put to a vote and so now thats the way it should be” as if the majority should dictate the way we should live. Imagine if you will what the outcome would have been if they had put the question of segregation up for a vote in the south in the 1950’s? What if you had let even put the question of slavery up for a vote in the 1850’s? Would those results indicate that the country should continue on the path that it had been on. Change is a difficult thing for people to embrace, but change is what is needed here. We cannot as a nation simply put peoples rights up for a simple yes or no vote. I mean today its the gays, and tomorrow….who knows, it could be….YOU!
November 16th, 2008 at 12:37 pm
10,000 people is not wall to wall. Maybe on a three foot wide sidewalk.
Face it the turnout was very light. It was a flop.
November 16th, 2008 at 12:49 pm
Flap, how many do you want? I suppose you think I’m making this up.
Google “history of marriage” and you’ll find 10 million.
Here are just a few resources, from historical, psychological, and religious resources.
http://www.psychologytoday.com/articles/pto-20050506-000006.html
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/09693a.htm
http://www.counterpunch.org/leupp12132003.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marriage
http://www.plannedparenthood.org/issues-action/medical-privacy/marriage-6402.htm
and in response to your post #8: You say there’s no support? You’re wrong. I support marriage between any consenting adults, including Gay Marriage and was unable to attend the protest due to work. If it makes you feel better to think this was a flop, enjoy. You are still wrong. Enjoy living in ignorance and fear.
November 16th, 2008 at 1:08 pm
Well you keep telling yourself that, and when they overturn it this week…you see if you can get more people to march in protest that the court RESTORED our rights…….how many do you think would take to the streets to protest the court returning civil rights instead of taking them away……..??? food for thought.
JDB
November 16th, 2008 at 1:19 pm
Flap. it seems that you are using or embracing the eternal method of the GOP/conservatives/right wing to exaggerate your point to make your point seem more valid. The arguement that the rally didnt garner very much support (which isnt true) still doesnt hold much water in trying to point out that the battle was over with the election and now we should just get on with out lives. That just isnt going to happen. We are in a unique situation here in CA because although there have been other ballot measures in other states. California was the only state where the right to marry already existed and then was voted away. Personally (and this is just my opinion) I think that the court will rule that since they already concluded in the first ruling that the right to marry was a “right” and that to exclude homosexuals was in fact taking that civil right away, they will conclude that this vote is unenforceable. I mean in the first ruling they said that ..yes it is a civil right and they are being excluded so that is unconstitutional and they must be allowed to marry. Now that it is established that it is in fact a right, how could they go back and say that just because its gone to a vote we are no longer going to consider it a civeil right. They have already established that it is a right and now I think they will go in and say that no matter what the “majority” says you can not take a civil right away from one group while extolling it to another……..Remember it says that ‘all men are created equal”…NOT “all men are created equal unless you happen to be gay”……I just have to ask this question though, I have to wonder if those same people who are saying now that “its been put to a vote and now its law’….I wonder if those same people will be of the same mindset when the Supreme court says that this is unconstitutional….It will be law then, and then I guess that we should all just go home and stop compalining……dont you think?
JDB
November 16th, 2008 at 1:48 pm
@27
We won’t take to the streets. We don’t have to make an exhibition like Saul Alinsky and the LEFT directs you.
We will gather the necessary signatures and recall the California Supreme Court while we go to federal court which will stop any stay in Prop 8.
Checkmate, dude.
November 16th, 2008 at 1:50 pm
@28
Ever hear of the DOMA?
November 16th, 2008 at 1:54 pm
#16: I just said it. Don’t like it? So what? I don’t care.:-)
#17. If you think life is ‘fair’ then you’re dumber than a box of rocks. I didn’t vote for “NOBAMA” either! BAWHAHAHAHAHA!!
#19; But he’s a nice bigot, as am I.
#22. You’re right. How could I have ever fooled a true intellectual genius such as you? Having now had that cosmic epiphany and it’s resultant orgasm, I feel privileged to merely be on the same planet with an Enlightened Person such as yourself. What did your masters promise you for going to conservative blogs and creating agitprop? Yawn……
November 16th, 2008 at 2:02 pm
Because your perceive (somehow) the turnout to be small doesn’t make prop 8 legitimate.
November 16th, 2008 at 2:07 pm
@32
No, the voters of California did by passing Proposition 8 on election day.
November 16th, 2008 at 2:21 pm
Recall the Supreme Court……IN YOUR DREAMS!! It will NEVER happen. I have to give you creidtt Flap that at least you hold your ideals so close that you actually believe that they are possible. Recall the Supreme Court? Can anybody tell me if that has ever happened? I dont think it has ever been done and I doubt it will be. The underlying issue here (and Flap you never addressed my earlier points about does a majority vote make something morally and legally binding) Number one, just because this has been put to a vote DOES NOT make it morally or legally binding. As I pointed out in an earlier post there have been any number of things in our history that would have easily passed if put to a vote and yet they no longer exist. ( for Gods sake we had a civil war because half the county thought it was their God given right to own anther human being) Yes a long bloody civil war because half the nation felt so strongly about the issue. Furthermore how many people died in the south and ignored state and federal law when they were told that they had to start segregation. These are all perfect examples of when change was forced onto the majority (sometimes with dire consequences) yet here we are a better nation for it. It is the same thing here. As far as this nonsense about a recall goes, I hardly know where to begin, or even should I. Did they recall the judge who ordered segregation? Did they recall the judge(s) who said abortion was within a womans right? It just wont happen. Your argeument starts off with the assumption that should any judge reverse this ballot measure, they woule be doing something contrary to the law or constitutuion……that is just not the case. They are intrepreting the constituion in a way that you dont agree with and that does not constitute a reason for recall. Oh Im sure there will be a lot of hub-bubbing and screaming that they overturned the will of the people, but as I said befoe the will of the people can not alway be taken for gospel.
GAME SET MATCH
JDB
November 16th, 2008 at 2:22 pm
@27
Your links are a joke. Planned Parenthood and wikipedia. Jokes all.
Those societies that permitted same sex debauchery have really survived the test of time, now haven’t they?
November 16th, 2008 at 2:25 pm
@35
Are you kidding me?
Google Rose Bird.
Voters in California have a right to amend the California Constitution. And, this is what Proposition 8 does.
Game over.
November 16th, 2008 at 2:29 pm
Oh and one last thing Flap……You talked about going to Federal Court if the California Supreme Court overturns Prop 8. Federal Court will most likely not take on a case like this because, as Im sure you know marriage is still a state issue. The Federal Supreme Court does not want to get there hands dirty on this because they know they will then be looked at as the last result for EVERYTHING. Marriage is a states rigthts issue and unless the the FEDS decide to venture into territory where they have never been before, I would be willing to bet you that the CA supreme court has the last word on this. If what you purport were true, why then did opponents of same sex marriage not try to have their case heard by the Federal court when the CA court said it was ok for gays to marry? Why didnt they go right to the Federal Supreme court back then? I think the answer probably is because they knew that they would not be heard.
just more food for thought
JDB
November 16th, 2008 at 2:34 pm
Flapster!!! You should reconsider. It was a HUGE turnout! 12,000 is 0.4% of LA’s population! How could anyone with twelve functioning neurons not see this as a HUGE MANDATE for CHANGE!!!!???? Bawhahahahaha!!!!
November 16th, 2008 at 2:34 pm
@38
No, you are wrong again.
Proposition 8 signatures were already being gathered when the California Supreme Court ruled in May of this year. Why make a federal challenge when it is more expedient to change the California Constitution? Which was done.
Should the California Supreme Court overturn Proposition 8, suit WILL be filed in federal court and the California Court will be recalled.
The will of California voters will prevail.
Face it, dude.
You lost.
November 16th, 2008 at 2:37 pm
@39
Now, don’t make fun of their HUGE turn-out.
Remember when the illegal aliens turned out hundreds of thousands.
Gay marriage - not so much.
November 16th, 2008 at 2:37 pm
Ok Flap….touche…Rose Bird…Good luck getting it done again over this.
I can see the commercials now……They voted to let homosexuals get married…….lets show them!!
again I pay homage to you ideals……but I think you are on the sinking end of this ship.
JDB
Gotta run….nice chattin with you……but Im gonna go have some hot man sex with my husband!!
(God that must be killin you huh)…….
November 16th, 2008 at 2:41 pm
Whatever floats your boat, man.
The commercials will be easy - “whether you like it or not.”
See you soon.
November 16th, 2008 at 3:04 pm
ha, Babsy found her thesaurus and retorted with attitude and anger. I never regarded education as a cosmic epiphany. It’s hard to believe we ARE on the same planet.
#32, In the fashion you are able to communicate in:
You’re still an idiot. The truth is too difficult for you to acknowledge. Your lack of ability to debate differences of opinion without feeling insulted and put down is a shame.
I’m sorry you feel stupid. Just check your facts before thinking you know everything. Statements like “For five thousand years marriage has been definded as between a man and a woman” are misinformed. “Definded” isn’t even a word. 5000 years is an inaccurate timeline for your reasoning, historically in error of your statement. I don’t have a problem with you being uncomfortable with people that aren’t just like you, or disagreeing with me, but if you aren’t qualified to have an intelligent conversation or debate on an issue, what gives you the right to legislate it. Next thing you’ll be calling me a fornicator.
It + is = it’s, I think you meant “its resultant orgasm” (glad I could oblige and I’m not even a lesbian). Mastery of the English language shouldn’t be so difficult.
Am I right that you don’t even live in California (which you seem to despise so much) but hail from Texas? Why would your opinion matter to us as you continue to insult us? Stay in Texas, make your own laws. Why do you care what we do here–does it make your life better or does it just scare you that things somewhere might change? I acknowledge that this is Flap’s blog. Of course he’ll get the last word but he also moderates this blog and makes the choice to allow the posting of these alternative views. Hey a hit to your site is still a hit to your site.
Babsy, unfortunately you do feel privileged. Privileged to have the right to happiness and deny it to others.
In the end there are no nice bigots. (and if you are PROUD of calling yourself one, you really are a lost soul.)
The church has never had a monopoly on marriage. Monogamous marriage originated from men wanting vaginal rights over women, to guarantee the authenticity of bloodlines. All it takes is a modicum of research by an interested individual to find historical truth.
Our constitution ensures our rights to our own religious and moral beliefs, and separation of church and state. American law doesn’t allow for legislating morality. Morals aside, this is an issue of equal treatment under the law. You wouldn’t allow discrimination against yourself without an argument. If you want to follow 5000 years of tradition, perhaps you support the concept of slavery as well, it was for many centuries an accepted practice throughout the world. Where do you draw the line between right and wrong? 100 years ago, our newly elected president’s parents wouldn’t have had the right to marry. Inclusion evolves through generations. Do you really want to live like 5000 years ago?
Perhaps history will show Flap is right, and this turn out is low by comparison. Perhaps he blogged about it because he’s disappointed in the turn out, expecting more to show up. Perhaps he included it just to rile us all up. All I’m saying is that this one protest march in itself doesn’t mean that no one supports inclusion and hateful beliefs will not stop the advancement of a more homogenous kinder society. This protest wasn’t the necessary tool in winning many California hearts and votes, not the majority this time, but a still a very significant percentage.
November 16th, 2008 at 3:20 pm
@36
same sex debauchery? Ha! you have NO control over that. Marriage may be the issue, but relationships and families you have no control over.
@39 miss babs, how ’bout the 5,301,540 people that voted against Prop 8, who cares about the march. 47% of Californian’s want fairness.
Sounds like Flap thinks ILLEGAL Aliens should have more rights than American citizens. hmmm. Bigger voice in the Mexican border states on that occasion, I’ll give you that. If you wanna think this march represents the voice of gay marriage support, I guess the conservatives have to feel they’re winning somewhere. the next four years will be much more fun than the last 8. Despite the disaster George is leaving the country in, we do have HOPE. We see the country having the ability to be more well than damaged. Whether YOU like it or not. ha.
mmm hot man sex.
November 16th, 2008 at 3:33 pm
Traditonal marriage won on November 4th as it has in every state where there has been an election.
Whether you like it or not…..
November 16th, 2008 at 3:51 pm
Yes, Nicky, you’re correct in my misspelling of ‘its’ (possessive form). I failed to proofread my reply before posting, but you know how us idiots are. There is one thing you seem to be unable to comprehend in our spirited exchanges: I DON’T CARE WHAT YOU WANT. Got that? Have a pleasant evening.
November 16th, 2008 at 3:53 pm
The term “traditional” still cracks me up. Highest divorce rates, highest adultery rates. Huge percentage of sexual dysfunction and perversity comes from forcing people into little boxes where they don’t fit.
In 5-10 years the 65 and up electorate that was the only group with a majority voting for prop 8 will be past having their voice heard. If marriage doesn’t evolve it will become an unnecessary and antiquated institution. I could care less. Hold onto the 50’s. Believe in fairy tales. It doesn’t change my life or choices. When you support the government legislating my bedroom, it gives me the right to legislate yours. Maybe we should just take everyone’s marriage rights away.
In California the electorate doesn’t have the sole right to revise the constitution. This won’t be the last word, no more than Prop 22 was. You can’t stop progress. Enjoy your one little temporary victory.
November 16th, 2008 at 3:57 pm
Wow Flap,
From how you extol traditional marriage you would think that straight people have made it an unequaled success! and which point in the 5,000+ years of man/woman marriage would you like to point to for reference? When women were the property of their husbands, polygamous marriages (in the Bible), arranged marriages, divorced marriages? You remind me of the folks that are constantly quoting Leviticus as justification for outdated and ignorant points of view. Grow up and learn that civil and human rights are not up for popular vote. If you want a theocracy, move to Iran.
November 16th, 2008 at 4:21 pm
See, Babsy, it doesn’t matter to me if care what I want.
But you do. If you didn’t you wouldn’t have such issue with my stance. You care so much that it’s funny. You’re just mad because you know I’m right.. go look at your husband’s history log, and you can see how perfect traditional marriage is. If traditional marriage is so great, why do men need so much porn to supplement their oh so happy homes? Mrs. Traditional Marriage hates to admit that marriage isn’t perfect. It means they have to recognize just how unhappy they really are. Marriage for most women are a way to trap a man into paying her bills. A way to make someone else responsible for their happiness, someone to blame when they are unhappy,. Men stay married because they don’t want to pay more not because they are happy. And when they get sick of women like Babs nagging them, they find some sweet girl to make them feel like a man again. (it only takes a comment and a smile not a roll in the hay.)
The gay couples I know have much more authentic relationships and lives than you Traditionalists. How truly honest can you be without worrying about losing your meal ticket? They are brave enough to be honest with themselves. Take the silver spoons out of your mouths and smell the manure. Keeping marriage “traditional” is a frantic attempt to keep fooling yourselves that you are faithful, happy, and fulfilled by marriage. Your piece of paper does not a lifelong commitment make.
I have a feeling I’ll be voting in California long after you.
November 16th, 2008 at 4:31 pm
@48
Better read the California Constitution.
November 16th, 2008 at 4:32 pm
@49
But, amending the California Constitution is and it has been changed.
Get over it or try winning an election.
November 16th, 2008 at 4:44 pm
Bigots, nothing but bigots.
WHY do YOU care if gays marry? It has no effect on your life.
Traditional marriage is NOT sacred. Divorce proves such.
The procreation argument strips marriage down to little more then the ability to procreate, and so those who CANNOT and have no intention of having children should not be allowed to marry. Be it those who are sterile, old or even on birth control. Married couples should NOT be allowed to use birth control as it goes against the natural ways of your lord.
The protect the children argument is so full of lies that even those FOR proposition 8 had difficultly believing it. Marriage is NOT taught in schools at ANY age. Marriage, be it homosexual or heterosexual, is taught by PARENTS. Sex education is taught in schools, which is optional of course, with NO mention of marriage or even relationships.
Condemning those who don’t prescribe to your religious beliefs is going against the foundations of this country.
I’m sorry but this is a losing battle for you. Look at the numbers. Proposition 8 won by a small majority, a VERY small majority. Four years ago the numbers against homosexual marriage were overwhelming, and now they aren’t. I know it scares you, for whatever reason that may be, just as womens right’s and desegregation scared the people of this country not so long ago. This is a country of progress and change, however slow and that change is inevitable. We will move forward.
November 16th, 2008 at 5:03 pm
@51
Article 18 of the state Constitution provides that the document can be changed by amendment or by revision. An amendment may be enacted by initiative with a majority vote, whereas a revision must first be passed by two-thirds of the Legislature before being submitted to the voters.
Seeing there was already an amendment allowing the legality of gay marriage, Prop 8 appears to be a revision of existing policy, thus requiring 2/3 legislative vote first.
keep spinning.
November 16th, 2008 at 5:21 pm
good point: why does Flop care about gay marriage? Be interesting to find out what’s really at stake for him personally.
November 16th, 2008 at 5:36 pm
@54
Most legal authorities say it is an amendment. But, this is what has been plead to to the California Supreme Court. It will be a reach to change a vote of the people TWICE.
If the California Supremes throw out Proposition 8 then we will sue in federal court and recall the court - just like Rose Bird.
I doubt this will be necessary though.
November 16th, 2008 at 5:36 pm
@50
I will never vote in California, land of kooks and flakes.
@53
My dear, sweet Annie: Yes, I’m a bigot. What of it? There are many bigots in this world and life is unfair. As long as your happiness depends on what I do you will forever be MISERABLE.
@54
Nicky, Nicky, Nicky!!! Spinning????? Surely the lawyers for your side checked on the legitimacy of the proposition before it went on the ballot, no?
November 16th, 2008 at 5:42 pm
@54 and 55
Tom, first of all, don’t call me names. Read my terms of use above.
Go here and watch the videos: http://flapsblog.com/2008/11/13/gay-marriage-headed-back-to-california-ballot-in-june-2010/
and here: http://flapsblog.com/2008/11/12/elton-john-criticizes-california-proposition-8-for-focusing-on-marriage/
This explains my stake in this issue in a nutshell - for my children and grandchildren.
Update: Here is a piece by Maggie Gallagher that also explains what is at stake: http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/sunday/commentary/la-oe-gallagher1-2008nov01,0,5151041.story
November 16th, 2008 at 6:13 pm
@55/58
I don’t see Tom calling anyone names, he asks a question.
@57 babsy
1) Flap asks that you not call him or anyone else names.. you call him and I “kooks and flakes” (see terms of service)
(and yes, you keep agreeing to names called on you, which you agree to and wear like a badge of honor. still shaking my head)
2) My name isn’t Nicky
3) Seeing you don’t vote here, your opinion has no bearing on this issue. No body cares what you think.
I don’t think Annie will be miserable at all as much as you’d like to think you have that power, you don’t.
4) your need to be so involved in this California matter from your seat in TX makes me wonder if you’re someone’s internet girlfriend. Don’t you have family and issues there to occupy your concern?
@ 56
Flap had to say “most” because it’s not decided yet. It’s up to interpretation. and the people aren’t the final authority in cases of discrimination. If it’s pushed to federal court, separation of church and state will have to be addressed fully. The churches don’t want that– it eliminates power they’ve been grooming for generations. All Americans won’t agree to give up their individual rights or follow one common church. It’s anti American. Why would I convert to your faith? Would you convert to mine?
@58
Flap, I’m curious what rights you want for your children and grandchildren? If they are gay, will you punish them for it? (I know a whole lot of gay male ex Mormons who were physically tortured by their church and loved ones.) My thought is that loving parents embrace and protect their children, religious or not. In reading Maggie Gallagher’s article, I still don’t see how gay marriage interferes with, but instead upholds, those great traditions of family in society. I would think your common enemy would be divorce, adultery, and unmarried pregnancy, not people’s desire to be monogamous, committed, and family oriented. (Those “common enemies” are not new issues or gay issues.)
November 16th, 2008 at 6:24 pm
Dearest Nicky,
I am just like you. I will go until I am stopped. Got that? As for Annie, the only power I have over her, or you for that matter, is what you give me. So I say again, as long as your happiness depends on what someone else does (i.e., the State giving you gay ‘marriage’), you will suffer. Have a pleasant evening.
November 16th, 2008 at 6:29 pm
Barbara, you are nothing like me. Keep trolling, you’re funny to watch. Your comments border on threats. Sorry you have no will to make the world a better place. Go back to the dark ages where you belong. Bring your marshmellows.
November 16th, 2008 at 6:31 pm
@59
Tom addressed me as FLOP. Read the terms of use.
Babsy has a stake in California’s Proposition 8 because had it not passed and gay marriage was legal, the homosexual lobby was immediately going to sue in federal court to overturn the DOMA.
The California supreme court will rule whether the fifteen words are an amendment or a revision to the California Constitution. I doubt they will consider it a revision. But, if they do, the people of California will recall all of the Justices and amend the Constitution to strip them of jurisdiction in the definition of marriage.
You see the will of the people has advantages.
I don’t think you will ever understand my stake in this issue.
Updated:
But, here is another video that lays it out: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A-jc4ujp9Ok
November 16th, 2008 at 6:52 pm
Sweet Nicky,
I am not Barbara and I have no reason to threaten anyone as my IQ is only 64. I do have the will to make the world a better place to live. I am going to sell all I own and give it to the One. You know, to spread the wealth around for those less willing to work than me. See, you were so wrong about me!
November 16th, 2008 at 7:43 pm
@62
I haven’t stopped hearing what you have to say, or refused to understand your perspective. The youtube video perhaps states your fears. I feel like you’re saying that your rights and freedoms must be upheld at the cost of mine and others.
Does this mean you refuse treatment to gay patients or refuse to bill domestic partner insurance? I may be misreading, are you anti gay or anti gay marriage? btw, when you discounted wiki and PP as resources, you didn’t discount the Catholic website that substantiated the same historical information.
Marriage for procreation sake insults infertile couples. Procreation isn’t a requirement in America, and we are populated enough. Why should it be the foundation for marriage?
Would you support Civil Unions having ALL the legal rights of Marriage? Should people have the rights of inheritance on property they built together? Should family units have custody rights over those of distant blood relatives?
I’d support the right for churches to allow or deny marriages within their denominations and properties to follow the rules their congregations choose. I’m not asking for the sacrament of Holy Matrimony. I actually refused it for personal reasons. There are lots of marriages I wouldn’t approve of if my opinion had more value than another’s personal rights. I don’t love paying for other people’s bad choices.
How do other marriages legitimize your own? Does it keep you married longer? Make your marriage happier? My guess is that everyone responding to this blog has been in a loving long term relationship of some kind, solemnized by religion or law or love. Should we go back to just trading our daughters for dowries?
I think DOMA will be under scrutiny no matter what happens to Prop 8. DOMA is 15 years old. Not reflective of historical nor modern society as a whole. The author, Bob Barr, has since apologized for his sponsorship of the DOMA. Prop 8 is not something that passed by an overwhelming majority. Ventura and LA Counties were split so close to 50-50, a few thousand votes could have taken it the other way. I’ll have to say, I’m ashamed of all the people I know that didn’t bother to vote. Even if they would have tipped the scale in the other direction, I’d respect their taking a stand. I bet you don’t want the people of Massachusetts or Connecticut making the law here in California. It’s still a state issue and as you keep saying the people have spoken, yes, they have. Twelve million people voted on the issue. In effect, the state was very close to being split down the middle. This is not an issue that a small minority are pushing.
I respect Flap’s stance on this issue. I don’t have the same perspective, but I understand in some ways why you think things shouldn’t change.
(Babsy keeps typing my name erroneously. Tom may have just misread and mistyped as well. The word flop is in the blog title and perhaps Tom’s intention wasn’t to call you a name, Flap. Curious nickname.. is it dentistry related?) I actually did read your Terms of Use.
@63
in California you have no power. In America you have as much power as me. One vote. Isn’t this a great country? I still have freedom from your religion. No matter how much money you throw at your beliefs, goodness always prevails in the end. Hate no matter how disguised, is still hate.
November 16th, 2008 at 8:32 pm
Flap, Can you put your objections in your own words very simply? Thank you for those posts and I have to say that I really don’t agree with the points made, but more importantly but they don’t really explain why you personally have some much at stake in this issue. Gay marriage has been legal in Canada (where I am from) for a while and the world and its children are still safe! I know everyone makes this point, but people used to say the same things about interracial marriage, and it is a very interesting thing to compare them, because it turned out to simply be about fear. Fear of the new, or different…
November 16th, 2008 at 8:42 pm
@65
If you do not understand from the material I presented then you never will.
Since you are not an American tell me why you have anything at stake with the issue?
November 16th, 2008 at 9:14 pm
I am a dual citizen and live in California. My stake in this is simply wanting a better world for everyone. I think there are a lot of gay parents and gay children who would be better served by a society that accepts and welcomes everyone. When I think about all the gay and lesbian teenagers and children who have been harmed by a lot of the fear and superstition around homosexuality (Matthew Shephard, if you remember that tragic story, immediately comes to mind), it makes me sad. I hope that this whole issue resolves without anymore harm (physical or psychological) being done to those who are most vulnerable to the kinds of prejudice that this whole Prop 8 debate has unleashed. It is a good dialogue to have and important, I believe, to examine ones own prejudices when confronted with new situations or new kinds of social arrangements. But i guess you and I will have to respectively disagree. That’s about all I really want to say on this!
November 16th, 2008 at 9:58 pm
Boy, you guys surely know how to beat a dead dog!
Prop 8 passed. Done deal.
December 11th, 2008 at 5:14 pm
It doesn’t matter whether or not you think gay marriage is “natural” or “right.” You have to look at the proposition for what it is. It’s trying to take away rights from a certain minority group. Therefore, it is unconstitutional. The end.
December 11th, 2008 at 5:20 pm
California Proposition 8 restored the traditional definition of marriage (one man and one woman) to the California constiution.
Hence, it is not unconstitutional.
Move along…..