Proposition 8 Supporters are not all bigots (wedding, public school, taxes)

[caldje]

Originally Posted by Roaddog

All the talk in the world is not going to change the minds of anyone on here, if folks are going to vote yes or no they are not going to change, their minds are made up by now based on how they believe and how they feel, just because someone votes yes doesn't mean their anti gay or a bigot or a republican bible carrying gun totting racist, I'll speak for myself, I'm not threatened by Gay marriage, I just don't see two men or women as husband and wife, I'm all for civil unions and I'm all for Gays trying to expand those unions to increase the benefits to them, I don't care if the union allows the exact same rights as marriage I would vote for it but as I said two men do not equal husband and wife in my eyes and i mean that with no disrespect.

Would you vote for an ammendment that ALL partnerships are considered "civil unions" by the state. So that your "marriage" would from now on be called a civil union?

I would be willing to settle for EVERYONE being in a civil union.

I like to think there are open minded people in the world though, and I will continue to assume that there are readers of this forum that are open minded enough to consider changing their minds.

[caldje]

Originally Posted by SOON2BNSURPRISE

I also fail to see how the issues that have faced all peoples of color can relate to the struggles that people attracted to the same sex have.

"Peoples of color" is an antiquated racial term and is quite offensive by the way.

I am also not comparing all racial inequalities with hate against gays and lesbians. For example, gays and lesbians were obviously never slaves. However, they were killed and persecuted, and tortchered by Nazi germany as well as are beaten and murder consistently in the United States simply because of their sexuality. This is extremely similar. But the issue at hand, MARRIAGE, is almost identical. In 1948 California Supreme Court in a vote of 4 to 3 was one of the first in the country to overturn a publicly voted on and passed referendum that prevented interracial couples from marrying. A fight accross the country ensued but civil rights prevaled and interracial couples were still allowed to marry.

It is also no coincidence that hate groups such as nazis and the KKK all include the same 3 groups of people they hate accross the board. Blacks, Jews, and gays. You can't argue with facts and the fact is, every major hate group that exists groups the three together.

[Roaddog]

Originally Posted by caldje

Would you vote for an ammendment that ALL partnerships are considered "civil unions" by the state. So that your "marriage" would from now on be called a civil union?

I would be willing to settle for EVERYONE being in a civil union.

I like to think there are open minded people in the world though, and I will continue to assume that there are readers of this forum that are open minded enough to consider changing their minds.

I believe in the tradition of marriage between a man and a woman but i would not deny the same rights under civil unions to Gay's, it's just the way I feel about it.

[caldje]

Not all proposition 8 supporters are bigots. I stand by my original statement. However, for those participating I would like to offer the definition of bigot.

A bigot is a person who is intolerant of opinions, lifestyles, or identities differing from his or her own, and bigotry is the corresponding state of mind. Bigot is often used as a pejorative term against a person who is obstinately devoted to prejudices even when these views are challenged or proven to be false or not universally applicable or acceptable.

Bigotry - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Sincerely,
No on 8

[Roaddog]

And you see it always falls back to the same old thing, if a person really wants to change something it wont happen here.

[bhcompy]

Originally Posted by caldje

"Peoples of color" is an antiquated racial term and is quite offensive by the way.

tell that to the NAACP*

*hint: CP = Colored People

[wehotex]

Originally Posted by caldje

I would like to take a minute, as a person who is in a same-sex marriage to say that I don't appreciate the folks who are saying that ALL proponents of prop 8 are bigots and basing their opinions on hate.

The one thing the yes on 8 folks are right about is that if we are going to support tolerance it has to go both ways. We should be tolerant of their religous convictions.

Although there are PLENTY of bigots supporting the measure, it is counterproductive to generalize and prejudice based on this. Some people are just truly misled and believe that a yes on prop 8 would protect their children etc. Of course, this is not true, but can't we be tolerant of them as well?

I have no doubt, that given a civil debate and appealing to those who are actually not bigots but are planning on voting yes on 8 we will win every time. They are out there, they aren't bigots, and if they hear the truth I have no doubt they will do the right thing and eventually vote no on 8.

Tolerance goes both ways. Im willing to support that and hopefully a few folks who had originally planned on voting yes on 8 will have a civil discussion with me as to the merits of my position that a no vote on proposition 8 is a necessity in a society that does not discriminate against minorities. Let us talk with the honestly good people who have been lied to. Its not their fault, they are making rational decisions. We know that 50% of California is not irrational! Lets be real and reach out with compassion in the same way we want to be treated.

Sincerely,

Please talk to me civilly about why a no vote on 8 is the right thing to do.

I find it ridiculous that we as a society spend so much time, money and energy to argue over WHO in our society deserves to have basic human rights. All of the church groups, hetro family organizations and pro-gay organizations have spent in excess of $75 million to defend and fight against this proposition. Does anybody realize that all of the money, energy and time could have been used for purposes to make society better? For example, I donated $75 for the "no" on 8 campaign because i felt that it was important to stamp out bigotry in california. but i would have much preferred to donate that money to the american cancer society and NPR, my two favorite charities. now i can't donate to either due to budgetary issues.

I think that if the "no on 8" forces do not win, it will be left to the next generation of californians to reverse the CA constitution from the error of the previous generation. again, more time, energy and money will have been spent for a petty argument about citizens having rights that should have been granted from the get-go.

eventually, gays will have the right to marry because a wrong does not stay wrong forever.

[CMKM-Miller]

Originally Posted by Roaddog

All the talk in the world is not going to change the minds of anyone on here, if folks are going to vote yes or no they are not going to change, their minds are made up by now based on how they believe and how they feel, just because someone votes yes doesn't mean their anti gay or a bigot or a republican bible carrying gun totting racist, I'll speak for myself, I'm not threatened by Gay marriage, I just don't see two men or women as husband and wife, I'm all for civil unions and I'm all for Gays trying to expand those unions to increase the benefits to them, I don't care if the union allows the exact same rights as marriage I would vote for it but as I said two men do not equal husband and wife in my eyes and i mean that with no disrespect.

Well said Roaddog.

[caldje]

an article on how a no vote on prop 8 is right for california's businesses.

http://www.mercurynews.com/travel/ci_10749028

[happ]

More good news today with the $1 million donation from the California Teachers Union to the No on 8 campaign The rationale is the need to inform people of sexuality studies that dismiss any sense in "choice" [what straight person choses to be heterosexual?

Then the issue becomes how we treat one another. Disabled people have been accommodated with wheel chair ramps at every business in California. It means extra expense but who would complain if it helps a paralyzed person? We have empathy for the crippled. How can those voting "yes" deny equal accommodation to gay people? Are they the kind of person who begrudges the disabled parking spaces? I call that a selfish person!