Posted by
Playful Walrus on Tuesday, October 21, 2008 3:54:19 PM
I swear I am not obsessed with this issue, but I just can't let papers like the Los Angeles Times go unanswered. In an editorial endorsing a "no" vote on Prop 8, the folks at the paper try to downplay our rights in favor of made-up rights.
Californians tend to be an open-minded crowd that wouldn't take kindly to a campaign attacking homosexuality or attempting to strip away people's rights. So the well-financed and savvy backers of Proposition 8 have produced waves of advertising aimed instead at making voters believe that supporters of same-sex marriage are intent on stripping away everyone else's rights, and that this ballot measure is the only way for traditionally religious people to retain them.
It is the only way for ANY voter to retain their rights in this matter.
Schools aren't required to teach comprehensive sex education, but if they do, this is one of many rules they must follow. The law also gives schools the option of discussing gender, sexual orientation and family life, though that's not required as part of the more comprehensive program.
Since when do these activists ever even wait for permission?
The measure would do one thing: use the state Constitution as the device to take away an existing, fundamental right from a particular group of people, so that a loving adult in that group could not marry the person of his or her choice.
Once again:
State-issued licenses are not a “fundamental right”.
Gay or straight, a each person will still have equal access to marriage.
The paper (Karin Klein, in particular) goes on to complain about Governor Schwarzenegger not going out and marrying some dude himself in a big public ceremony. I’m exaggerating, but they are peeved that he hasn’t been actively campaigning against Prop 8.
He hasn't been around to reassure voters that their churches won't have to conduct same-sex marriages and their preschoolers won't have to attend gay weddings.
Maybe he doesn’t want to lie to people about this?
He attends rallies for Proposition 11, on redistricting, but is quiet about opposing Prop. 8.
Prop 11 reflects one of his original pet causes. He never ran on the platform of neutering marriage.
If you read the comments, you’ll find one timed at October 20, 2008 at 07:24 PM that is very extensive and thoughtful. No surprise - it was posted by “Chairm”. Good job!
“William Joseph Miller” comments:
Nationally and internationally, we have alarming rates of poverty. For example, thousands of children in this country live in homeless shelters. People in Haiti survive on mud pies. Think of all the money various churches are spending for Proposition 8. Couldn't this money be better spent in other ways?
I love comments like this. First, the activists spend a lot of money manipulating the courts to attack our rights. Then, they and their surrogates tell us not to respond, saying “You should spend your money more productively.” They’re like the arsonists who complain about all of the tax money being spent on the Fire Department.
If you were really so concerned with poverty, you’d help us or at least not attack us. We’re concerned about poverty, but we also need to protect our basic rights. Oh- and by the way, bride-groom marriage corresponds to lower poverty rates.