California Residents: Prop 8?

Well, as of today, Prop 8 has had enough votes to be passed. I was just curious where the people of the BBS stood on this subject. In case you don't know, Prop 8 was started to ban gay marriage in California.

 

Whatever the outcome, I think they did the right thing...don't let a judge decide...let the voters decide.

 

Personally, I think the voters should mind their fucking business.

 

Each unto their own, but there will be significant costs involved and that is where the voters should have a say.

 

Buck...for the last time...the answer is still NO

 

What costs?

For years here, IYC has voiced his opposition to gay marriage while being completely incapable of explaining how it would affect his life. Maybe I am finally getting an answer from someone today.

 

I promise to be gentle tho. C'mon, just a little.

 

I think he's referring to increased insurance costs and payouts, etc from an additional amount of "spouses" on the gov't rolls.

 

i agree papa and buck, it is of no consequence to me to let people marry, straight people do enough damage to the ideal of marriage on their own to start looking down on gays for wanting to marry as well.

it wont affect my life either way, but on an ideals basis alone i would not have supported prop8. i do not favor discrimination of anyone. also and what was an even bigger piss off to me was how they marketed the whole thing on FEAR. the commercials here were just too much. they centered on kids being taught this in school, and the whole think of the kids platform. 2 issues...1. i teach school, we DONT teach kids about marriage, we dont even talk about it. many of these kids dont even have married parents, we certainly dont dwell on the topic with them one bit. 2. if you are soooo worried about what other people might tell your children then teach them about it yourself, you as the parent set the ideal about it. if you are soooo concerned with that aspect of your childs eduaction then take the lead and do that yourself. in the end what are hiding them from...??? the TRUTH, that people dont just get into male-female relationships. doesnt matter what ya tell them now anyway, eventually they will know that gay people exist.

i just thought the whole fear mongoring, think of the child thing was wayyyy over done and not at all right, but i suppose it worked.


BTW i cant vote so my voice is null and void,lol.

ya know even last year i had parents come to me and ask me if i was going to teach homosexuality in 1st grade. i was so taken back, i was speechless. they were seriously concerned,lol. i just had to tell them we dont discuss marriage of any type. they then started to ask me my personal beliefs ... after i got over the fac that they were wayyyy to ignorant to be asking me this. i simply declined and said it doesnt matter what they are, we dont discuss marriage of any type. anyhow, fear can get a lot of stuff done it seems.

 

Thanks.

How much less of a burden would it be on the government payrolls if they married people of the opposite sex? I don't expect you or anyone here to give me precise figures, just trying to understand the rationale.

 

i can give ya the precise figure. its a tough question but, lets say every gay that married instead married someone of the opposite sex... well papa, i believe the answer to be 0. there would be no gain or loss if they were to marry someone of the opposite sex. boy i had to rack my brain on that one....

 

I just think we took a huge step forward by electing a black president, but then took another huge step backwards by discriminating against homosexuals. The whole "it will be taught in school" thing was just absurd.

 

I'm neutral on 8.

Being gay is nobody's business but your own.

Being religious is nobody's business but your own.

Marriage should not be the State/Fed's business.

edit: Education should not be the State/Fed's business either. Of course I would defer to States to make their own decisions.

If two people want to live together and they feel the need to have a contract between them (marriage, union, etc.) the State/Fed should provide a robust properly functioning legal system to manage contracts and disputes.

Of course in order for the "properly functioning" part to happen it'll require the government be trimmed back to something simple and functional and out of everybody's business.

 

You sound like a libertarian :up:

 

Be careful not to get any gay on you. I heard it's contaigous.

 

In your haste to be a smartass, you assumed that the financial burden would be the same for homosexual couples as it is for heterosexual couples. I don't know that, and you probably don't either. I think the only people who might know that the ones we use it as an argument against gay marriage.

 

Under-30s were in favour 67 - 31 percent and over-65s (predictably) were 57 - 43 against.

But weird is by race: whites were 55 - 45 in favour, Hispanics were essentially even but blacks were 69 - 31 against. I don't understand that last one.

 

I am in favor of civil unions. Same sex or not.

As an atheist, I associate marriage with religion. Maybe I am wrong on the actual definition. However, I think that is ironic that the same people who are on the left opposing religion want same sex marriages.

The goal is equal protection and rights. If you want that, go to your courthouse and apply for a civil union certificate. If you want a marriage Certificate, find a church that will accommodate you.

 

(and not just because he can kick my ass...)

 

It has been my personal experience that there is more homophobia from blacks than from whites.