Closing Arguments: Picking Sides on Prop 8

I agree with the Mormons.

Believe it or not there are others beside Mormons that do not want this to pass and there voice has been heard! In a country where we are supposed to respect what the majority votes why don’t they! To create such disrespect outside of a church speaks volumes! The media in their ever one sided opinion giving them publicity doesn’t help!

I believe in gay rights!!!! I was very disappointed when Cali banned them.. As a straight married woman, i believe every one has the right to happiness! and btw, for example, if a man and a man are gay and live together and share a beautiful relationship and one passes away, due to the fact they are only in a civil union, the surviving partner WILL NOT GET ANYTHING LEFT and a second cousin who never met the man could claim everything. but if the gay couple were married, then there would be no problem in the remaining benefits.
and not to sound cruel, but i think we should give the gays the right to adopt again. there are too many children just wasting away in foster homes with no love or care.

I agree 100% with marriage only being between a man and a woman. I do not believe anyone should listen to these protestors. The state voted and voted for Prop 8 and that is the end of it. The majority of the people obviously believe gays should not be allowed to be married. If they give in to these protestors it will again show that voting is useless if you have enough money and the media on your side. Democracy can never work if the voice of the people is ignored!!

No matter what the issue, if voted in by the people it should remain as such. Otherwise what is the purpose of voting?

I think that there should be a seperation between church and state. People should be able to be with and marry whoever they are in love with. Man and man. Woman and woman. Who cares. Just be happy…

Minority rights being decided by majority preference. Sounds like South Africa and ‘the Old South’ are more than just memories. What’s really disturbing, most people are just not bright enough to see the connection.

I believe that if the responsibilities and legal rights that going along with marriage, such as being allowed to be the beneficiary of life spousal insurance, and the legal default guardian of any children involved in the event one dies, is given to them in the form of “Legalized Partnership” or “Civil Unions” then the word, “marriage” should remain un-edited as the Church wants.
The word should not carry as much meaning and the legal recognition of spousal authority. And form what I have read, Civil Unions provide this right. So, I would have voted “Yes” on Prop 8. if I had the choice.

No I dont think that there should be same sex marriages. The bible reads in the beginning God made man and gave him a WOMAN as a help meet. It was Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve. It is an abonation to God. In the end of time all will stand before God and be judged that means christians and sinners. If you allow this to happen you will be judged on this also.

I find it “curious” that Mormons have trouble with gays pursuing life, liberty, and happiness, but have no trouble with polygamy. Some people might say that their actions are hypocritical. And, shame of the Knights of Columbus for their part. (These comments come from a life-long Catholic who believes in an individual’s responsibility for his/her actions.)

==”Gay marriage” does not exist. Marriage only happens between a man and a woman as God intended.==
Correct.
The man and woman may claim to be homosexual.

The voters have spoken. Violent protests by Homosexuals will only help cement the opinion of the masses against homosexuality. KEEP UP THE GOOD WORK

I agree with the Mormons. I can love gay people and still be against them getting married.

Aren’t we allowed to have our own opinion on what marriage should be? And today, gays spit in an old lady’s face in anger because she disagreed with them? Are gays now the new thought police? What next? Religious book burnings?????

I don’t care what you call it-”civil union” or “marriage”. I just want my partner/spouse to be able get my Social Security, be covered under my insurance, make medical and financial decisions if I cannot, and file our taxes jointly. Is this too much to ask, we are Americans also.

Everyone should have the right to form a civil union with another person, no matter the sex. However the term marriage has religious roots. If you can find a religion that is believes that marriage between two homosexuals is okay, then I say that it should be law. But I know of no religion that believes that.
As a Christian/Catholic, I believe that everyone has the right to be happy, and in love. However I also believe that the sacrement of marriage is between a man and a woman. However, homosexual couples should have the same civil rights as heterosexual couples, just leave religion out of it.

mormons believe in polygamy..
gays believe in freedom and rights..
who really cares what the mormons think??

This country was founded on freedom of religion; therefore we have the notion of separation of church and state. The word “marriage” is based on the predominant understanding from Christianity for some people. We need to keep religion out of politics and allow gay marriages to occur because it’s their right as citizens. If people have the problem of using “marriage” ubiquitously, then “union” should be used in our system because “union” is not based on traditions or religion. Having religion with politics is unconstitutional.

God loves the gay people but He hates the sin. If the homosexuals really understood the church’s stand against homosexuality they would read it for themselves. But to take God’s word out of context to fit their agenda is half truth. God loved us all so much He sent His Only Begotten Son into the world to save us from the bondage of sin. God’s word plainly says that homosexuality is sin. Let God be true and every man a lier.

God gave Eve – not George – to Adam to make him complete and be his partner. Homosexuality is not a crime, but it is a sin, and I certainly do not want the United States or any individual state to make marriage between same sex couples legal. These couples can do whatever they want behind closed doors, but please do not make me or my children or grandchildren watch and have to act like it is OK.

gay marriage is a civil right denied to gay and lesbians. its blatant discrimination.

I fully support the ban on gay marriage. Marriage has always been an institution of the church- I am not against gay rights- I believe they should be afforded the same opportunities as anyone else…but marriage has been, and always should be between a man and a woman.

Gay people deserve the same rights as others. They have families and some have relationships that are much longer enduring than some marriages of men and women. It should not manner who you love and commit to and gay people in these relationships should be allowed the same rights. I am Against Proposition 8

Isnt the definition of religion “FAITH”
Doesnt faith mean “Hope”
How can a country have hope if its people cant love?
Maybe some dont want it to pass tonino but I can tell you that this is the first time anyone asked me for my opinion.Therefore the majority you are speaking about is who??? I agree with Jessica and Cheryl.

The level of gay vituperation at having lost this vote is in direct proportion to the degree to which they are wrong on this issue. It leads one to believe that, at a deep level, they have some degree of awareness of this fact. Their shrill protests of anguish revel the truth of the universal understanding that marriage is a spiritual absolute; most of us never had the slightest doubt that Californians, in spite of their reputation for LA-LA liberalism, would repudiate the madness of gay marriage.

==Gay people deserve the same rights as others. ==
They already have the same Rights. Men and woman may marry, and there is no requirement that they be heterosexual.

Who is hating whom? Marriage is one woman and one man! You are free to vote your choice. No one is stopping you from voting, choosing your own lifestyle, etc. No one has taken away your “right”? Should I also receive a tax break for living with my sister or some other relative or friend? Perhaps seeking other terminology might prove to be more successful…MARRIAGE is not the word to use. As long as I have studied in history and various cultures–all seem to define MARRIAGE as the union between one man and one woman. So you live with someone of the same sex? Is anyone preventing you from that? No one is policing heterosexual couples in co-habitation–I think that is also wrong. It seems that I am a “hater” if I don’t agree with some one yet the person who disagees with me is not a hater???

==We are all God Children …==
No, not all are the children of God. Only those who are born again are the children of God, according to the Word of God.

I always love to hear these uneducated people spouting the line “separation of church and state.” Do you realize that nowhere in the constitution, declaration of independence, or any other legal statute is anything stated that there is a separation of church and state! Anyways, that has nothing to do with this matter. the government is not mandating a religion (which is as close as the constitution comes to “separation of church and state”)–this constitutional amendment reflects the will and views of the majority of the voters in the state of Cali…and that’s what matters! Marriage should be between men and women…whatever your religious beliefs.

“Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and they shall become one flesh. (Gen. 2:24) – The Mormons are correct.

I’m all for marriage equality. It’s unbelievable that religious groups like the Mormons, the Roman Catholic hierarchy and the Knights of Columbus support and promote laws that would deny equality to American citizens. Such hypocrites!

I agree with the Mormons. every church should take a stand against same sex marriage. It is a sin against God

Even animals in the wild don’t do what homosexuals do to themselves and each other. By recasting the deviant and destructive as normal and natural, we do them, and ourselves, great harm.

It is not about marriage, it is about money. They can be married, have a ceremony, live together and be committed to one another. They
can make their will so the partner will
inherit their estate. They can fill out
the proper paperwork at a hospital so
their partner can have power of attorney
and make medical decisions. They want the monetary benefits of divorce,
insurance, social security, etc.,
If they can marry and then can sue
photographers and florists for not wishing to participate in their wedding,
where is the justice in that? And
churches certainly should never be forced to comply…………….
It is a very large problem. People who
are against gay marriage do not necessarily hate gays but see this as a
slippery slope that will come to include
polygamy, child brides, etc.

I believe in marriage being between a man and a woman. Civil unions will give gays the same rights, But marriage is and always has been between a man and a woman, You change that then next you will be censuring the bible, the churches and the rights of people who have voted and have been heard. Judges should not decide. WE the people of the United States should decide and California has voiced that right to chose and uphold the definition of marriage. Massachussets did not allow a vote. Its time to move on.

==I’m all for marriage equality.==
Me, too. All those of age may marry. Nobody has to be heterosexual in order to marry. So, a man claiming to be homosexual may marry a woman who says she is homosexual.

It absolutely amazes me how so many people will take biblical scripture and use it out of it’s context in order to justify their own feelings and actions. The Bible talks about “loving one another” in the agape. Agape love is an unconditional love for each other. It’s the same love Jesus expressed for his fellow man. It is not a sensual or sexual love. I would recommend for those quoting this statement to read the Chapter that this statement is in so as to gain a better understanding…. Unless of course that challenge intimidates you, or maybe you already have the idea that it doesn’t line up with your trane of thought. As far as the Homosexual agenda; What does the Bible specifically say about that? Read- Romans: chapter 6, verses 26 and 27. Then try 1st Timothy: chapter 1 verse 10. The truth is hard to argue. Look for the truth and you won’t go wrong.

According to theologians, marriage was ordained by God and is defined as a union of a man and a woman.
So why is any level of government involved in legalizing a Religious institution?
It’s time to legalize civil unions for gays, straight atheist, pagans ect and any one else who wants to enjoy all the legal protections it includes.
The religious folks can sanctify their union in the church of their choice and gays can sanctify their union in a progressive church of their choice.
Everyone wins happy happy joy joy

Just as the protestors have the right to their opinion about the issue, and to express it without fear of being attacked by the other side, so do those who supported prop 8. That is why it is America. The protestors need to quit acting like nazi intimadators, and if they did not get their way, then accept the process that our country has to work with and keep their efforts in these boundries, and not in the streets. I doubt very seriously you would be seeing people of faith in the streets protesting, if prop 8 had failed. My opinion is that it does not gain them sympathy for their point of view from most people, but actually turns people against them.

Marriage is meant to be between a man and a woman. This is God’s plan. If gays want the rights for insurance and other financial benefits, fine. Let them have contracts between one another, civil contracts. Of course they would not be happy with that. They will only be satisfied when they tear down the foundations of our Christian and Jewish religions.
If all they really wanted was to live with equal civil rights they would accept civil legal instruments and leave marriage alone. But as usual they feel it necessary to shove their way of life down everybody else’s throat. Of course if we flaunt our heterosexuality the way many of the gays flaunt their sexuality we would be charged with sexual harrassment and hate crimes. They have to be the center of attention and will not be satisfied until they tear down the last remaining foundations of family in America.
But maybe the Islamic radicals will take over and then they will know real oppression!

It states in the constitution that, “All men are created equal” and we all have the right to, “Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.” And yet, if a person is gay they are denied these rights.
Not only are they denied the right to marry in most states, they are denied the right to adopt children, to pass tax-free their property to their partner on their passing, their children can be taken away by the state if one of a couple dies and the other didn’t formally adopt the children, they are denied equal protection under the law in job discrimination, and there is the issue of hospital visitation and legal consist.
Most people are willing to give gays equal rights to marriage as long as they don’t call it Gay Marriage which is equivalent to the whole, “separate but equal” issue we had over segregation. What is so special about a word that incites anger in people because others want to use it? Why can’t gays get married just the same as straight people? Why must it be different for gays? Why must a gay couple be considered something other than equal to a straight couple?
I see absolutely nothing wrong with giving gays the same rights and protections that straight people have.

The protesters have misdirected their anger. It was God, not Mormon church, who performed the first marriage. I had to vote against the proposition here in Florida because it went too far in blocking any way around the word marriage for civil rights for gay couples. I have no problem with reserving the word marriage for a man and a woman, but coin some term for gay couples to achieve similar rights within society.

==It absolutely amazes me how so many people will take biblical scripture and use it out of it’s context in order to justify their own feelings and actions.==
Then those who claim to be homosexual oughta stop doing it!
== The Bible talks about “loving one another” in the agape. Agape love is an unconditional love for each other.==
It’s brotherly love in the LORD. It’s not worldly love.

I do not think gay marriage should be legal. I believe in the right of every American to free speech, including those who supported Proposition 8. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints encouraged the members of the Church to exercise their right to free speech and there is nothing wrong with this. I also disagree with those throwing around the words “bigot” and “hate” when it comes to this issue. Just because someone disagrees with you on a moral topic does not automatically mean that he or she is a bigot and hates those on the other side of the argument. That would mean more than half of the voters in California would be considered bigots and I do not think that is true.

I do not believe that God approves of the Gay Lifestyle. I think it’s just wrong!!
But,as a Christian, I can love my gay neighbor, and still not support the gay lifestyle.

This is a tough one for me. Married 34 years, to one man, and I am one woman. That is my concept of marriage. But it seems this country cannot make up its mind. Why can’t we just call it by a different name, and allow the sme rights and priviledges? Marriage by implication is a religious term. My ceremony was by no means religious back in the early 70′s. A JP and 2 witnesses
I think anyone married before this action should be considered acting in faith under the law, and considered legally wed. I also believe that gay couples should be able to unite legally, without religious obligation.
Beth

==What seems outrageous to me is the fact that a simple majority vote is sufficient to change a state’s constitution! ==
And, yet, the majority of the California Supreme Court did that. The People in accordance with the state consitution, corrected that error.

I am opposed to gay marriage. Just because some people see this as a civil rights issue doesn’t make it so. Some people want animals to have civil rights. Then they will want bestiality unions to be legal marriages. Next it will be pedophiles. It is easy to scoff at these ideas but 50 years ago people would have scoffed at even the idea of gay marriage. The fabric of our society has torn because too much has come out of the closet.

I have read everyones response and I fully believe that people need to crawl out from the rock that they are stuck under. People who quote the bible and say “God made Adam and gave him Eve” should look at their own lives. Do these same people who quote the bible live strictly by the bible. I doubt that they do. They shouldn’t hold others to the same expectations that they don’t hold themselves to.

Religious beliefs aside, what amazes me about the current democracy of America is its double-standard. We all will accept our newly elected President, whether or not he was our candidate of choice. However, having utilized the same democratic process in the form of the Proposition 8 referendum, opponents feel justified in protesting and invading the privacy of the personal choices of what turned out to be the majority. One final note of clarity, both God and we Believers LOVE all people, including homosexuals. It is the lifestyle God hates. And what behavior God hates, so do I. As for those who don’t believe in God nor the Bible, I DO! That’s my vote and it counts too!

Religion is the curse of the world. All prophets, including the Christian’s prophet, Jesus, never espoused the kind of belief systems that have evolved. It is hate, plain and simple. All prophets preached love and only love. Gays are BORN gay – it is a medically proven fact. I simply do not understand how denying this simple civil right to people who love each other is wrong in the minds of those who voted for Proposition 8. If you knew how many famous and brilliant people, going back hundreds of years, were and are gay, you would faint. Homosexuality is not ‘new’ – it goes back to the beginning of time. Stop the hate. Live and let live. You who deny and hate are not the rulers of the world even though you are the ‘majority’. The ‘majority’ is ignorant.

==Why can’t we just call it by a different name, and allow the sme rights and priviledges? ==
Cuz they already have the same Rights and priviledges: Those men who claim to be homosexual may marry women who claim to be homosexual. The law doesn’t require them to be heterosexual. so, where’s the discrimination?

These “religious” folks really couldn’t find something more important to do with 36 million dollars? Really? And if civil rights should only be granted by a vote, should we revoke all civil rights granted by the courts? Really? A little perspective could go along way here!

It is not just the Mormons, all religions that follow the Bible know marriage is between a man and a woman, period. Why does the majority have to conform to satisfy a few. That is what is wrong with this country now. We do not hate the person we just believe being gay is morally wrong. Also, this stuff about separation of church and state was set up so the government could not set up a religion for us to follow we do have the freedom of choice. Just as all homosexuals and murderers have a choice, but that doesn’t make the crime right, but as a christian I do not hate the person or treat them different just because I don’t agree with them. The media is also stirring up trouble as always by reporting on this.

==Religion is the curse of the world.==
“Religion,” a man-made thing, is a curse. thank God Christians have relationship, not religion, with God.

This vote was not about gay rights. It was about redefining marriage. Western civilization was built on the premise of marriage being the joining of a man and a woman to create a family that produces offspring. Interesting that the largest group that voted to retain the definition of marriage as it has been for thousands of years was the African-American sector. Why are they not targeted by the non-democratic whiners in their ridiculous protests? Cowards.

Marriage is between a man and a woman. It is how God intended it to be. Gay marriage is just another immoral act and should not be allowed or made to look like a real marriage. I agree with Proposition 8.

Mormans should take the advice; those in glass houses should not throw stones.

Are you not aware that homosexuality is aganist the law in a lot of states so why are we not enforceing them.

who is trying to take away opposite-sex marriage. Don’t twist intentions. Maybe Mr Incredible should look up the history of the Nazis. I am not so far off. I don’t understand why some one else’s right to live their life should affect anyone else in such a hostile way. I’m not a fear-mongerer, I’m truly concerned about this Pandora’s Box. What if a proposition was put on the ballots removing the federal rights afforded by marriage to any Mormon who engaged in polygamy. Is that ok? Black and white citizens of the U.S. weren’t legally allowed to marry not so long ago. Do you think that was correct too?

What does Prop 8 actually say? Does it say marriage or does it say union. I agree with another user here. “marriage” is religious. Take the religion out of it. Call it a “civil union”.
I personally believe that homosexuality is a sin. But my faith is mine alone and shouldn’t be forced on those who don’t believe in Christ.

==Mormans should take the advice; those in glass houses should not throw stones.
==
Yeah, only those whiney ones who claim to be homosexual should thow stones when they don’t get their way. Kristallnacht?

Be careful. The opponents of Prop 8 will stamp their feet and hit you with their purse(the male opponents) and boycott you to prove a majority vote doesn’t matter. I trying to recruit them for the Obama vote recount.

Sluggo, good to see you around again…

STOP, PLEASE STOP!
STOP THE HATE.
Call it a civil union and get your civil rights back.

==Marriage equality should not be dependent on popular vote, it should be guaranteed. ==
All men of age may marry all women of age. They don’t have to be heterosexual. So, where’s the discrimination?

Gays are not satisfied with civil union because they think being able to get married will make them feel more accepted. This is not only a religious issue, it is a common sense issue. There are laws of nature. If you need evidence- exhibit A, a female body; exhibie B, a male body. Marriage was created in order for a man and woman to create a family unit. When I signed my marriage certificate I did so with the intent of becoming a wife to my husband, not a partner to my companion. No one has the right to redefine the terms. What if a man is in love with six women and they love him, too? Shall we recognize their marriage because it makes them happy? If homosexuality is not a lifestyle choice then it seems they would want to put some of the money they are wasting into research to see why it is occurring. They are the ones full of hate for the moral majority which, by the way, are not all religious. I’m sure that our ancestors would have clearly defined marriage if they ever thought it possible that people of the same sex would want to marry. I am glad that gays have civil unions available to them but leave traditional marriage alone. Try some social sensitivity.

I don’t think anyone should be exposed to this kind of thing. The homosexual community needs to get back in the closet. I sure don’t want my grandchildren exposed to this type of immoral behavior.

==Black and white citizens of the U.S. weren’t legally allowed to marry not so long ago. ==
However, interracial marriage is between a man, as husband, and a woman, as his wife, and that goes along with God’a plan. Not so with those to advocate so-called “same-sex ‘marriage.”

I completely agree with the church on this one and beleive all churches should put their differences aside and fight against this until the end. I have the utmost respect for any orginization that tries to keep higher moral standards for this and the next generation, in a world that is totally unpredictable and out of control I am happy to see people fight for the only thing they do have control over their moral structure.

Now I understand even better why the Brittish call us the STUPID Americans.

1.Corinthians 6;9 say/ What do you not know that unrighteous person will not inherit God’s kingdom ? Do not be misled. Neither fornicators,nor idolaters,nor adultors, nor men kept for unnatural purposes, nor men who lie with men.

I have not viewed anything loving or respectful from the gay demonstrators who are antagonizing anyone or any group who dare disagree with them. The gay community have revealed a lack of tolerance for any other view but their own. They use unfair tactics in their attempt to sway the masses to their viewpoint. They use propaganda and redefine terms: equal marriage rights. They use intimidation: if you use your freedom of speech and share a different opinion, I’ll label you a homophobic. They use manipulation: let’s start with vulnerable elementary children and indoctrinate them. They censor the media: Most Hollywood films are reviewed for content positively favoring or promoting homosexuality, while many traditional families are mocked in the same media. Proposition 8 offered an honorable method to communicate the will of the people. The collective voices of California, Arizona and Florida were deafening.

The institution of marriage is God’s law, not man’s to change. That’s what MANY churches believe and uphold.

Let them marry, but I think single people should get the same benifets/rights as a married couple. A single person has to provide for themself with no other income to help and a single person does not get a tax break as a married couple gets.

You know, there are people who say that they do not want homosexual marriage to be legalized because it would destroy the sanctity of marriage as we know it. Before you say that, could you please define such sanctity? Sanctity may have existed fifty years ago, but not today. If we gays are not allowed to marry, then should the heterosexuals be able to have marriages annulled or divorces awarded? According to http://www.divorcerate.org, first time marriages fail forty-one percent of the time, second time marriages fail sixty percent of the time and third time marriages fail seventy-three percent of the time. Don’t get me wrong, those drunken Vegas weddings are very sanctified; aren’t they?
It really boils down to the fact that the government should not be allowed to interfere with the marriage or love of individuals. After all, there are wars to be paid for, economies to be salvaged and criminals to be put behind bars.
Homosexuality is just love between two humans, now what is so horrible about that?

Why should such a small percentage of Americans be allowed to redefine marriage as a gay thing. It is time for the majority to stand for its rights.

I find it ironic that at one time “gay’s” were considered sleazy because they would have multiple partners and now that they are wanting to become monogamus folks are all worked up over it. Wow, really “so don’t sleep around but don’t be committed and want the ‘American dream’ either how dare you!” What does the Church going moral believing public want to rid of the gays? Regarding “tonino” posting that reads “respect the majority” well let’s stop to think about that for a moment if you would. If we use the satistics of 1 out of 10 people are gay (that doesn’t count the folks that are married or the blacks that are on the down low only those brave few that refuse to live a lye) that would live 90% considered straight. So sure the majority is heard only because those 10% are a minority!
Remember back in the day when women and blacks weren’t allow to vote but we gladly took taxes from them but didn’t give them the same rights as white men. Seriously this is a civil rights issue not a moral issue or anything else. How moral is 60% of all fist marriages failing and 80% of all second marrigages failing but “God” forebid that gays help that static!
Regarding the Morman Church claiming to only support “traditional marriage” is that Brigham Young’s view of Traditional Marrige of 7 wives for each man?
Jessica’s blog said it best! How is the love and marriage of someone else really going to affect or effect anyone else but themselves? They gay community really have become the blacks of this century. How sad when the “majority” have voted to elect a half black man to lead our country into the future.

On those >> Aren’t those

It is interesting that only 2% of California is Mormon, yet a little over 50% voted in favor of Prop 8. When will there be protests directed towards the other 48% of the voters???

==Interesting that there’s supposed to be a separation of church and state…==
Where?

How about separation of church and state? Isn’t that what’s called a Pavlovian Cliche? Try reading the Constitution, it doesn’t mention any such separation. Churches are made up of citizens with rights too!

Can we all quote from fictional books of our choice or only from the bible?

It seems to me that the LDS Church will make these moral stands but they always seem to be on the wrong side of history. They voted in the 1850′s to be a slave territory, they sanctioned polygamy, they were big supporters of prohibition, they fought against the ERA amendment, and they didn’t give blacks the priesthood until after the civil rights movement was basically over in 1978.
Morality is so narrowly defined by most LDS people that they don’t see larger moral issues. They don’t seem to understand that the constitution guarantees rights and does not limit them. The constitution limits government and defines rights. Same Sex Marriage is an extension and definition of rights that should be granted to everyone.
Again as an LDS member is hard for me to understand how with their belief in the pre-existence and the great war in heaven that they want to use government to force people into correct moral choices. If they truly had faith in their theology, they’d have faith in their ability to teach their morality in their families and churches and let the people make their own choices.

I could barely finish reading through all of the posts without feeling discouraged about Humaity. It is disheartening to hear so much misinformation, intolerance and bigotry about gay men and women. How is this issue unlike the American laws against interratial marriage in 1948? A person no more chooses to be gay as he or she chooses race , height, or eye color. Civil unions do not afford the same legal and social protections as federally recognized marriage does. Not even close. The day will arrive when the misinformed bigots against gay marriage will be on as much of the wrong side of the law and as culturally disapproved of as the Nazi party and the KKK is today. Wake up people! Stop hiding behind religion and pay attention to what Christ was really talking about.

All they need to do is change the proposition so that we ALL have the right to choose. Church’s need to be able to have the right to choose for themselves (not the government) if they want to perform gay marriages or not and you can choose whether you want to be a member of that church or not. Mormons are not promoting hate. We want to protect our right to chose not to perform gay marriages within our church and you may choose not to become a member if you disagree.

I think marriage is between a man and a women. God provided this to proceate and repopulate His world he made just for us.

I don’t agree with the church, I have done research on gay rights and marriage and there is a biblical story of a gay couple named Johnathan and David and that they loved eachother so much that they built a covenant together and when Johnathan died David said “Thy love to me was wonderful passing the love of women”. If God didn’t approve of same sex marriages I don’t think there would be a biblical story about it.

I agree with the Mormons (and the Catholics) etc.

Just because the majority of people voted for it does not make it right. That is the problem with voting! If, for example, People in the 1860′s voted that ‘slavery is legal’, it does not mean it was right. Sometimes people are locked into what is thought to be good from wrong by their beliefs that have been passed on from generation to generation. Letting two people get married has nothing to do with religion or god. Thats just what lay people have been led to believe. Gay men and women just simply want to have the same legal rights, many of which have to do with transfer of property, as married couples do. This is plain discrimination when a married couple can legally pass on their property to the ones they love and gay men and women have to leave their property up to the discretion of a court to leave it to the closest relative. I am straight and feel that they too should have the same legal rights with no discrimination at all.

==How is this issue unlike the American laws against interratial [sic] marriage in 1948?==
Interracial marriage is between a man, as husband, and a woman, as his wife. That conforms to the template God created.
Where, in the Word of God, does God talk about the template of a so-called “same-sex ‘marriage’”? That’s right, there isn’t one.

Mr Incredible….. I expect your probaly not only stupid… I’d say your FAT! you need to start attendance in social gratification classes. You obviously have NO clue.

==Just because the majority of people voted for it does not make it right. ==
Had the vote gone the other way, you would’ve said the opposite.

I agree with all those who voted for the proposition. I for one would like to see those against the prop to stop taking out their frustrations on the Mormons as there were obviously thousands more who supported it. They are just looking for someone to blame but they might as well look at the majority of those they live around as the majority has spoken.

==Just because the majority of people voted for it does not make it right. ==
You say that just because you’re on the losing end.

==… the world is moving in a different direction …==
So what?

Ummm… didn’t we already hold the election??? Prop 8 passed. The people have spoken. Get over it.

First off, I fully agree that “Marriage” is a union of one man to one woman, period. The gays who are fighting so hard for the right to marry are using the excuse of equality. It has nothing to do with equality, no one is infringing on any of your rights. Most people could really care less who you partner up with, it’s when you start stepping on the instituion of society that you bring the wrath of the majority down o yourselves. This is true with any cause. There are causes that are legal issues, pure and simple such as women being allowed to vote or civil rights, then there are moral causes such as marriage or allowing our schools to teach kids morals. Womens rights to votes and racial equality and subjects of that nature should not even be questioned in this day and age, other than perhaps to have to prove you are qualified personally to have that responsibility or deserve that equality. I don’t care if your black, white, or purple with pink poke-e-dots, if you don’t want to follow the established rules of society, you should not be allowed equal rights, you act like trash, that’s how you should be treated. As for the moral causes, these are what are causing the constant decline of society. Kids are being taught that gays should be allowed to enter the sacred union of marriage, but in the same moment, their parents are getting a divorce for the third time and they tell them it’s no big deal, they just aren’t compatible. Well which is it, is it a sacred union for life or just a convienient way to get to sleep with someone till you grow tired of the other person. If it’s the prior, than gays still have no right to it, but if it’s the latter, than it really doesn’t matter. But if your excuse is for equal rights, then you need to figure out exactly which rights you are being denied and I’ll be the first to step up and fight with you to get those rights. I am sick of people thinking they need to ruin every organization built. Mens clubs should remain mens clubs, if they don’t want women in them, too bad, go out and make your own club. If people don’t want their sacred marriage institution imposed upon, so be it, go form you own institution. I guess my bottom line here is why do want so badly to belong to something that doesn’t want you to belong to. Go do your own thing. As a kid, I went to join up with a local gang of kids who looked like a fun group to be with. I was new to the neighborhood and had no idea who they were. They instantly let me know I wasn’t welcome, but the gang dow the road from them welcomed me with open arms. I was fine with that. It’s really that simple. You don’t have to get along with, or be the same as everyone else in the world, it’ll never happen. Be yourself and leave me alone. I don’t push me on you, don’t push you on me. For the record, I live in a partnership with my significant other. We are not legally married by choice because we don’t want the government dictating our lives anymore than necessary. We are common-law by Texas law, and we are married under the laws of God, but refuse to pay the government for a certificate saying we can live together. If marriage were to be seperated from the government, we’d do it in a heartbeat, till then, we will continue to live our lives in peace and harmony through the eyes of God. For the record, all the morals of marriage are set by the church and God, the laws of marriage are set by government and man. Which one are you truly stiving for, if it’s the laws of man, then I feel sorry for you.

==/=Gays are BORN gay – it is a medically proven fact.=/==
Those who claim to be homosexual were not born homosexual. Sometime after they were born, they chose to go homosexual.

Get the facts before you comment. The Mormons excommunicate those who practice polygamy. It’s interesting that those who supported Prop. 8 were called bigots for their support; however, it now appears that the opponents of Prop. 8 are discriminatory bigots themselves in the way they are treating the Mormon church.

Hello Cynthia,
We had the same propositon here in Arizona, and it was of course beat. You know this is a terrible situation, it should of never started and bow that they have a foot hold they are after blood. I am of course a Latter Day Saint and are with them all the way. We believe in Jesus Christ, and I don’t think that he would approve. We must get God back in the Schools, so that the children will go back to Church and learn of His goodness. Thank You.

Sooooooooooooo move to a country with a dictator who is willing to mandate same sex marriages. We’ll see how long that country will last!
Oh, I forgot, it is a right on which we cannot vote? We live in a democracy for a reason. Even “non-Christian” or “non-Mormon” societies would side with the Christian point of view of marriage as being between one man and one woman. Of course Muslim men can have up to four wives (provided that all are treated equally), not one of them can be male. Of course in nations where Sharia laws are practiced one or both partners of a homosexual relationship may be put to death. I don’t agree with that approach, however I hardly believe that the liberty that homosexuals have in our society purpetuates an attitude of hate.
Again it is a problem of semantics. Call it something other than MARRIAGE.
I suppose you want to force those who practice any religion to allow same sex “marriages”? Then our first ammendment right is denied–free-exercise (the right to practice our religious beliefs). What in any religion denies YOU the right to homosexuality, promiscuity, or whatever you want to call it? Change the semantics and work hard to pass the law. However, you cannot force any church to agree to carry out such marriages. Perhaps you could even create your own religion to accomodate your desires.
It seems that the rights everyone is so eager to deny are those of Christians. I am not surprised as that is biblical. Christians were ones who founded this country in a flight to maintain their own religious beliefs, yet every effort was made to insure that the country could not mandate any one single religion. So with that in mind, your right is protected. Ironically, the more it is pushed, I do believe that the more Christians will be forced to excercise their voices. You will only serve to make our convictions stronger. So, please continue your efforts and work at convincing “us”!

Here’s my view: If prop 8 would have passed then my grade school children would have been taught gay marraige in school. Gay rights? What about my children’s rights? Religion spreading hate? Seems the protesters are spreading more hate through thier yelling, chanting and signs.
Leave the mormons alone. I heard it was the catholic vote who won prop 8 anyway.

I agree with the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Mormons)
Marriage between a man and a woman is ordained of God and that the family is central to the Creator’s plan for the eternal destiny of His children.
All human beings—male and female—are created in the image of God. Each is a beloved spirit son or daughter of heavenly parents, and, as such, each has a divine nature and destiny. Gender is an essential characteristic of individual premortal, mortal, and eternal identity and purpose.
In the premortal realm, spirit sons and daughters knew and worshiped God as their Eternal Father and accepted His plan by which His children could obtain a physical body and gain earthly experience to progress toward perfection and ultimately realize his or her divine destiny as an heir of eternal life. The divine plan of happiness enables family relationships to be perpetuated beyond the grave. Sacred ordinances and covenants available in holy temples make it possible for individuals to return to the presence of God and for families to be united eternally.
The first commandment that God gave to Adam and Eve pertained to their potential for parenthood as husband and wife. We declare that God’s commandment for His children to multiply and replenish the earth remains in force. We further declare that God has commanded that the sacred powers of procreation are to be employed only between man and woman, lawfully wedded as husband and wife.
We declare the means by which mortal life is created to be divinely appointed. We affirm the sanctity of life and of its importance in God’s eternal plan.
Husband and wife have a solemn responsibility to love and care for each other and for their children. “Children are an heritage of the Lord” (Psalms 127:3). Parents have a sacred duty to rear their children in love and righteousness, to provide for their physical and spiritual needs, to teach them to love and serve one another, to observe the commandments of God and to be law-abiding citizens wherever they live. Husbands and wives—mothers and fathers—will be held accountable before God for the discharge of these obligations.
The family is ordained of God. Marriage between man and woman is essential to His eternal plan. Children are entitled to birth within the bonds of matrimony, and to be reared by a father and a mother who honor marital vows with complete fidelity. Happiness in family life is most likely to be achieved when founded upon the teachings of the Lord Jesus Christ. Successful marriages and families are established and maintained on principles of faith, prayer, repentance, forgiveness, respect, love, compassion, work, and wholesome recreational activities. By divine design, fathers are to preside over their families in love and righteousness and are responsible to provide the necessities of life and protection for their families. Mothers are primarily responsible for the nurture of their children. In these sacred responsibilities, fathers and mothers are obligated to help one another as equal partners. Disability, death, or other circumstances may necessitate individual adaptation. Extended families should lend support when needed.

California voted…what’s the problem?
I might not always like the way an election turned out, but the majority wins! If you don’t like living in a democracy, move out.

==I DONT SEE GOD HERE SAYING THAT IT IS NOT RIGHT…==
He already said it in His Word.

Separation of church and state! Hello…. what are all you people afraid of if gay and lesbian couples marry? Who does this hurt? Why should any couple be denied this? I say shame on this country for making this a religous debate. It has nothing to do with religion.
And a civil union still does not give the same rights.
The ppl against prop 8 ran very mis leading adds to prey on the fear of the ppl.
Get real ppl… this has no affect on on hetrosexuals. Remember that god created all of us… including gays and lesbians.
Diversity is what America is all about.

Mr Incredible,
If you are a Mormon, as you say you are, why weren’t you at church the day they read the letter? The reason we were to strongly oppose the proposition was not because we were against “gay marriage” as it was that if it passed, we would be required to perform them in our own churches. I think many of us don’t really care so much whether or not a gay couple gets “married,” the part we have a problem with is that it takes away OUR religious freedom. As a church we belive that ” THE FAMILY is ordained of God. Marriage between
man and woman is essential to His eternal plan.
Children are entitled to birth within the bonds of
matrimony, and to be reared by a father and a mother
who honor marital vows with complete fidelity.
Happiness in family life is most likely to be
achieved when founded upon the teachings of the
Lord Jesus Christ.”
If we are forced to perform gay marriages in our churches it goes against the fundamentals of what we believe.
If a proposition were to come out that gave them their right but also allowed us to retian our, while I’m sure the church would still be against it, it would probably not be opposed so vehemently.

If you’ve ever spent time with Mormons, you would know that they are not a hateful group of people. I don’t agree with their religious beliefs, but it is wrong to call them hateful.

Though many think marriage to be strictly of religious origins is not. Far from it. As such, arguments put forth from the many religious organizations against “gay” marriage have been rather specious. Prop 8 has been one group of religions imposing their beliefs on other set of people and religions. If people want to argue marriage from a sociologic view fine, but leave religion out of it. Further, just because something is odd, strange or different it should not be outlawed. Can anyone give an argument against polygamy or polyandry?

I DO NOT AGREE WITH THE MORMONS. In a world of “Fly by night” or frivilous relationships, what is so horrible about a committment that 2 people want to make that love each other? This is a matter of the HUMAN HEART whether it be between a Man & Woman, Woman & Woman, Man & Man. Let people LOVE & choose their partner in life, grant them their right to make that life long committment in marriage. STOP HATE & BIGOTRY and lets move on to serious issues with the world!

==California voted…what’s the problem?==
The problem is that those who claim to be homosexual, their supporters and activists in the Homosexual Internet Militia and in the Department of Homoland Security don’t like the People voting on anything they don’t like. That’s why they go shopping for a sympathetic judge, or two, to substitute is Will for the Will of the People.

Ok I know plenty of Mormons who do not hate and even support gay rights… As I stated earlier, if it’s a matter of the word MARRIAGE… Then change EVERY licence to a CIVIL UNION License… Your own religious leaders can bless your legal union as a marriage in the eyes of God…
This way everyone gets what they want… Your church still decides what’s a marriage and what’s not… and everyone who chooses to “pay for the piece of paper” gets the legal protections that the current “marriage license” allots

Let’s pay attention to the facts: It’s not the church that forked out the money, it’s the individual members who chose to do so of their free will, to support what they believe. The church uses its money to help the poor all over the world, like feeding and vaccinating children in Africa,building homes and businesses destroyed by the Tsunami, providing opportunities for education, and micro-loans for people to start businesses. Members donate money for these causes, but also use their paycheck for whatever they want.

==what is so horrible about a committment that 2 people want to make that love each other?==
Nothing is horrible about it if it stops there. It doesn’t.
So, it isn’t about love. It’s about “marriage.”

Thank you Ashamed. My sister is also gay and has struggled through meny of the same things you have I’m sure. I love you for your sacrifice and understand where you are coming from.

I’m on the side of the Mormons (and all other Christians who understand the Bible in respect to the subject of Gay marriage.
Christians everywhere need to make a strong stand on this.

If it is a matter of religion then it has no place on the ballot. There is a reason we have the separation of Church and State

I strongly oppose Prop 8 & believe that the Mormon Church was wrong for getting involved in this issue. First of all, why would a religious group in Utah be so hateful that they wanted to take away Gay civil rights in another state. I also find it interesting that a Religious group who promotes polygamy is against the civil rights of any other group of people.
Also to all the people who claim that the majority has spoken on the rights of a minority group, this country was built on the premise of equality for all. The majority group should not be able to vote on the civil rights of minority groups. This is unconstitutional & we should not amend Constitutions to deny civil rights. Constitutions are meant to ensure the rights of all people. Men do not have the right to vote to deny rights for women, white people do not get the right to vote on the rights of African Americans & Hispanics and straight people should not have the right to vote on denying rights to Gay people.

Take away the Mormons tax exemption, they have far too much power, to give 22 million dollars towards this cause is only the tip of the iceberg, where else do they pay for what they want, and who.

If you would read my first post, it offers some explanation.

This is my final comment…
Remember…
God is LOVE…
Not God is love but only when it’s between a man and woman… Just LOVE… Pure and Simple… And where there is LOVE there is GOD…

`If it is a matter of religion then it has no place on the ballot. There is a reason we have the separation of Church and State`
I COULDNT AGRRE MORE

To start with I am Gay.
HOWEVER
I agree with the voters of Calif. I have voted against GAY MARRIAGE and the GAY BILL of RIGHTS every time its been on the ballot in my state. I do not feel that we need anymore laws on the books. We are all covered under the constitution and the bill of rights. the gays have civil unions and straight people have marriage. both are considered unions of 2 people. if the ceremony means that much then by all means have one.
As for the separation of church and state…are you stuck on stupid or what ?? IT AINT GOING TO HAPPEN !
this country was founded by our fore fathers so that we the people would be able to have the freedom to worship GOD without being persecuted / prosecuted for our religeous beliefs. ALL OF LAWS OF THIS GREAT NATION ARE BASED ON ONE BOOK THE BIBLE. So if you truely want separation of church and state not to mention GOD out of and off our money,the pledge, our public buildings then the Constitution and the Laws need to be done away with too… Then and only then will you truely have a separation of Church and State.. Then we can usher in a new state…
THE STATE OF CONFUSION.
REMEMBER EVERY NATION THAT HAS TURNED ITS BACK ON GOD HAS FALLEN… WILL AMERICA BE NEXT ????

Mr Incredible,
The reason we were to strongly oppose the proposition was not so much because we were against “gay marriage” as it was that if it passed, we would be required to perform them in our own churches. I think many of us don’t really care so much whether or not a gay couple gets “married,” the part we have a problem with is that it takes away OUR religious freedom. As a church we belive that ” THE FAMILY is ordained of God. Marriage between
man and woman is essential to His eternal plan.
Children are entitled to birth within the bonds of
matrimony, and to be reared by a father and a mother
who honor marital vows with complete fidelity.
Happiness in family life is most likely to be
achieved when founded upon the teachings of the
Lord Jesus Christ.”
If we are forced to perform gay marriages in our churches it goes against the fundamentals of what we believe.
If a proposition were to come out that gave them their right but also allowed us to retain ours, while I’m sure the church would still be against it, it would probably not be opposed so vehemently.

We have our fee agency but we also need to obey the laws. The people have voted and still the gays are trying to force their ideas on others. God showed where he stands on same sex marriges when he burned Sodom and Gomorrah when it became the nom there. It goes against Gods plan for us.

This Country was founded by Men who believed in God! They believed in the Word and Commandments of God! It is in the Bible that marriage is between a man and a woman, this is Gods Plan and that is the way it should be throughout this Country! And if you donot like it then Leave!! We do not need more people in this country trying to lower the values of Our Country! There are enough idiots out there already doing that so a few million less will definitely be a Relief!God Bless America and God Bless the Mormons and everyone else who is tired of people saying God and Religion must be kept separate from State and Government! We need God and Religion in Our lives now more then ever! We do not want to wind up like Sodom and Gomorrah!
Hooray! for Proposition 8 hopefully the
rest of the country will follow suit!

OH PLEASE!!!! where is this GOD? Where is his SON? What is it you smoke….. Is it ACID… a really good grass…. Pauoti? give me a clue…. please wake up and get real.

I believe in a man and a woman in love till death do they part. I believe in the virtues of marriage. I believe there is a God and this God gave us the ecstasy of intimacy with an opposite partner-each having its own biological perfections for its sex.
I don’t believe in a world that forgets words like: slobs, skinks, wierdos, sluts, perverts and other terms that we used as kids and have long forgotten to the new tones of: discrimination, closed mindedness,fanatical,etc.
Give me liberty or give me death!!!

==As a church we belive that ” THE FAMILY is ordained of God. Marriage between
man and woman is essential to His eternal plan.==
The reason that marriage is sacred is that it simulates the marriage of Christ, as Groom, to His Church, the bride.
Thus, in Malachi 2:15 [AMP], the purpose of such a marriage is to produce Godly children.

“The religious folks can sanctify their union in the church of their choice and gays can sanctify their union in a progressive church of their choice.
Everyone wins happy happy joy joy”
Posted by: Jim Theisen | Nov 13, 2008 12:39:14 AM
WRONG, WRONG, WRONG
This is where your comment is wrong. The Christians freedom of speech are being stepped on. The Christians are starting to loose their rights. Why should a church that believes that the Word of God, the Bible, is truth, be forced to marry homosexual couples. This is where homosexual marriage is heading. We have a right to speak out and protect our beliefs as well.
I don’t hate homosexuals; in fact I have friends that are homosexual, but marriage is between a man and a woman. This is Biblical and this is my belief and I have just as much right to my belief as homosexuals have to their beliefs. This is my right. This is not discrimination. This is not hate.
I believe that homosexuality is a lifestyle choice. Nature says it is not normal and this lifestyle shouldn’t be forced on others. What will be next. Are we going to start allowing people to marry their pets so that their pets can get insurance.
Homosexuals have the legal right to buy homes together, make a will, set up living wills, etc. to include their partner, but they should not be allowed to enter into the bonds of marriage.
I agree with the person who compared homosexuals living together, to someone living with a sister, relative, etc. Are we going to make these living arrangements a marriage just so they can receive health benefits. Where is this going to stop.
Christian schools are being sued for discrimination, because they fire someone when they find out that person is gay. People pay to send their children to Christian schools so that their Christian/Biblical beliefs can be taught to their children. There should be nothing wrong with there being a hiring criteria that says that person has to share the same beliefs as the school, but no this has been labeled discrimination.
Businesses are being sued for not hiring a person, because they don’t like their tatoos. Employers should have the right to not hire based on these things. We are seeing reverse discrimination. You should not be forced to hire someone that isn’t a good fit.
I am not talking about race. This is a totally seperate issue.
I know of no laws that say companies have to hire any one person, but we have people suing for these reasons. Where are the rights of the employers.
The Christians rights are being taken away, as well as the rights of others, all under the disguise of discrimination. We are seeing reverse discrimination and Christians do need to start speaking out for their rights.

What I find fascinating is how the backers of Prop 8 are almost entirely religious groups that are not only starved for credibility with the American public… …they’re also religious groups that have literally purchased their credibility over the last several decades.
I find it curious that while people outside of the LDS church generally ignore the Mormons, they seem perectly open to the Utah-based LDS church spending tens of millions on a California based political issue. I find it odd that people in these non-Utah states don’t push back and tell the Mormons to get lost and quit wasting California taxpayer money by religious grandstanding with California taxpayer dollars.
Consider the religious groups backing Prop 8:
Mormons: founded by convicted felon Joseph Smith who once sold phony pirates treasure claims off the coast of New York State. Mormons believe that Joseph Smith found the lost testaments of the bible buried in upstate New York and that American Indians were one of the lost tribes of Israel and that their skin is brown after being expelled from hell. The Mormon “promised land” went from upstate New York, to Ohio, then onto Illinois, then to Missiouri, and then finally to Utah where nobody else wanted to settle. These are just a handful of the many odd claims by the LDS Church.
Scientologists: founded by Sci-Fi writer L.Ron Hubbard. Scientologists believe that humans are the lost, confused souls of aliens who were dropped into volcanoes millions of years ago by an evil “master alien.” Scientologists believe most if not all human problems are based on the agony of these lost alien souls within each of us… …and if you pay thousands of dollars to the Church of Scientology, the church will help you reach a higher level of self awareness.
South Park did some very entertaining shows that highlight the founding beliefs of both Mormons and Scientologists. I highly suggest watching these episodes if only for the entertainment value.
Moving right along…
Evangelicals: most if not all of their churches or ministries were founded by televangelists, radio preachers, and circus tent revival preachers. Evangelicals seem to have no problem with their preachers living like rock stars with tax free donations. Few if any Evangelicals complained loudly when Rev Pat Robertson sold off his decades long collection of religious radio and tv stations for BILLIONS, when the media outlets were all purchased with tax exempt religious dollars (talking mostly about Fox). Evangelicals repeatedly turn a blind eye to the fact that some of the most prominent Evangelicals who bash gays have been caught red handed having gay relationships (TED HAGGARD). And every 3-5 years (or 3-5 months), Americans catch wave of yet another mega-scandal involving a high profile Evangelical preacher (Jim Baker, Jimmy Swaggart, Ted Haggard, etc etc etc)… …but the Evangelicals simply shift gears and shift their religious attention and tax free donations to yet another hot, new rockstar preacher.
BOTTOM LINE:
I guess I find it odd that the backers of Prop 8 are for the most part credibility starved religious groups. I find it odd that they have tens of millions to blow meddling in out-of-state political issues. Most of all I find it odd that the California-American public blindly buys into the “fake outrage” continually invented by these credibility starved religious groups.
It’s one thing to claim that “gay marriage” runs counter to YOUR OWN religious beliefs… …but the backers of Prop 8 took the issue 500 steps further by deliberately lying to the public. I only know a handful of gay couples, but one thing I do know is that gays have no interest whatsoever in “homosexualizing our public schools,” and gays have no interest in forcing anti-gay churches to perform gay marriages.
Don’t get me wrong I understand very well that the backers of Prop 8 stand to make their money back ten-fold by their endless gay bashing. But on the same note, I find it odd that while the public outrage is centered on the issue of gay marriage… Nobody is discussing the issue of out-of-state, credibility starved religious groups (and some very odd religious groups at that)… …nobody seems to discuss the issue of the Prop 8 backeres meddling in California politics and the enormous cost to the California taxpayers.
Or if Californians are discussing the issue of out-of-state religious groups costing Californians tens of millions of dollars, I find it odd that it’s not being reported by the news outlets.
I would also be interested in learning a gustimate dollar amount that Prop 8 is costing the taxpayers of the State of California. And maybe add to this a guestimate by legal experts as to the projected costs of the many legal battles that will surely play out in the California courts.
I mean it had to cost millions to put Prop 8 on the ballot. The act of printing the extra paper, counting the millions of extra ballots, etc etc. And by the time the gays finally win the right to EQUAL CIVIL RIGHTS, I would be interested in how much California taxpayers are paying for the 10-10,000 ensuing court battles.

LMAO… Ok I just had to laugh…
“Be forced to perform services for gays”… PUHLEASE!
No one can force a religious organization to perform a wedding ceremony…
The church has been recognizing and NOT recognizing marriages and divorces regardless of the legal status of the union (The Catholic Church is a CLASSIC example of this)

AMEN Mary

I think I may laugh my ass off….. Marriage till death? you really are from Mars. My god(with question) do you really know someone who is on their first marriage?
I need to go to bed. This conversation has evolved into something even I can’t participate in any longer.

I’d like everyone to exchange the word “Gay” “Homosexual” etc with the word “Black”… Because this country made those same arguments about African Americans not so long ago too

I would like to know what was actually read over the pulpit in the LDS churches. I’m under the impression that the members of the LDS church in California were actually asked to do all that they can to support marriage between a man and a woman. Depending on your point of view, that is different then saying “do all that you can do to fight gay marriage.” Reading prop 8 I can not find anything that DIRECTLY attacks gay marriage, but is all in support of traditional marriage between a man and a woman. The purpose was to preserve and protect the fundamental unit of society, being a man and a woman who can produce offspring with the potential of becomming valuable contributors to society. No other unit of society can produce human beings.
As far as the separation of church and state goes…there was separation. The churches only took a stand on a moral issue…the people, the government, made the decision. The LDS church did not put it’s money into prop 8, It’s members did. The members did not do it because they were being controlled by the LDS church(as evidenced by many members in opposition to Prop 8). They did it because they saw it as an opportunity for them, as american citizens, to take a stand on something they personally believe.
Why is this poll even being taken on whether or not people agree or disagree with the Mormon’s as if they were the ones responsible for the decision made. The members of the LDS church only make up a small 2% of California’s population. What percentage of Mormons actually voted for Prop 8 out of all the other groups involved?…Not a significant number. It disturbs me that just because LDS members contributed a large portion of the money they are the ones taking the blame…
But historically speaking churches in general, prophets, apostles…and those who followed their inspired words have never been popular in the public eye. Moses was constantly bothered by his own doubting, disobedient people, who never truly accepted him as a prophet, as they did Abraham. It wasn’t until the days of Christ that the Jews held great reverence for Moses name, but who was this Christ? They crucified him, rejected him, for what he taught. Today this situation is one foretold by scripture that those who would stand up for the teachings of Christ would be persecuted. As a Christian, I feel it my responsibility to stand with the LDS church, the Catholics, other Christians, and all others who have voted through this process in support of maintaining the traditional family.
The media needs to do a better job at telling the whole story…not just the part that catches peoples attention. We all know it just about ratings…Tell one part and wait tell it goes cold, then share the other half you knew all along to boost ratings again, and when that dies off throw in a twist. I do not mean to generalize in saying that all media is this way, I’m just saying i’ve seen it a lot on all political sides. I apologize if I have offended anyone, but I do not apologize for the decision I have made in supporting Prop 8.

==we must strive as a nation to come to some sort of compromise.==
Not on this.
== Some sort of understanding and acceptance of one another…==
Those who claim to be homosexual must understand that we are not in the position of defying God on this. Thus, there can be no compromise of His Word on this.
==This is why I say take “marriage” out of the license…==
The Word of God is also clear about living as though you’re married when you’re not.
== Make it a Civil Union for all… This will be equal rights for all tax paying law abiding consenting adults regardless of race, religion, gender or sexual orientation the legal protections the government, at the present, only offers heterosexuals.==
There is no third sex. Humanity is made up of male and female. Of those, less than 2% say they are homosexual. Nobody stops a man who claims to be homosexual from marrying a woman who says she is homosexual. So, where’s the discrimination in the law that defines “marriage” as a union of a “man” and a “woman”?

===this country made those same arguments about African Americans not so long ago too==
Irrelevant.
Interracial marriage is made up of a man, as husband, and a woman, as his wife. That complies with the template God created, joining a man, as husband, and a woman, as his wife — WHAT, not who. Those who claim to be homosexual cannot make the same claim.

What are you thinking? Those of you who say the people have spoken with there votes. Let’s thank LBJ, the Federal Government and the Supreme Court at that time for not allowing individual States to make decisions on civil liberties.

==What is wrong with the people who voted for this? ==
To the scoffer, everything. To God, nothing.
==They may have forcibly divorced 18,000+ couples, many of whom have children.==
There are no blood children. Those couples, of, for and by themselves did not have those children. It’s a biological impossibility.
== How is it moral to rip families apart?==
If the children were blood relatives, that might be a consideration. However, as I say above, a same-sex coupling did not create those children.
== These people are just cruel.==
Romans 8:1

dean this contry was founded on freedom of religion with out persacution
for exsample i am an atheist and i have every right to be that way rather you are christion or what ever you might be you have that right
but i still believe in seperation of church in state if not completely at least dont base everything off of it
and ii know its going to take little arguements or big ones in order for every one to be truely equal here in the us dont get me wrong i love my country but it more than obvious that most people are not ready for this to be so excepted
but i do look at it this way im younger this was my first time ever voting but the more people who are my age that i speek to are okay with gay marriedge so once the magority now is the minority there will still be arguments but hopefully if the people i know and alot of others just old enough to vote are as open minded about these things one day gay marridge will be legal
++++++++++

Mike In Cincinnati, you are very bitter and why do you know so much about the mormon religion? Truth hurts!!!You don’t have your facts straight. You must be very confused. I am not of the mormon faith, but I agree with them. They are great people. You should be a mormon with your know it all thoughts. Get a life and stop being so hateful!! We are not going to just accept the gays because your feeling left out of life.

I’m inclined to respect a majority vote–but once upon a time, the majority thought blacks and women had no right to vote, now we have a black president. Sometimes society needs a push to recognize what’s right. If “marriage” is to be defined as a purely religious institution, as many supporters of Proposition 8 have suggested, then it’s completely outside the realm of the state anyway & the government should use an entirely unique term that grants equal rights to straight and gay couples. The word marriage either belongs to the government or it belongs to religion, it can’t belong to both. Let religion discriminate all it wants…that should have no place in government.

“There are 3 significant reasons why it is a good thing that Prop. 8 passed:
1. The MINORITY doesn’t (or shouldn’t) make the rules. In 2000, 61% of California voters said NO to gay marriage. Somehow the whopping 4 million Californians who agreed on the definition of marriage (between a man and a woman) was overruled by 4, yes FOUR, judges in the California Supreme court. These 4 judges threw the voters opinions out the window by overruling the law and legalizing gay marriage. By definition, Democracy means the RULE of the MAJORITY.
2. Public Education would be forced to teach same sex marriage to our children.
3. Religious freedom would be jeopardized. If Proposition 8 would have failed, gays and lesbians would have had the right to SUE religious institutions for discrimination. Religious entities would be striped of their tax exemptions if they refused to recognize same sex marriages as valid. A church cannot discriminate and must allow all married couples (defined by law) the same privileges. If they won’t comprise their religious beliefs, their tax exemptions would be taken away. This is millions of dollars for many religious institutions.”
The Mormon church encourages its members to be respectful and love those with different beliefs. I don’t know why there can’t be a mutual respect for one another- regardless of what side you are on.
And I just want to clarify to a few individuals who have an incorrect view on the Mormon church’s stance on polygamy. Polygamy is strictly prohibited by the church. The Mormon Church discontinued polygamy over a century ago. No members of the Mormon Church today can enter into polygamy without being excommunicated.

==…the sanctity of marriage between man and woman for procreation is more a survival instinct to help continue our species.==
God created marriage for the man, as husband, and a woman, as his wife, to express their Godly love and to produce Godly children. This is a simulation of the marriage of Christ, the Groom, to His Church, the bride.
If the sanctity of marriage between a man and a woman for procreation is more a survival instinct, what’s the Godly purpose of a so-called “same-sex ‘marriage’”?

Mr. I: read my posts – we’re not disagreeing.

==Mr Incredible I want you to tell me where, who god is?==
Well, “god” is in the money you love, the car you love, the stereo you love, and in anything you give power to have authority over you.
I can’t imagine that you want to know where God is cuz scoffers won’t believe it anyway. Likewise, scoffers don’t believe in His Son, and, so, any explanation won’t make them believe.

There are many opponents of prop 8 that say this is a government issue not a religious issue and churches have no right in speaking on such matters. This is a moral issue that effects many aspects of society and religious institutions as well as anyone else have the right to state their view on moral issues.
There are many laws that have been on the books for many years that refer to marriage or marital status and we all know these terms have been used to refer to marriage between a man and a woman. If we allow the word marriage to mean something other than between a man and a woman it essentially changes any law that refers to marriage, which is what the opponents of Prop 8 would like to see.
As they should be, moral issues are integrated into the fabric of many of the laws of this land. Why should this be any different?
What’s the next step? Should homosexuals partners be allowed to adopt children? Should they then be allowed to divorce their partner and “marry” their previously adopted child? Will this be considered incest? Will we then need to redefine the word child, son, daughter and spouse or is everything a free for all? Should any human relationship be acceptable and subject to the same rights as any other relationship? Where do we draw the line? There are some who seem to believe there should be no lines with respect to human relationships. We have laws to define lines. These laws should be established and governed my moral principles.

==Mr. I: read my posts – we’re not disagreeing.==
Okay.

When a church starts telling it’s parishioners, who rely on the church’s guidance in order to determine their actions and the possibly outcome of their eternity, how they should vote based on the churches opinions… they have crossed a very important line. If they want to be in politics, they’d better be ready to get taxed for those millions of dollars they requested in order to stomp all over civil rights!
Oh… I agree with the protesters. Keep your religion out of our laws, folks. And the Mormons? Who have been attacked themselves for their marital practices? They go after others for it? For shame. We reached an important milestone in the Presidential election. It’s about time the rest of you get your head out of the Dark Ages and start living in the 21st century already.

==Mike In Cincinnati, you are very bitter and why do you know so much about the mormon religion? ==
All of his allegations were off base. Whatever tiny kernals of truth may have been embedded were completely slatered in and overrun by false accusations.

OMG… From Candice on. I can see we have a very long way to go. I simply wonder what kind of brains we contain. However after the last 8 years in the Whitehouse…. why should I. I hope this GOD you all believe in can guide Elect President Obama to make the right decisions. I fear many of you freaks want agree with his judgement.

There are three central issues in the controversy: hate, law, and societal effect. Hate is obviously shown only by those against Proposition 8. It shows what kind of people they are and how they behave in the face of differing opinions. It also shows the fruit of the defended lifestyle.
The law must defend the good of society, and part of this is to be resistant to restructuring. A grape is not a watermelon, and a union of same sex people is not a marriage. Marriage has, among other funtions, the place of protecting children and nurturing them to functional adulthood. This is most often successfully done by a mother and a father. It is sheer, patent nonsense that all people acting as homosexuals are that way because nature made them that way. Some may have chemical and physical structures that promote their attractions but far from all. Much is fostered by convenience, the difficulty of finding a suitable mate of the opposite sex, and lack of self control. Allowing homosexuals the same rights as married heterosexuals defies protections of children and family that are known to be central to the propogation of species and the maintenance of orderly society. Two people of the same sex can provide for themselves the same as singles, as is required in all other household structures other than birth or adoptive parents of the opposite sex, e.g., grandmother, uncle, cousin, etc.
The impact of homosexuality on society is detrimental to say the least, notwithstanding all the sophistry used by those who promote it. The economic impact alone would be cripling to business and government. And this for no reasoned purpose. In addition, homosexuals again show their disorderly behavior by not only asserting their acceptance in society but by demanding that they be given more than a fair share of attention, acceptance, legal rights, etc. as has been shown in the unperspicacious states that have allowed homosexual “marriages.” And the legal challenges and harassment of educational institutions place absurd burden on the ongoing duties of those laboring to preserve society.
Two people of the same sex who wish to be together may do so, but voters have every right to deny marital status to homosexual partners. To do otherwise is ruinous to society, and civil officials are duty bound to effect protections against such.

I would like to know what was actually read over the pulpit in the LDS churches. I’m under the impression that the members of the LDS church in California were actually asked to do all that they can to support marriage between a man and a woman. Depending on your point of view, that is different then saying “do all that you can do to fight gay marriage.” Reading prop 8 I can not find anything that DIRECTLY attacks gay marriage, but is all in support of traditional marriage between a man and a woman. The purpose was to preserve and protect the fundamental unit of society, being a man and a woman who can produce offspring with the potential of becomming valuable contributors to society. No other unit of society can produce human beings.
As far as the separation of church and state goes…there was separation. The churches only took a stand on a moral issue…the people, the government, made the decision. The LDS church did not put it’s money into prop 8, It’s members did. The members did not do it because they were being controlled by the LDS church(as evidenced by many members in opposition to Prop 8). They did it because they saw it as an opportunity for them, as american citizens, to take a stand on something they personally believe.
Why is this poll even being taken on whether or not people agree or disagree with the Mormon’s as if they were the ones responsible for the decision made. The members of the LDS church only make up a small 2% of California’s population. What percentage of Mormons actually voted for Prop 8 out of all the other groups involved?…Not a significant number. It disturbs me that just because LDS members contributed a large portion of the money they are the ones taking the blame…
But historically speaking churches in general, prophets, apostles…and those who followed their inspired words have never been popular in the public eye. Moses was constantly bothered by his own doubting, disobedient people, who never truly accepted him as a prophet, as they did Abraham. It wasn’t until the days of Christ that the Jews held great reverence for Moses name, but who was this Christ? They crucified him, rejected him, for what he taught. Today this situation is one foretold by scripture that those who would stand up for the teachings of Christ would be persecuted. As a Christian, I feel it my responsibility to stand with the LDS church, the Catholics, other Christians, and all others who have voted through this process in support of maintaining the traditional family.
The media needs to do a better job at telling the whole story…not just the part that catches peoples attention. We all know it just about ratings…Tell one part and wait tell it goes cold, then share the other half you knew all along to boost ratings again, and when that dies off throw in a twist. I do not mean to generalize in saying that all media is this way, I’m just saying i’ve seen it a lot on all political sides. I apologize if I have offended anyone, but I do not apologize for the decision I have made in supporting Prop 8.

Love is the most powerful attracting force in the universe. It draws us together to be in each other’s presence. It compels us to share our time, our thoughts, our concerns, even our possessions. Love fills us with a desire to bring each other happiness, peace, and joy. Sometimes love compels us to create together, to create relationships, homes, even life. Love is universally honored and appreciated as a force for good, and the purest of motives. It is acknowledged as the only force more powerful than our instinctive will to survive, a force so great that we would sacrifice our own lives to preserve the happiness and security of those we love. So why would anyone want to stop two people who love each other from being married?
In order to understand the answer to that question, we must first understand what marriage is and what marriage is not. We must also understand why society embraces marriage, and why two people would want to be married.
For as long as humankind has kept written records, humans have acknowledged marriage as a multiparty agreement between a man, a woman, society, government, and even God. While many variations of this agreement exist, the general terms are often similar and fairly simple. American society generally accepts the following terms as part of the marital agreement:
1. The man and the woman agree to share property, privacy, and privilege.
2. Government agrees to treat these two individuals as if they were one with respect to their property, privacy, and privilege.
3. The man and the woman agree to mate with each other.
4. Society agrees to condone the mating of the man and the woman.
5. Society also agrees to disqualify the man and woman as prospective mates for others.
6. In the religious tradition, deity sanctions the mating of this couple as an appropriate use of creative power.
Thus, the marriage agreement generally involves two aspects: sharing and approval. When we look a little deeper, however, we can see that the approval aspect of marriage is not related to friendship or love. While marriage is an agreement that provides approval of sexual behavior, it is not an agreement that provides an approval of love. Such an approval is unnecessary because love is universally approved, as is friendship. Sexual behavior, on the other hand, is scrutinized and evaluated for its impact on society. The approval of society accompanies marriage because marriage is viewed as an agreement designed to maximize the positive impact of sexual reproduction while minimizing the negative impacts on society. Specifically, marriage is embraced and used by society to protect the family.
There are many organizational units in society, which produce or provide components of a healthy civilization. Some produce goods and services, and we call these companies. Others produce ideas and philosophies. We call these political parties and churches. Some provide safety and security. We call these armies. Ultimately, however, all of these units and the many others that exist in civilizations are composed of people.
People are the building blocks of society, and only one unit in society produces those building blocks. We call it the family. The family is considered the fundamental unit of society because no other unit can be built without the building blocks produced by families.
Societies have always given special attention to the formation of families because families play such a central role in the development, growth, sustained existence, and prosperity of civilizations. Many dangerous structural weaknesses can threaten family stability. If a family is not formed properly, it may easily break down and cease to produce good members of society. Without good members of society from which to build companies, political parties, churches, and armies, society itself loses stability. When families fail, society fails; therefore, societies have used marriage as a means to ensure the integrity of the family unit.
The general terms of the marriage agreement are designed to ensure that the building blocks of society produced by families are properly nourished, protected, educated, and prepared to become productive members of society. Scientists and researchers agree that children raised by both a father and a mother are more likely to be properly nourished, protected, educated, and prepared to become productive members of society. Accordingly, societies have historically disapproved of fornication, adultery, and divorce, as these practices often result in teen pregnancies, single mothers, deadbeat dads, and confused, neglected, and insecure children. While some do succeed in raising healthy children under these circumstances, statistically, those cases are the fortunate few.
Because people have a tendency to seek approval and acceptance from others, social disapproval has proven to be an effective deterrent to the unstable formation of families. Since marriage provides the approval of society, government, and religion; most devoted couples will seek to be married before they begin to create a family, and they will commit to fidelity and mutual support in order to enter the marital agreement. Both fidelity and mutual support facilitate the creation of a stable environment in which to raise productive members of society.
So, we have outlined what marriage is and what it is not. We have examined why society embraces marriage, and why a couple would want to be married. With these ideas in mind, we can now address the original question. Why would anyone want to stop two people who love each other from being married?
First we must reemphasize that love is not under consideration in marriage because love is universally approved. Sexual behavior is scrutinized and evaluated for its impact on society. Society does not disapprove of love between a man and a woman, nor does society disapprove of one man loving another man or of one woman loving another woman. This is called having a best friend. Many of us have our guy friends and our girlfriends of the same gender. We love and care for these people very much. We want to be with them. We want to share with them. We want to make them happy. Usually we do this by showing our concern, by listening to their problems, and by providing advice or encouragement. Often we assist them with their labors or provide other temporal support. We loan them our resources; we give them gifts; we open our homes and our families to them. Sometimes we love our friends so much that we would even give our lives for them.
Regardless of the gender of our friends, none of these acts are considered homosexual. The soldier who loves his friends so much that he throws himself on a grenade to save them is not homosexual because of his love. The definition of homosexuality is not to love someone of the same gender, no matter how strong that love is. Friendship does not become homosexuality until two people of the same gender engage in sexual acts with each other.
With marriage, love is not being submitted for approval; sexual behavior is being submitted for approval. For heterosexual couples, this approval is easily granted because their sexual activity may produce children, and they are promising to also create a stable environment for those children, so the children may someday become good members of society.
With homosexual couples, this approval is not easily granted for several reasons; primarily, their sexual activity can never create children. The couple cannot produce the building blocks of society; therefore, they are not the fundamental unit of society, and their sexual behavior is not approved.
We must note here that sexual activity of any kind is rarely used exclusively for reproductive purposes; however, social approval is not so much based on the intent of sexual partners as it is based on an evaluation of the possible impact on society. Society considers many impacts in addition to the production and development of people, including changes to the pool of potential mates, reproductive health and the spread of sexually transmitted diseases, unplanned parenthood, abortion, broken families, children in foster care, and many others.
This evaluation of social impact (not sexual intent) is reflected in society’s historical disapproval of unmarried heterosexual partners and in the general acceptance of sexual activity within the bonds of marriage. Married couples may not intend to have children or may not be able to have children; nevertheless, if they do have children, those children are statistically more likely to be raised in a stable environment and prepared to become good members of society. Production of children is not mandatory for approval; rather, the potential for that production within a stable environment is the perceived benefit that leads society to accept marital sex.
The evaluation of social impact is perhaps the most rational reason for the disapproval of homosexual behavior; however, an honest investigation into people’s opinions and feelings about homosexuality will produce a variety of less rational, yet no less real, emotional and mental barriers to approving such behavior. While many of these sentiments are openly discussed, others are quite taboo. Still, we must eventually address all of them if we are to come to a mutual understanding and find an answer to our original question. Those sentiments that are more sensitive must especially be discussed because they are the feelings that frequently lead to heinous hate crimes, prejudice, and discrimination. For the sake of clarity, they are presented here in a scientific and straightforward manner.
First, homosexuality is commonly seen as a perversion and an abuse of the power to create life. Many view this power as a sacred gift granted by God. Even those who do not believe in God typically feel a profound respect for the intimate and marvelous ability to create life. Misuse of this power for any purpose, whether for masturbation, fornication, adultery, homosexuality, or bestiality, is often considered perversion. To pervert is to change, alter, or distort something. In that sense, all of these acts are indeed perversions – changes, alterations, and distortions of human reproduction. Thus, the sexual behavior is not approved.
Second, many of the sexual acts listed above are considered sinful, which means contrary to the will of God. Many believe that God gave mankind the power of procreation and gave guidelines for the appropriate use of that power. They also believe that God created the institution of marriage. Naturally, their belief system would not allow the possibility of changing that institution to incorporate those who cannot procreate together and who are practicing sexuality in a way that has been forbidden by many religions. Thus, the sexual behavior is not approved.
Third, many sexual acts considered sinful, such as masturbation, homosexuality, and bestiality, cannot create life; rather, they are used to self gratify. They have no useful or meaningful purpose other than to release dopamine and cause physical pleasure. Many do not consider the case in which two homosexual partners seek only to bring happiness to each other; instead, they see homosexuality as a willingness to do anything for self gratification. Self gratification, or selfishness, runs contrary to friendship and love. Usually selfishness is the cause of divorce or broken friendships, and selfish people are rarely accepted by others. Thus, the sexual behavior is not approved.
Fourth, homosexuality fails many ethical tests. For example, Kant’s Universality Test of the Moral Imperative requires that we imagine a universe in which everyone was required to follow the maxim or perform the action in question. We assume that what is truly good for one must also be good for all. If homosexuality were to replace heterosexuality, all human life would cease within a generation. Only the practice of artificial insemination could prevent the extinction of humankind.
Because of these ethical tests, many non-religious people are opposed to homosexuality. They find that even outside of the constraints of religion – entirely within the boundaries of metaphysics and ethics – homosexuality is still viewed as a vice rather than a virtue. Thus, the sexual behavior is not approved.
Fifth, many are appalled by the thought of homosexual intercourse. They view the specific techniques of homosexual intercourse as unsanitary, particularly in the case of male homosexuality involving anal intercourse. While this is not the only method of homosexual intercourse, it has become the most salient, and it continues to shape perceptions about homosexuals.
Anal intercourse, whether it is practiced by homosexual or heterosexual couples, is revolting to many. The human rectum is an orifice of the digestive system, not the reproductive system. It is the passageway of human waste and excrement. This excrement is considered to be the filthiest of all materials. It is foul smelling and naturally repugnant. Furthermore, anal intercourse is damaging to the tissues of the colon and rectum and often causes bleeding, which brings infection from excrement and facilitates the introduction of sexually transmitted diseases. Accordingly, the thought of homosexuality is naturally appalling to many people. Thus, the sexual behavior is not approved.
Because of these reasons and perhaps others, many in society will never accept or condone homosexuality. Unlike the primary reason for disapproval, these last five are fraught with logical fallacies. However, regardless of whether or not any of these reasons are logical or justified, they are certainly real; they are extremely significant, and they must be considered because they continue to hinder the social approval of homosexual behavior.
Remember that the marriage agreement involves two aspects: sharing and approval. While many do not approve of the sexual behavior of homosexuals, they are willing to participate in a multiparty agreement involving only the sharing aspect. This means that the couple will share property, privacy, and privilege, and the government will recognize their right to do so and treat them as one person with regard to those things. We call this a civil union.
Still, civil unions are not good enough for some homosexual couples because they want the one thing that only the word “marriage” provides, and that is social acceptance and approval of their choice to engage in sexual acts with a partner of the same gender.
Why do you need to “marry” the person you love? If your answer is that you want the legal rights and legal privileges of marriage, then a civil union will provide all of those. If you simply want society to honor and accept your love, then friendship will suffice. If, however, you also want social acceptance and approval of your sexual relationship, then you must be married.
Unfortunately, that is the great illusion that has led so many homosexuals to seek government sanction of same-sex marriage. They are under the false impression that receiving a title of marriage will provide acceptance for them as it has for so many heterosexual couples. This sad misunderstanding demonstrates their failure to see the mechanisms of civilization that have embraced marriage and made it a central institution in society.
Remember, marriage is a multiparty agreement:
1. From an individual standpoint, marriage represents an agreement to share property, privacy, and privilege. It also represents a commitment of fidelity.
2. From a government standpoint, marriage represents recognition of the right to share property, privacy, and privilege.
3. From a social standpoint, marriage represents a sanction of the proper formation of a family, a fundamental unit with potential to create good members of society.
4. From a religious standpoint, marriage represents an approval of the proper use of creative power.
If these are the parties of the multiparty agreement, only two can be satisfied with same-sex marriage. The civil union agreement only requires the participation of these two satisfied parties, but the marriage agreement requires the participation of all four.
Too many in society are not willing to sanction same-sex marriage as the proper formation of a family, a fundamental unit that will produce good members of society. Too many in the various churches throughout this nation are not willing to use their religious authority to approve homosexuality as a proper use of creative power. Should we force these two parties into the contract? Or, should we allow them to make their best judgment in this issue and let the other two parties create their own contract?
In the end, “married” is just a word. It is a word that indicates the formation of a specific unit in society, the family – producer of people. Still, it is just a word. There are many words that represent the formation of societal units, words like incorporation. Incorporation is also just a word, and articles of incorporation are just paper; however, they represent a multiparty agreement that has actually taken place. You can call a company incorporated, but if the relevant parties have not actually agreed to the contract, what does it mean?
The word “married” is like a stamp of approval. A stamp of approval is created to express a sentiment that already exists. The stamp itself is just an image, but it represents a careful process of evaluation and judgment. You can create and apply a similar stamp without completing that process, but what does it mean?
Just calling yourself incorporated does not make you a legitimate business, a legal producer of goods and services. Calling yourself married does not make you a family, a producer of human life. Stamping yourself with “approved” does not force the evaluation board to approve you, and calling yourself married does not force society and religion to approve of your sexual behavior.
Again, if homosexuals want marriage because they want legal rights, then a civil union will do. If they want marriage because they want approval, they are gravely misguided. Those that will approve of their sexual behavior because they are married, likely already approved of it before. Those in society that do not approve will not be swayed by what they view as a counterfeit stamp of approval – false articles of incorporation. A homosexual couple will still be viewed as a mislabeled organization, an under-the-table business, a false fundamental unit that cannot perform the fundamental function of a family.
It is important that we distinguish between the different units in our society and understand the role that they each play. If we do not, we will struggle to allocate the proper resources to the development, utilization, and preservation of each unit. It is even more important that we continue to recognize the family as the fundamental unit of society, so that we can continue to place it first on our list of priorities. No other unit should be allowed to share that position because no other unit is so crucial to society.
This is why so many feel that we must retain the specific stamp of approval which has been created for the designation of a fundamental unit. Certainly, we must at least understand the consequences of throwing that stamp on anything that merely approximates a family.
The title, type, function, and description of organizations are all connected for the sake of order and clarity. A company is created by incorporation. A family is created by marriage. An army is commissioned. A labor union is unionized. Words have meaning. You cannot incorporate an army. Its primary and intended function is not to produce goods and services. True, an army can buy goods and services. It purchases weapons and supplies from many corporations, but it is not a corporation. It has a different function; it requires different resources; it is governed by different laws, so we commission it and do not incorporate it.
Likewise, same-sex couples can never create human life together. They can buy the seeds of life or buy life itself by adopting, but they can never produce that life alone, not without the participation of a third person of opposite gender. While some heterosexual couples suffer tragically from infertility, most can produce life. The social impact of their heterosexual behavior is viewed as potentially beneficial; therefore, society broadly accepts that behavior and is willing to marry those couples and recognize them as a family.
No homosexual couples can ever produce life… not one. They simply do not have the capability or potential to perform that function. Society does not perceive the same potential benefits when evaluating the social impact of homosexual behavior; instead, society perceives many negative potential impacts. Therefore, many do not consider a homosexual union to be equal to the family, the fundamental unit of society, the producer of people. Society is willing to unionize those same-sex couples, but many are not willing to marry them.
Willing is the key word. Two homosexuals may be willing to love and support each other; that is friendship. No one is stopping them. They may be willing to participate in homosexual acts; that is homosexuality. No one is stopping them. They may be willing to share property, privacy, and privilege; that is a civil union. No one is stopping them.
Ultimately, homosexuals are not really asking to do something. They are asking others to do something. They are not asking for the right to do what they are willing to do. When they ask for marriage, they are asking the rest of us to do something that we may or may not be willing to do. They are asking society to approve of their homosexual activity, and they are asking religious institutions to sanction their homosexual behavior as an appropriate use of creative power.
Are these other parties willing? That is the real question posed by Proposition 8. That is the underlying referendum being presented to us for a vote. By voting “Yes” on Proposition 8, we would do more than define marriage as a union only between one man and one woman. We would answer the underlying question of our willingness to participate in the marital agreement with homosexuals. By voting “Yes”… we would answer, “No… we are not willing. We are not willing to approve the social impact of homosexual activity. We are not willing to sanction homosexuality as a proper use of creative power. We are not willing to enter the multiparty agreement. We are not willing, and we choose to abstain.”
…That is an exercise of our freedom, not a restriction of theirs.
Proposition 8 is not about telling people who they can and cannot love. It is not about telling them who they can and cannot be with. It is not about preventing the legally recognized sharing of property, privacy, and privilege. Proposition 8 is about defining marriage. It is about the right and freedom of society and religion to abstain from a multiparty agreement deemed unacceptable. It is about preserving the coveted title of marriage as a stamp of approval for that fundamental institution which contributes the most to society. It is about protecting the unique status of the family and ensuring its place as the first and ultimate priority of civilization. Only the union of a man and a woman can create the greatest of all resources – human life. For that, we honor them. For that, we approve of them… and for that, we marry them… for only they have the power to create our future and the future of all humanity.
Joshua M. Uda © 2008 – All Rights Reserved
Please send a message to Joshua Uda to request permission to publish or share this article outside of Facebook.

I’m just a voter too, but recognize the facts that the majority of Americans are
in support of one-man/one-woman marriage. That’s not being mean – simply being REALISTIC. People are born
with a gender, regardless of how they
“FEEL” later in life. Genetics don’t lie. Neither do the the polls — and in America the mainstream is solidly
in favor of retaining heterosexual marriage exclusively. So be it. That’s not “hate” – just simple common sense. “Feelings” can’t alter facts…
and chromosomes are the bottom line here…not optional. Get over it!

I support the LDS church in its efforts to protect our rights in this free country. Yes on Prop 8 was voted on and decided by the public. The right to vote is being damaged here if we can’t have citezens who are willing to live by the laws of the land.

Love is the most powerful attracting force in the universe. It draws us together to be in each other’s presence. It compels us to share our time, our thoughts, our concerns, even our possessions. Love fills us with a desire to bring each other happiness, peace, and joy. Sometimes love compels us to create together, to create relationships, homes, even life. Love is universally honored and appreciated as a force for good, and the purest of motives. It is acknowledged as the only force more powerful than our instinctive will to survive, a force so great that we would sacrifice our own lives to preserve the happiness and security of those we love. So why would anyone want to stop two people who love each other from being married?
In order to understand the answer to that question, we must first understand what marriage is and what marriage is not. We must also understand why society embraces marriage, and why two people would want to be married.
For as long as humankind has kept written records, humans have acknowledged marriage as a multiparty agreement between a man, a woman, society, government, and even God. While many variations of this agreement exist, the general terms are often similar and fairly simple. American society generally accepts the following terms as part of the marital agreement:
1. The man and the woman agree to share property, privacy, and privilege.
2. Government agrees to treat these two individuals as if they were one with respect to their property, privacy, and privilege.
3. The man and the woman agree to mate with each other.
4. Society agrees to condone the mating of the man and the woman.
5. Society also agrees to disqualify the man and woman as prospective mates for others.
6. In the religious tradition, deity sanctions the mating of this couple as an appropriate use of creative power.
Thus, the marriage agreement generally involves two aspects: sharing and approval. When we look a little deeper, however, we can see that the approval aspect of marriage is not related to friendship or love. While marriage is an agreement that provides approval of sexual behavior, it is not an agreement that provides an approval of love. Such an approval is unnecessary because love is universally approved, as is friendship. Sexual behavior, on the other hand, is scrutinized and evaluated for its impact on society. The approval of society accompanies marriage because marriage is viewed as an agreement designed to maximize the positive impact of sexual reproduction while minimizing the negative impacts on society. Specifically, marriage is embraced and used by society to protect the family.
There are many organizational units in society, which produce or provide components of a healthy civilization. Some produce goods and services, and we call these companies. Others produce ideas and philosophies. We call these political parties and churches. Some provide safety and security. We call these armies. Ultimately, however, all of these units and the many others that exist in civilizations are composed of people.
People are the building blocks of society, and only one unit in society produces those building blocks. We call it the family. The family is considered the fundamental unit of society because no other unit can be built without the building blocks produced by families.
Societies have always given special attention to the formation of families because families play such a central role in the development, growth, sustained existence, and prosperity of civilizations. Many dangerous structural weaknesses can threaten family stability. If a family is not formed properly, it may easily break down and cease to produce good members of society. Without good members of society from which to build companies, political parties, churches, and armies, society itself loses stability. When families fail, society fails; therefore, societies have used marriage as a means to ensure the integrity of the family unit.
The general terms of the marriage agreement are designed to ensure that the building blocks of society produced by families are properly nourished, protected, educated, and prepared to become productive members of society. Scientists and researchers agree that children raised by both a father and a mother are more likely to be properly nourished, protected, educated, and prepared to become productive members of society. Accordingly, societies have historically disapproved of fornication, adultery, and divorce, as these practices often result in teen pregnancies, single mothers, deadbeat dads, and confused, neglected, and insecure children. While some do succeed in raising healthy children under these circumstances, statistically, those cases are the fortunate few.
Because people have a tendency to seek approval and acceptance from others, social disapproval has proven to be an effective deterrent to the unstable formation of families. Since marriage provides the approval of society, government, and religion; most devoted couples will seek to be married before they begin to create a family, and they will commit to fidelity and mutual support in order to enter the marital agreement. Both fidelity and mutual support facilitate the creation of a stable environment in which to raise productive members of society.
So, we have outlined what marriage is and what it is not. We have examined why society embraces marriage, and why a couple would want to be married. With these ideas in mind, we can now address the original question. Why would anyone want to stop two people who love each other from being married?
First we must reemphasize that love is not under consideration in marriage because love is universally approved. Sexual behavior is scrutinized and evaluated for its impact on society. Society does not disapprove of love between a man and a woman, nor does society disapprove of one man loving another man or of one woman loving another woman. This is called having a best friend. Many of us have our guy friends and our girlfriends of the same gender. We love and care for these people very much. We want to be with them. We want to share with them. We want to make them happy. Usually we do this by showing our concern, by listening to their problems, and by providing advice or encouragement. Often we assist them with their labors or provide other temporal support. We loan them our resources; we give them gifts; we open our homes and our families to them. Sometimes we love our friends so much that we would even give our lives for them.
Regardless of the gender of our friends, none of these acts are considered homosexual. The soldier who loves his friends so much that he throws himself on a grenade to save them is not homosexual because of his love. The definition of homosexuality is not to love someone of the same gender, no matter how strong that love is. Friendship does not become homosexuality until two people of the same gender engage in sexual acts with each other.
With marriage, love is not being submitted for approval; sexual behavior is being submitted for approval. For heterosexual couples, this approval is easily granted because their sexual activity may produce children, and they are promising to also create a stable environment for those children, so the children may someday become good members of society.
With homosexual couples, this approval is not easily granted for several reasons; primarily, their sexual activity can never create children. The couple cannot produce the building blocks of society; therefore, they are not the fundamental unit of society, and their sexual behavior is not approved.
We must note here that sexual activity of any kind is rarely used exclusively for reproductive purposes; however, social approval is not so much based on the intent of sexual partners as it is based on an evaluation of the possible impact on society. Society considers many impacts in addition to the production and development of people, including changes to the pool of potential mates, reproductive health and the spread of sexually transmitted diseases, unplanned parenthood, abortion, broken families, children in foster care, and many others.
This evaluation of social impact (not sexual intent) is reflected in society’s historical disapproval of unmarried heterosexual partners and in the general acceptance of sexual activity within the bonds of marriage. Married couples may not intend to have children or may not be able to have children; nevertheless, if they do have children, those children are statistically more likely to be raised in a stable environment and prepared to become good members of society. Production of children is not mandatory for approval; rather, the potential for that production within a stable environment is the perceived benefit that leads society to accept marital sex.
The evaluation of social impact is perhaps the most rational reason for the disapproval of homosexual behavior; however, an honest investigation into people’s opinions and feelings about homosexuality will produce a variety of less rational, yet no less real, emotional and mental barriers to approving such behavior. While many of these sentiments are openly discussed, others are quite taboo. Still, we must eventually address all of them if we are to come to a mutual understanding and find an answer to our original question. Those sentiments that are more sensitive must especially be discussed because they are the feelings that frequently lead to heinous hate crimes, prejudice, and discrimination. For the sake of clarity, they are presented here in a scientific and straightforward manner.
First, homosexuality is commonly seen as a perversion and an abuse of the power to create life. Many view this power as a sacred gift granted by God. Even those who do not believe in God typically feel a profound respect for the intimate and marvelous ability to create life. Misuse of this power for any purpose, whether for masturbation, fornication, adultery, homosexuality, or bestiality, is often considered perversion. To pervert is to change, alter, or distort something. In that sense, all of these acts are indeed perversions – changes, alterations, and distortions of human reproduction. Thus, the sexual behavior is not approved.
Second, many of the sexual acts listed above are considered sinful, which means contrary to the will of God. Many believe that God gave mankind the power of procreation and gave guidelines for the appropriate use of that power. They also believe that God created the institution of marriage. Naturally, their belief system would not allow the possibility of changing that institution to incorporate those who cannot procreate together and who are practicing sexuality in a way that has been forbidden by many religions. Thus, the sexual behavior is not approved.
Third, many sexual acts considered sinful, such as masturbation, homosexuality, and bestiality, cannot create life; rather, they are used to self gratify. They have no useful or meaningful purpose other than to release dopamine and cause physical pleasure. Many do not consider the case in which two homosexual partners seek only to bring happiness to each other; instead, they see homosexuality as a willingness to do anything for self gratification. Self gratification, or selfishness, runs contrary to friendship and love. Usually selfishness is the cause of divorce or broken friendships, and selfish people are rarely accepted by others. Thus, the sexual behavior is not approved.
Fourth, homosexuality fails many ethical tests. For example, Kant’s Universality Test of the Moral Imperative requires that we imagine a universe in which everyone was required to follow the maxim or perform the action in question. We assume that what is truly good for one must also be good for all. If homosexuality were to replace heterosexuality, all human life would cease within a generation. Only the practice of artificial insemination could prevent the extinction of humankind.
Because of these ethical tests, many non-religious people are opposed to homosexuality. They find that even outside of the constraints of religion – entirely within the boundaries of metaphysics and ethics – homosexuality is still viewed as a vice rather than a virtue. Thus, the sexual behavior is not approved.
Fifth, many are appalled by the thought of homosexual intercourse. They view the specific techniques of homosexual intercourse as unsanitary, particularly in the case of male homosexuality involving anal intercourse. While this is not the only method of homosexual intercourse, it has become the most salient, and it continues to shape perceptions about homosexuals.
Anal intercourse, whether it is practiced by homosexual or heterosexual couples, is revolting to many. The human rectum is an orifice of the digestive system, not the reproductive system. It is the passageway of human waste and excrement. This excrement is considered to be the filthiest of all materials. It is foul smelling and naturally repugnant. Furthermore, anal intercourse is damaging to the tissues of the colon and rectum and often causes bleeding, which brings infection from excrement and facilitates the introduction of sexually transmitted diseases. Accordingly, the thought of homosexuality is naturally appalling to many people. Thus, the sexual behavior is not approved.
Because of these reasons and perhaps others, many in society will never accept or condone homosexuality. Unlike the primary reason for disapproval, these last five are fraught with logical fallacies. However, regardless of whether or not any of these reasons are logical or justified, they are certainly real; they are extremely significant, and they must be considered because they continue to hinder the social approval of homosexual behavior.
Remember that the marriage agreement involves two aspects: sharing and approval. While many do not approve of the sexual behavior of homosexuals, they are willing to participate in a multiparty agreement involving only the sharing aspect. This means that the couple will share property, privacy, and privilege, and the government will recognize their right to do so and treat them as one person with regard to those things. We call this a civil union.
Still, civil unions are not good enough for some homosexual couples because they want the one thing that only the word “marriage” provides, and that is social acceptance and approval of their choice to engage in sexual acts with a partner of the same gender.
Why do you need to “marry” the person you love? If your answer is that you want the legal rights and legal privileges of marriage, then a civil union will provide all of those. If you simply want society to honor and accept your love, then friendship will suffice. If, however, you also want social acceptance and approval of your sexual relationship, then you must be married.
Unfortunately, that is the great illusion that has led so many homosexuals to seek government sanction of same-sex marriage. They are under the false impression that receiving a title of marriage will provide acceptance for them as it has for so many heterosexual couples. This sad misunderstanding demonstrates their failure to see the mechanisms of civilization that have embraced marriage and made it a central institution in society.
Remember, marriage is a multiparty agreement:
1. From an individual standpoint, marriage represents an agreement to share property, privacy, and privilege. It also represents a commitment of fidelity.
2. From a government standpoint, marriage represents recognition of the right to share property, privacy, and privilege.
3. From a social standpoint, marriage represents a sanction of the proper formation of a family, a fundamental unit with potential to create good members of society.
4. From a religious standpoint, marriage represents an approval of the proper use of creative power.
If these are the parties of the multiparty agreement, only two can be satisfied with same-sex marriage. The civil union agreement only requires the participation of these two satisfied parties, but the marriage agreement requires the participation of all four.
Too many in society are not willing to sanction same-sex marriage as the proper formation of a family, a fundamental unit that will produce good members of society. Too many in the various churches throughout this nation are not willing to use their religious authority to approve homosexuality as a proper use of creative power. Should we force these two parties into the contract? Or, should we allow them to make their best judgment in this issue and let the other two parties create their own contract?
In the end, “married” is just a word. It is a word that indicates the formation of a specific unit in society, the family – producer of people. Still, it is just a word. There are many words that represent the formation of societal units, words like incorporation. Incorporation is also just a word, and articles of incorporation are just paper; however, they represent a multiparty agreement that has actually taken place. You can call a company incorporated, but if the relevant parties have not actually agreed to the contract, what does it mean?
The word “married” is like a stamp of approval. A stamp of approval is created to express a sentiment that already exists. The stamp itself is just an image, but it represents a careful process of evaluation and judgment. You can create and apply a similar stamp without completing that process, but what does it mean?
Just calling yourself incorporated does not make you a legitimate business, a legal producer of goods and services. Calling yourself married does not make you a family, a producer of human life. Stamping yourself with “approved” does not force the evaluation board to approve you, and calling yourself married does not force society and religion to approve of your sexual behavior.
Again, if homosexuals want marriage because they want legal rights, then a civil union will do. If they want marriage because they want approval, they are gravely misguided. Those that will approve of their sexual behavior because they are married, likely already approved of it before. Those in society that do not approve will not be swayed by what they view as a counterfeit stamp of approval – false articles of incorporation. A homosexual couple will still be viewed as a mislabeled organization, an under-the-table business, a false fundamental unit that cannot perform the fundamental function of a family.
It is important that we distinguish between the different units in our society and understand the role that they each play. If we do not, we will struggle to allocate the proper resources to the development, utilization, and preservation of each unit. It is even more important that we continue to recognize the family as the fundamental unit of society, so that we can continue to place it first on our list of priorities. No other unit should be allowed to share that position because no other unit is so crucial to society.
This is why so many feel that we must retain the specific stamp of approval which has been created for the designation of a fundamental unit. Certainly, we must at least understand the consequences of throwing that stamp on anything that merely approximates a family.
The title, type, function, and description of organizations are all connected for the sake of order and clarity. A company is created by incorporation. A family is created by marriage. An army is commissioned. A labor union is unionized. Words have meaning. You cannot incorporate an army. Its primary and intended function is not to produce goods and services. True, an army can buy goods and services. It purchases weapons and supplies from many corporations, but it is not a corporation. It has a different function; it requires different resources; it is governed by different laws, so we commission it and do not incorporate it.
Likewise, same-sex couples can never create human life together. They can buy the seeds of life or buy life itself by adopting, but they can never produce that life alone, not without the participation of a third person of opposite gender. While some heterosexual couples suffer tragically from infertility, most can produce life. The social impact of their heterosexual behavior is viewed as potentially beneficial; therefore, society broadly accepts that behavior and is willing to marry those couples and recognize them as a family.
No homosexual couples can ever produce life… not one. They simply do not have the capability or potential to perform that function. Society does not perceive the same potential benefits when evaluating the social impact of homosexual behavior; instead, society perceives many negative potential impacts. Therefore, many do not consider a homosexual union to be equal to the family, the fundamental unit of society, the producer of people. Society is willing to unionize those same-sex couples, but many are not willing to marry them.
Willing is the key word. Two homosexuals may be willing to love and support each other; that is friendship. No one is stopping them. They may be willing to participate in homosexual acts; that is homosexuality. No one is stopping them. They may be willing to share property, privacy, and privilege; that is a civil union. No one is stopping them.
Ultimately, homosexuals are not really asking to do something. They are asking others to do something. They are not asking for the right to do what they are willing to do. When they ask for marriage, they are asking the rest of us to do something that we may or may not be willing to do. They are asking society to approve of their homosexual activity, and they are asking religious institutions to sanction their homosexual behavior as an appropriate use of creative power.
Are these other parties willing? That is the real question posed by Proposition 8. That is the underlying referendum being presented to us for a vote. By voting “Yes” on Proposition 8, we would do more than define marriage as a union only between one man and one woman. We would answer the underlying question of our willingness to participate in the marital agreement with homosexuals. By voting “Yes”… we would answer, “No… we are not willing. We are not willing to approve the social impact of homosexual activity. We are not willing to sanction homosexuality as a proper use of creative power. We are not willing to enter the multiparty agreement. We are not willing, and we choose to abstain.”
…That is an exercise of our freedom, not a restriction of theirs.
Proposition 8 is not about telling people who they can and cannot love. It is not about telling them who they can and cannot be with. It is not about preventing the legally recognized sharing of property, privacy, and privilege. Proposition 8 is about defining marriage. It is about the right and freedom of society and religion to abstain from a multiparty agreement deemed unacceptable. It is about preserving the coveted title of marriage as a stamp of approval for that fundamental institution which contributes the most to society. It is about protecting the unique status of the family and ensuring its place as the first and ultimate priority of civilization. Only the union of a man and a woman can create the greatest of all resources – human life. For that, we honor them. For that, we approve of them… and for that, we marry them… for only they have the power to create our future and the future of all humanity.
Joshua M. Uda © 2008 – All Rights Reserved
Please send a message to Joshua Uda to request permission to publish or share this article outside of Facebook.

==I hope this GOD you all believe in can guide Elect President Obama to make the right decisions. ==
Obammy is pro-choice = pro-abortion = wrong-choice. That is opposite God’s view.
Obammy is on the side that supports so-called “same-sex ‘marriage.’” That support is opposite God’s view.
Therefore, why should God try to support him in making the right decisions clan, in those two issues alone, Obammy ignores God’s wishes?

decisions clan >>> decisions

I’ve obviosly stumbled into the wrong site. I don’t feel you represent to notion of the nation. Please continue your stupidity. I opt to converse with a more intelligent group.
Goodnight.

==I’ve obviosly stumbled into the wrong site. I don’t feel you represent to notion of the nation. Please continue your stupidity. I opt to converse with a more intelligent group.==
Translation: “I’m going to hang around with people who are as deceived as I am so that I can feel more comfortable in my having been deceived.”

People are missing the point. Marriage isn’t a “right.” Where did this idea of “marriage” come from? It is not a government institution! What is marriage, or “holy matrimony”? It is not just two people making loving (and sometimes temporary) promises to each other. Two people’s happiness is not dependent on “marriage”…everyone should know that! Where did “marriage” originate? History and church tradition says that marriage is a special relationship between a man and a woman by the nature of their physical design. It comes from the Bible. Marriage is a religious institution “invented” and designed by God in the Garden of Eden. God designed their bodies, and God joins them together in a special bond to make them one until death naturally and physically separates them. Remember the words, “What God has joined together, let no man put asunder”? As a matter of fact, if we didn’t have the Bible, we wouldn’t even have the word marriage in our vocabulary. It’s monogamous design protects the family…a natural result of two people’s joining together. It also protects the two parents from contracting sexually transmitted diseases which could harm them and their children. Most importantly it provides a permanent secure environment for any children they procreate as a result of that union. Simply said, it provides a loving,safe environment for two people and their family. No matter what people believe about the origin of man, babies can only be created by male sperm combining with female ovum. When this naturally happens in a monogamous marriage relationship that is built on love and trust as described in the Bible, children have two parents who love and care for them. It should “not be entered into lightly” and was “instituted by God” as the historical religious vows state. It makes no sense to redefine an established religious institution. No wonder church people are against this. What right does the government have to redefine the church’s religious vocabulary and institutions? I can’t imagine them stealing “baptism” and redefining it, can you? Why have people made it into a religious freedom issue? What is the real reason that people want to steal and redefine a religious institution? I hear people demanding to have the same rights and privileges. Is the underlying reason which is fueling the debate really about equality and/or money? If that is the real issue then please don’t steal the word marriage nor the institution of marriage and that is defined in the Bible and make it something else. But leave the religious institution of marriage to be described and defined by it’s creator and inventor.

Paul, your right I probably won’t agree with all of Obamas views, nor have I agreed with Bush. I am not a democrat or a republican, I am simply an american girl who still has a few morals left. You can’t blame this on the mormons, the majorty of Americans feel this way. Like I said before my sis in law is gay, and I love her. But she has a 9 year old son who is embarassed of his mom. He lives with his dad. Whether you believe in God or not is your business, I however do and no I haven’t seen him, but I have seen the beautiful sunrises and sunsets he gives me everyday, and sometime it’s not what you see it’s what you feel. I guess you just don’t understand and I feel sorry for you.

Mormons were not the only ones to spend $$ and time to pass this. Other churches were involved in a coalition to pass Proposition 8. California wasn’t the only state which fought this fight. Arizona and Florida voters also voted marriage as “one man and one woman”. The people have spoken.

This wonderful country of ours was founded for the very purpose of freedom of religion and freedom of speech. I don’t understand why the gay community feels that the rights of the Mormon Church should be stifled. The Church itself does not vote, but the members feel a moral obligation to stand up for what they believe. The people of California voted for Prop 8, and the majority of Californians are not Mormon. Why single out the Mormons when there were many other religions and groups who supported Prop 8?

The ignorance of some of you is astounding! It is far better to remain silent and let people wonder if you are an idiot, then to open your mouth and remove all doubt.
What about separation of Church and State? This clause was intended by the founding fathers to prevent the creation of a State (government) sponsored Church which would prevent exercise of free religion. It has been carried far beyond its original intent today. However, it seems extremely one sided as I never seem to hear anyone call for any Church to lose its tax exempt status when the liberals are campaigning from the pulpit in all the liberal Churches. The Mormon Church, on the other hand, endorses no political party or candidate, and its leadership is comprised of different parties. Can the liberal churches make this claim?
There is already a federal law defining marriage as a legal union between one man and one woman. The Defense of Marriage Act was signed into law by BILL CLINTON in 1996 and has already been ruled as CONSTITIONAL by at least one FEDERAL JUDGE in Washington. This Judge ruled that there is no fundamental Constitional right that allows for same sex marriage and therefore, it does not violate the equal-protection clause of the Constitution to allow opposite sexes to marry while preventing same sexes from doing so.
I believe in the Constitution!
I believe this Federal Judge gets it!
I believe in freedom of speech without fear of violent reprisal (Yes, some of you are reacting violently.)
I believe any religion is duty bound to speak out against any practice it finds morally reprehensable, and has EVERY right to do so.
I believe GOD!
If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.
(Leviticus 20:13)
“Tax this Church?”
You should buy about six enemas tonight and use all of them! Take care not to clog the main sewer line!!!

I believe that now is the time to change our tax laws to require the largest industry in the world to fall under the same tax obligations of all other U.S. businesses. In addition, it is time to require this industry to pay its fair share of real estate taxes considering the value of its holdings that generally sit in the heart of each community all across America.

==This wonderful country of ours was founded for the very purpose of freedom of religion and freedom of speech. ==
Actually, the settlers came here to escape a Church system, with the king as high priest, that wanted people to rely on the Church rather than on the Word of God.
The Church of England denied the people that Word of God for worship on their own.
So, the settlers came here to advance Christianity, as they say in their documents. They came here to worship in Christianity.

The settlers didn’t come here to open up a smorgasbord of religious activity.

I agree with the protesters because I believe in HUMAN rights and we are ALL humans, despite what some religions or people seem to think they have a right to determine.
The only people who don’t believe in the right for any two people who love each other to be joined in marriage are either afraid or living in ignorance.

You can watch a video of church leaders’ explanation.
Go to lds.org> News releases> Oct 8 Church Readies Members on Prop 8

and rob a contract >>> and write up a contract

OOPS! Again! I didn’t finish answering the post area
==Being hateful, selfish & purposely ignorant seems more ‘sinful’…==
If you knew the Word of God, you’d know.
==… but what do I know, I just a HUMAN.==
No excuse.

OK so “In God We Trust” was “coined” years after the US was founded… …but my overall point is the same and for the most part accurate.
The use of “God” by our founding fathers was based on Diesm and a Diest view of God. People in their original 13 colonies may have been forced by their own communities to practice their local religions. But the use of “God” was never intended to be exploited by televangelists and Mormons to further their narrow means on a national level.
TO ALL OF YOU MORMONS OUT THERE… If you don’t appreciate what you claim to be inaccurate portrayals of the Mormons and the LDS Church… …you need to understand that you’re not helping your cause when your own church FABRICATES LIES about gay people.
If I were a gay California taxpayer, I would be rightfully ticked off that the Utah-based LDS Church had pumped tens of millions into a ballot initiative that seeks to limit my rights. If I were a gay California taxpayer, I would put my money into mass distribution of the “All About Mormons” episode of South Park.

==So instead of being Christlike and charitable like Jesus Chris [sic]…==
What does a scoffer know about Christ, to be instructing us?

==The use of “God” by our founding fathers was based on Diesm and a Diest view of God. ==
BS!
==…the use of “God” was never intended to be exploited by televangelists and Mormons to further their narrow means on a national level.==
How do YOU know?
And, how to YOU know that they are “exploiting” God?

There is no hate nor are there lies, just misunderstandings blown WAY out of proportion.

To R. Miller -
This country was ‘founded’ with the desire for RELIGIOUS FREEDOM.
America was ‘founded’ on-top of someone elses land.
Our nation’s forefathers owned slaves (women were also ‘property’).
Our nation was founded by immigants, refugees.
Our nation was ‘founded’ with the thousands of criminals shipped to the “New World”.
The United States was founded by many, not a selective few.

==This country was ‘founded’ with the desire for RELIGIOUS FREEDOM.==
No, it wasn’t. The settlers didn’t bring a smorgasbord of religious activity.
They came here because they were not free to exercise Christianity in England. The Church of England prohibited personal worship, requiring the People to access God through the Church, instead of the Word of God.
So, they came here for the freedom to practice Christianity. There were no Muslims on their boats.

==Where is the discrimination in a law that defines “marriage” as the union of the “man” and a “woman”? Isn’t everybody either a man, or a woman? Does the law say that the man must be heterosexual? Does the law say that the woman must be heterosexual?==
We know that those who claim to be homosexual, their supporters and activists are choking on those questions.

I support all persons right to marry whomever they choose.

It is often easier to become outraged by injustice half a world away than by oppression and discrimination half a block from home.
-Carl Rowan

==Any one should have the right to marry whom ever. ==
Every man, whether heterosexual, or claiming to be homosexual, may marry a woman who is heterosexual, or claims to be homosexual.

I actually voted for defeating Proposition 8, unfortunately it still passed. I say the vote of the people is legit and we should all accept the results and move on. This has been defeated twice in California, maybe should try for the third time. I don’t agree and support all these protest.
I can’t imagine the loosing party to always keep forcing the issue by protesting.

==Any one should have the right to marry whom ever. ==
So, for instance, a man should have the Right to marry the wife of another man, is that it?

I don’t agree with any kind of demonstration. The issue was put to the voters and win or lose, the majority has spoken. Whether I voted for or against the ballot, the majority won. Let it rest! I believe that this issue has been on the ballot twice and each time, the majority went for the Yes on 8. What’s the point of drawing negative attention to their cause. Re-define the “legal union” of two adults not “Marriage”.

Religious prohibitions against certain classes of people have no place in the constitution of California or any state in the United States. It’s legislated discrimination as sure as Jim Crowe was legislated discrimination. Those who want to prohibit gay marrage as an “attack” on the “institution of marrage” should work to ban divorce!

1st: Seperation of Church and State.
2nd: All are created equal in the eyes of the law.
3rd: It’s about rights.
4th: If California refuses to recognize the Gay community as complete citizens, they should not have to pay state taxes.
5th: Seperate is not equal. Seperate rights doesn’t equal rights!
6th: I don’t go into different religious institutions imposing laws in their church, what makes them think they can do that to the Gay community?
I could go on and on…
NO ON PROP 8.

I was raised in a Apostolic Pentecostal Home. I’m gay and I don’t feel it was a choice. I was raised in a 2 parent home and my parents have been happily married for 30 yrs. I did not have TV or movies. Wasn’t allowed to listen to bad music. My family wasn’t dysfunctional whatsoever. From what the Bible says and the way a true Christian should do is leave Prop 8 alone. Don’t support it and don’t work against it. Everyone is entitled to there own beliefs and I strongly believe that. However a Christian working against something that is discriminating and judgmental when they are not God are in fact going against the teachings of the Bible and what should be there personal beliefs.

I totally disagree with the decision on prop 8!!! And yes, I am a woman who is NOT gay. What I can’t wrap my head around is why is it anybodys business. The rights that they are asking for does not effect anyone but the ones asking for it. And for those who claim it is against Gods wishes. You must first be a Christian to believe in God. And rest assure, this country is not made up of all Christians. And forcing ones belief on another sure seems a bit hipocratic to what this country stands for!!!

Marriage belongs in the churches and out of the gov’t.
The churches felt that the term marriage was theirs and they needed to defend their right to determine what marriage means. Unfortunately for them, it is a legal term in the eyes of the gov’t. and therefore have no right to determine the meaning. Because of this, Prop 8 was born. They grayed the lines between church and state and confused the millions of churchgoers.
Church and State must be kept seperate, that’s why I think that marriage should be completely removed from from all legal documents and let the churches have it. All marriages in the gov’t eyes will now become civil unions and if someone wants to be married, then they must be recognized by the church.
With this solution, you have 100% equality while maintaining freedom of religion.

It is a Federal issue not a State issue. It involves the INS, making medical decisions across state lines, taxation, etc.
I am for Federal Civil Unions for All tax paying consenting adults who wish to enter into a legal union(i.e. convert hetero marriages to Fed Civil Unions) and abolishing Legal marriage since “marriage” has become religiously defined. It is important to separate church and state.
To have legal marriage for one and only permit civil unions for another is “separate water fountains.”

I don’t think that religions should change their definition of the word ‘marriage’. If gays want to have a ‘union’ of their own they should have it, but call it something else. There’s no reason for them not to have the same legal rights, but call it another word.

Churches should stay out of things that are none of their business.
It may be okay for them to tell their own members how to live, but they have NO BUSINESS telling anyone else.
Also, a simple 50% vote should not be able to change the Constitution. The whole POINT of a Constitution is to protect the peoples’ rights against the whims of legislators or simple majorities.
–Gary

Gay marrage is wrong. I’m tired of this issue being forced on me and my family. This is more than just them wanting to be married, California already was an example of how the school system began to introduce the acceptance of homosexuality to children as young as kindergarden and told the parents there was nothing they could do because it was the law. If they want to live that kind of life that’s fine, just don’t force the rest of society to have to agree. The liberal judges who passed this law in the first place should be removed they do not represent the majority of this country, this vote does represent the majority and this issue should now be settled.

It is shocking how stupid people are! We are a country of laws, not mob rule. What makes this such a great country is that the Constitution protects the minorities from the tyranny of the majority. If the majority had it’s way, black people would never have been given the vote. It was the courts that made the difference- NOT a vote of the majority of people. If it had been up to majorities, people of different races would still be thrown in jail for getting married. If things were left up to the religious nuts, we would still be burning witches at the stake. If people looked into the Mormon cult just slightly, they would see that they are NOT Christians any more than Muslims are Christians. I don’t want Catholics OR Mormons or any fundamentalists imposing their nonsensical irrationalities on me. This is NOT a theocracy people. If you want a theocracy, move to Afghanistan and join the Taliban. This is America and ultimately justice will prevail and the hatefulness and bigotry of proposition 8 supporters will only be a stain on our history just like slavery and Japanese internment during WW 2.

==I totally disagree with the decision on prop 8!!!==
Tough.
==What I can’t wrap my head around is why is it anybodys business.==
Well, this is a country and the society and culture, and we are citizens of said country, society and culture. That makes it our business.
== The rights that they are asking for…==
Man who claim to be homosexual may marry women who say they are homosexual. They can do that right now.
==… does not effect anyone but the ones asking for it.==
It affects of this country, this society and this culture. I, for one, am a citizen of this country, this society and this culture. So, I am affected.
== And for those who claim it is against Gods wishes. You must first be a Christian to believe in God.==
No, that’s not the way it works.
One is born again. That’s what it means to be Christian. One believes in God through Christ.
==…forcing ones belief on another sure seems a bit hipocratic [sic] to what this country stands for!!!==
“Hipocratic”???!!! You got it wrong, and you couldn’t even spell THAT right!
So, you believe that the Right to vote is “forcing” our beliefs on others. Is that it? If you people had won, would it also be “forcing” your beliefs on us?

It’s understandable as a propaganda word that attempts to give “No on 8″ people the moral high ground, but labeling all disagreement on this subject as “hate” really doesn’t advance the discussion.
It’s possible for people of faith to look past behaviors and lifestyles that do not abide by their personal beliefs, but marriage is, from its origins, a religious institution.
With all the practical benefits in question already being offered to gay couples, the insistence on official recognition of gay marriage – instead of accepting the compromise – more accurately constitutes an attack on the religious beliefs of millions of Americans.

The only hate I see is coming from the homosexual. People were scared to put up signs saying yes because neighbors yards were destroyed, car brake lines cut etc… It is the voice of the people not the few who came out of the closet. Why destroy the meaning of marriage for a few who only think of themselves and not the government by the people. I did not vote for Obama but I will support the voice of the people. Love Aubrey Morris

I feel Mormon church had played a horrible role behind the prop. More than half of the funding for Porp 8 are from Mormons. I live in California and watched the Prop 8 campaigne commercials that were based on lies. Gay marriage has nothing to do with us. Why did we voted something that took other people’s rights that they HAD before. Also, it’s 21th century, whey do we still believe the craps that churches tell you…….

I wonder what people who are against gay marriage would feel if a gay man and a lesbian were to get married. Would this conflict with their moral codes? Both individuals are still homosexuals.

I agree with the supporters of Prop.8.
The fact is Californians amended their constitution. The Supreme Court has no business legislating from the bench. No matter what state you go to, the people always vote against gay marriage. No wonder:in other countries where gay marriage has been legalized,they have enacted hate crime laws so strict that anyone with a different opinion-even pastors preaching from the Bible about homosexuality-are jailed for their opposite views.They try to compare their quest to destroy traditional marriage to civl rights struggles-but you cannot choose the color of your skin. You can however choose your behavior, and your sexual partners. Huge difference!

Ok, I have not read most of these posts but I am going to throw a monkey wrench into this mess anyway. It has always bugged me that no one has picked up on the fact that most of the things that gays want marriage for are to ensure protections that would be awfully nice to be able to be applied in other situations, meaning…
Say you are a single person that is caring for another person a parent, aunt or uncle, niece or nephew or some other unrelated soul that you have simply decided to care for…wouldn’t it be nice if you could include them on your insurance policy, be guaranteed that you won’t be excluded from medical decisions.
The “protections” that gays are seeking have much broader “applications” as it were.
What if you want to care for a person whom has aged out of foster care?
What if there is a veteran that you want to accept responsibility for?
There are many “unofficial” relationships that create surrogate or sudo families would really benefit from being able to have the same “benefits” that so called “real” families have.
Why is it that a parent is not allowed to provide health care for a child once they reach 18 or 25 depending on the laws of the state…?
I don’t know, to me the issue is or should be much broader than marriage of any kind.
I will probably never have a traditional family; I am in menopause and not exactly on anyone’s top 10 lists of persons someone would want to marry. But I do have people whom I love and whom love me I would like the right to be able to care for them or be cared for by them in finacial ways that are currently not allowed. I care for and love people that I would love to be able to list as family on my health care insurance but now I cannot. I cannot afford to simply buy them separate policies so they are forced to apply for state aid.
Wouldn’t it help everyone if I were allowed to add them to my insurance plan? Or is that just it that the insurance industry does not want to allow that…
I don’t know…. just throwing it out there. Just something else to think about.

Proof that fundamentalists selectively quote the Bible:
A lesson about the book of Leviticus . . .
Homophobic fundamentalists often quote two particular verses that seem to be against gay people. These two verses, both of which appear in the book of Leviticus, are . . .
“You shall not lie with a male as with a woman. It is an abomination.” (Leviticus 18:22)
and . . .
“If a man lies with a male as he lies with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination. They shall surely be put to death. Their blood shall be upon them.” (Leviticus 20:13)
Below, we’ll take a look at other scripture verses that are in the exact same book (Leviticus) as the above verse. This exercise proves that those preachers who are so enthusiastic about quoting the book of Leviticus to affirm their personal prejudice against people who are gay or lesbian become awfully quiet when it comes to other verses that appear in the very same book.
Remember, this isn’t about faith whatsoever. It’s about people who have pre-existing anti-gay prejudice in their hearts. They choose the Christian Bible as the tool with which they attempt to affirm and legitimize that pre-existing prejudice.
Sadly, the truth is that they just don’t like gay people.
“For everyone who curses his father or his mother shall surely be put to death. He has cursed his father or his mother. His blood shall be upon him.” (Leviticus 20:9)
Imagine what would happen today if we killed every child who was disrespectful to his parents. Fundamentalists explain this verse away, saying that it is part of the Old Levitical Holiness Code and is not meant to be taken literally.
But the above verse is just a mere 3 verses before Leviticus 20:13, one of their favorite anti-gay scriptures which, of course, they do choose to apply literally.
It’s just incredible, isn’t it?
Fundamentalists change their entire methodology of scriptural interpretation when it suits their purpose, even when dealing with verses that are a just couple of sentences away from each other!
“If a man lies with a woman during her sickness and uncovers her nakedness, he has discovered her flow, and she has uncovered the flow of her blood. Both of them shall be cut off from her people.” (Leviticus 20:18)
Imagine what would happen today if we deported every man and woman who had ever had sex together while the woman was having her period. Fundamentalists decline the opportunity to take this verse literally, which is merely 5 verses after Leviticus 20:13.
“Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves. You may also buy some of the temporary residents living among you and members of their clans born in your country, and they will become your property.”
(Leviticus 25:44-45)
Did you ever wonder where racist, uneducated people in the 19th century got the idea that slaves were just property and not people? Directly from the above verse, which fundamentalists do not, of course, take literally.
“Do not cut the hair at the sides of your head or clip off the edges of your beard.” (Leviticus 19:27)
“Bible-believing” fundamentalists never preach against the evils of shaving, as they do not take this verse literally for our day. Of course, they most certainly would do so if they had a personal bias against shaving, but apparently, they do not.
“…and the swine, though it divides the hoof, having cloven hooves, yet does not chew the cud, is unclean to you.” (Leviticus 11:7)
As you can see, the book of Leviticus also prohibits the eating of pork (a swine is a pig). Of course, fundamentalists do not choose to use this verse to preach against eating pork. Sadly, however, they have no problem abusing the Bible to condemn gay and lesbian people. Remember, it’s about their personal prejudice against gay people, not about a true desire to understand what the Bible actually says.
“…do not plant your field with two kinds of seed. Do not wear material woven of two kinds of material.” (Leviticus 19:19)
Farmers in this country almost always grow more than one kind of crop in their fields. In fact, they often must do so for ecological reasons. Fundamentalists do not apply this verse literally. If they were to preach against farmers, there would be an uproar, and rightfully so.
Fundamentalists also ignore the Biblical command to not wear clothes that have two different kinds of material. The shirts that many fundamentalists are often seen wearing must be a cotton/polyester blend, the most common in the United States of America. They may be “Bible believing” Christians, but this is yet another verse that they don’t believe should be applied to today.
An “abomination?”
Fundamentalists also like to use Leviticus 18:22 to justify their anti-gay prejudice. That verse says, “You shall not lie with a male as with a woman. It is an abomination.” Perhaps you have heard some people refer to gay people as an “abomination.” They get the idea directly from Leviticus 18:22.
But did you know…
• The Bible says that eating shrimp and lobster is an abomination:
“But all in the seas or in the rivers that do not have fins and scales, all that move in the water or any living thing which is in the water, they are an abomination to you.” (Leviticus 11:10)
“They (shellfish) shall be an abomination to you; you shall not eat their flesh, but you shall regard their carcasses as an abomination.” (Leviticus 11:11)
“Whatever in the water does not have fins or scales; that shall be an abomination to you.” (Leviticus 11:12)
In conclusion . . .
The above exercise proves that anti-gay fundamentalists selectively quote the Bible. They enthusiastically and openly embrace those parts of the Bible which affirm and justify their own personal, pre-existing prejudice against gay people, while declining to become as enthusiastic about verses like the ones listed above.
After all, how many times have you heard a fundamentalist say that eating shellfish was an abomination? But they sure don’t hesitate to say it about gay people, do they?
What does that tell you?
By far the largest force that’s killing the sanctity of marriage is DIVORCE!!! 40% of all marriages end in Divorce. Let’s make divorce Illegal since THAT’S the REAL problem here. So what’s the meesage we’re sending to our children? Get married whenever yout want… and get a divorce whenever you want! Practice what you preach!!!
NO ON H8!!! PEACE!!! LOVE!!! NO WAR!!!

Here the bottom line, gays can have civil unions in cali or domestic partnership with the nearly all the same right. How does a marriage licences make any gay couple equal with a straight couple when they have the same benefits with civil unions. Gay are allowed the same privileges. Gay people are not discriminated against on the job, housing or having to sit in the back of a restaurant. However here in LA some entertainment company find out you voted for prop 8 and your will be pressured to quit and be a out cast. The real hater are the prop 8 people who are harassing people.
The real agenda is to censor and discriminate anyone who disagrees with them

==I wonder what people who are against gay marriage would feel if a gay man and a lesbian were to get married. Would this conflict with their moral codes? Both individuals are still homosexuals.==
I’ve been saying all along here that there is no discrimination in a law that defines “marriage” as the union of a “man” and “woman.” The law does not say that they must be heterosexual.
God joined a man, as husband, and a woman, as his wife — WHAT, not who.
So, if a man who says he is homosexual marries a woman who also says she is homosexual, that still conforms to God’s template.

“How do the Mormons get to call themselves a Church when they clearly are so involved in politics? Pologamy–come on, the GLBT community wants stable family units… I’d like to get back to a loving God not the God of hate the Mormons represent.”
FYI: Our church no longer practices polygamy (when it did it was for only a relatively brief time) and any people doing so are ‘splinter’ groups of our main church so please do your homework before accusing things that are untrue. And we believe that God loves ALL His children – we don’t preach hatred in any form. But God’s laws are God’s laws and they don’t change just because the world has decided to redefine and change it’s most basic, fundamental unit of society.

Really? Lev 20:13 IfH834 a manH376 also lieH7901 withH854 mankind,H2145 as he liethH4904 with a woman,H802 bothH8147 of them have committedH6213 an abomination:H8441 they shall surely be put to death;H4191 H4191 their bloodH1818 shall be upon them.
And we wonder why God’s blessings are not upon our country when God clearly writes: Psa 34:15 The eyesH5869 of the LORDH3068 are uponH413 the righteous,H6662 and his earsH241 are open untoH413 their cry.H77
And: 1Pe 3:12 ForG3754 theG3588 eyesG3788 of the LordG2962 are overG1909 the righteous,G1342 andG2532 hisG846 earsG3775 are open untoG1519 theirG846 prayers:G1162 butG1161 the faceG4383 of the LordG2962 is againstG1909 them that doG4160 evil.G2556
As a Nation, we need to get back to Righteousness! With all of the free-for-all attitudes of self satisfaction, we need to do what is best for our country and not necessarily for ourselves. CEO stealing has affected our household income, Enron’s CEO’s stealing has affected many’s retirement funds, Our fornication, infidelity, and immoral sexual habits have caused divorce, STD’s, and single parent families across this nation. We need to stop blaming other and take reasponsibility for ourselves! God’s eyes are not upon the unjust and with everyone’s behavior and lack of self-discipline we are experiencing a severe drop in God’s blessings upon this Great Nation! I’m Not Mormon, but I agree with their biblical backings of non-gay Marriage as God strictly gave us commands to remove such actions from our midst…

The passing of prop 8 is a death-knell for all Consitutional Rights… which minority group will be next to have rights denied? Discrimination has no place in a constitution meant to provide for equality for all. My gay and lesbian friends and relatives could never infringe upon any family’s values or marriage. Homosexuality is a fact of nature- denial of the inherent right to marry will not change that. — and — if protection of the “sanctity of marriage” is the foremost reason – where is the proposed amendments to..
1. make divorce illegal- gotta protect “what God has joined together” right?… and…
2. make it illegal for a man and woman to live together without benefit of marriage- they are an open example of “sinful relationships” are they not?
if the biological ability to produce children is the reason add..
3. no marriage allowed unless both parties can prove they are fertile — plus ban all birth control…
To those opposed to equality for all- perhaps thou should first take care of the mote in thine own eye
NO ON PROPOSITION 8!
btw- I am an over 60, heterosexual female… and a Christian who prefers to practice the teachings of Jesus – Judge not lest ye be judged.. Do unto others as ye would have them do unto you….

California voters all ready voted on this issue several years ago. It was passed back then, only to be overturned by the liberal ninth appelate court in San Francisco. Duh?
So now we vote on it again, with different wording. Gee, it passes again. Surprised? I’m not.
This is a MORAL issue, not a civil rights issue. And fortunately we still have, in this country, and so far, in California, a moral majority. Gays represent only 3% of the population in the US of A, (much higher in Ca,though), and if you live in Ca, you would think they own the state. (Many cities are totaly and openly gay, as is most of the Hollywood scene).
I am sick and tired of the slow demise of the traditionaal family unit in America, which the gay movement is a part of.
Get over it. Move on with your domestic partnership agreements. The people have spoken.

Facts v. Fiction
Proposition 8 would eliminate fundamental rights for a group of Californians.
It’s unconstitutional and flat out wrong!
Fiction: Prop 8 doesn’t discriminate against gay people.
Fact: Prop 8 is simple: it eliminates the rights for same-sex couples to marry. Prop 8 would deny equal protections and write discrimination against one group of people—lesbian and gay people—into our state constitution.
Fiction: Teaching children about same-sex marriage will happen here unless we pass Prop 8.
Fact: Not one word in Prop 8 mentions education. And no child can be forced, against the will of their parents, to be taught anything about health and family issues at school. California law prohibits it.
California’s top educators including Superintendent of Schools Jack O’Connell and California Teachers all agree: Prop 8 has nothing to do with education.
Fiction: Churches could lose their tax-exemption status.
Fact: The court decision regarding marriage specifically says “no religion will be required to change its religious policies or practices with regard to same-sex couples, and no religious officiant will be required to solemnize a marriage in contravention of his or her religious beliefs.”
Fiction: A Massachusetts case about a parent’s objection to the school curriculum will happen here.
Fact: California gives parents an absolute right to remove their kids and opt-out of teaching on health and family instruction they don’t agree with. The opponents know that California law already covers this and Prop 8 won’t affect it, so they bring up an irrelevant case in Massachusetts.
Fiction: Four Activist Judges in San Francisco…
Fact: Prop 8 is about eliminating a fundamental right. Judges didn’t grant the right, the constitution guarantees the right. Proponents of Prop 8 use an outdated and stale argument that judges aren’t supposed to protect rights and freedoms. Prop 8 is about whether Californians are willing to amend the constitution for the sole purpose of eliminating a fundamental right for one group of citizens.
Fiction: If Prop 8 isn’t passed, people can be sued over personal beliefs.
Fact: California’s laws already prohibit discrimination against anyone based on race, religion, gender, or sexual orientation. This has nothing to do with marriage.
Fiction: Pepperdine University supports the Yes on 8 campaign.
Fact: The University has publicly disassociated itself from Professor Richard Peterson of Pepperdine University, who is featured in the ad, and has asked to not be identified in the Yes on 8 advertisements.
Fiction: Unless Prop 8 passes, California parents won’t have the right to object to what their children are taught in school.
Fact: California law clearly gives parents and guardians broad authority to remove their children from any health instruction if it conflicts with their religious beliefs or moral convictions.
Stop spreading lies and get your FACTS straight!!!

to quote your nightline blog: Mormon leadership had a letter read aloud in every Mormon church in California, asking members to “Do all you can” to fight gay marriage…
Mormons were NEVER asked to fight gay marriage – we were never asked to fight gays, hate gays, bash gays. Indeed the bashing and hating has actually been posed at us for voicing our beliefs – we are not angry at people for their beliefs – we simply are fighting FOR TRADITIONAL MARRIAGE – MARRIAGE BETWEEN A MAN AND A WOMAN – the basis of society – I have read comments where people have said “kick those Mormons in the balls” – I have never said anything even similar to this nor would I even think of anything like this about someone for their feelings and beliefs – ALLOW EACH OTHER TO BELIEVE WHAT YOU WANT AND ALLOW DEMOCRACY TO WORK – THE VOTE HAS GONE FORTH AND THE PEOPLE HAVE SPOKEN. The protests are called peaceful, but I feel fear and terror to say who I am and have my children in the open and have our names on a “hit” list. For what other purpose are these web sites publishing our names for donations? Donations were made on both sides… let’s let the battle end and have peace. The anger directed toward us is frightening. I have many friends and family members who are gay and they know my stance and my feelings and I love them and they love me regardless and we realize that we have different opinions but it doesn’t make us hate one another.

The people, who organize these protests, should all be jailed and shot. This is a democratic country and society. We put a proposition up for a vote. Is been voted on and the people have spoken. Now, they’ll just have to live with it, stop acting like a spoil child and throw tantrums. If this is the way they want to go about it, does it means that the millions that voted for Mccain should organize protests and civil disobedience, because there are way more people that aren’t happen with Obama winning than there are gay activists. Should every group or individuals start protests if they don’t like the outcome of an election, if that’s the case why have election at all? Heck, that mean a great deal of us should be protesting Nancy Polosis’s re-election.

I agree with the 53% of Californians that voted for Prop 8, which also happens to be the perspective of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. I think that it is interesting that in this case the many who preach individual tolerance, do so only as long as everyone else agrees with them.

Homosexuals did not start nor populate our great great country from the beginning and they have no right to ruin it for everyone else. We all have to look back and remember what happened to the mighty Roman Empire. It wasn’t conquered by an enemy. It rottened away from the inside out due to homosexuality and perversions. If we are not careful the same will here. History always repeats itself. We have the choice to prevent it from happening here.

I am a gay man who lives in California and I have no desire to get married. California, in my mind, is a place for people of all walks of life to come together and live in the diverse community of acceptance. Tuesday, Nov. 4th changed my view of California forever. I do not reconize my state. Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and Sen. Diane Feinstein are largely to blame. They waited until 2 weeks before the election to speak out against Prop 8. They should have been speaking out and doing TV ads 2 MONTHS before the election. They have a loud voice of influence and they kept it shut when it mattered most. They should be ashamed. They let the gays of California down and let the Mormon church tell the government of California how to discriminate. How sad.

I am shocked by the hatred this country can still pile on a group they do not understand. I am shocked by the lack of education that still exists in this country. So we should only have the rights that people vote for? Isn’t that the whole idea of the Constitution…to protect the minority. Whose idea of marriage should we use? Only the Christian idea…if so which sect…Catholic? Protestant? Mormon? Or maybe the Jewish idea? Perhaps we should only allow the union between a Jewish Man and a Jewish Woman as decreed by Orthodox Judiasm? Okay, you want only the Christian marriage…so jews shouldn’t be allowed to be married by a Rabbi? Or maybe since there are more moslims in the world than any other religion we should only use their definition. That would be ruled by the majority. ARE YOU KIDDING ME!!! Can’t you realize that the only way to protect your religious beliefs about marriage is to KEEP THE GOVERNMENT OUT OF IT. Let a civil marriage be ruled by the constitution and a religious marriage be ruled by your church.

==Prop 8 is simple: it eliminates the rights for same-sex couples to marry.==
You people are claiming Rights that have never existed. Therefore, you want to the State to create new Rights.
A man who claims to be homosexual may marry a woman who claims to be homosexual. The law does not require that the parties be heterosexual. Therefore, the law which defines “marriage” as the union of “man” and the “woman” does not discriminate. There is no third sex.

==…and let the Mormon church tell the government of California how to discriminate. ==
There is no discrimination in a law that defines “marriage” as the union of “man” and “woman.” Those who claim to be homosexual are either men, or women. So, where’s the discrimination?

Hello!what ever happend to the saying thou will not judge? Hypocrites
If one regardless what sexual preference he or she may be and still pays taxes.Are they not entitled to same rights? Civil Rights Act 1964

Marriage, at least the “marriage” judges are referring to as an ‘equal right’, and voters are voting for or against, is a “Civil Liberty”… according to the separation of church & state, has nothing to do with religion, and is subject to civil rights laws.
Which, as the supreme court in California stated, cannot be given to some citizens and not others. Either no one can get married, or anyone can get married, if they want to, and they may not want to, but still hold that they should be able to if they do.
And it should not be something that people vote on. If we got to vote on the intigration of schools or the right to inter-racial marriage, they would still be against the law. Ones civil liberties cannot be denied by popular vote. And, I have no idea why Prop 8 was allowed to be placed on the ballot by the court. It is unconstitutional.
However, the “Marriage” mormons and others are opposing, Marriage as a sacrement, is a matter of religious choice, and, of course, can be denied to anyone the religion deems unworthy. Who cares! You don’t want to be married anyplace that doesn’t want you and love & accept you as you are as God/Goddess does. If love is denied and love is conditional you know there is nothing sacred there. Many churches do accept gays & lesbians into their congregations with full acceptance and perform the sacrement of marriage even to those not allowed their rightful civil liberty to marry. They usually call themselves “Welcoming” congregations…. among them are the Unitarian Universalists. Mormons do not get to tell anyone in any other religion or no religion whether they can have the civil liberty of marriage. That is what I believe is true. d. maria

==what ever happend to the saying thou will not judge?==
What about it?
To whom was Jesus talking? About whom was Jesus talking?
Do you suppose Jesus knew the difference between the unrighteous and the Righteous?
==regardless what sexual preference he or she may be and still pays taxes.==
Irrelevant.

If marriage is so sacred, shouldn’t the heterosexuals who are allowed to marry treat it more seriously?
I find it hard to reconcile the 50% failure rate of marriage with all the religious militants decreeing that it’s biblically ordained and sacrosanct and so gosh-darned precious. Fine, they should do what floats their boats, but I’m not sure why that gives them the right to impose their beliefs on everyone else. I don’t see how gay couples could possibly do any worse at respecting the concept than straight people do.
Straight people are allowed to marry with few, if any, impediments; and many do on a whim, or the drop of a hat for some incredibly stupid reasons. Far too many get married for the wedding then discover that marriage is much more difficult than having “the perfect day”. They then wake up hours, days, weeks, months, or a few years later (and usually much poorer, those weddings do cost) and say “Duh, that was a bad idea”. They then inflict more damage upon each other and their children undoing their “sacred” vows.
Personally, I’m straight and I do regard marriage as a very serious institution. I feel that anyone who has considered all of the implications and wants to make the commitment should be allowed to try. That would disallow a lot of straight people I know who haven’t given any thought to what marriage entails.
When the anti-gay marriage people perfect the whole marriage thing they may then have the right to dictate to others what constitutes marriage. Until they get it right, they should shut up and let others try it their way.

==..the propostition was flat out unconstitutional…==
Know, it wasn’t and isn’t.
==… and therefore should have never been voted on. ==
Not what the California Constitution says.
==..the voters were fed propeganda and lies about what prop 8 was and wasn’t.==
Irrelevant. They voted on what was before them. That’s the Right of the electorate.
==…the mormon church which raised over $22 million was the major force…==
How much money did YOU PEOPLE raise?
==Isn’t spreading lies forbidden in the long list of words of wisdom?==
The Mormon Church spread the truth.

You can’t over turn a constitutional amendment with a simple ballot measure. These amendments have to go through a rigerouse process to even be considered. State and federal have to ratify them with at least a 2/3 vote. That’s because some of them are designed to protect MINORITIES. They are called minorities because there are LESS of them! They would lose in a vote. For example, whites in Alabama in the 60s would have voted over turn the civil rights act in a hart beat if they had the chance. But they didn’t. Being gay is not a choice and is they should be afforded the same rights as everyone else. The REAL crime here are the churches for wasting tens of millions of dollars fighting some so trivial when that money could have been used to help families and the needy, especially with our economy in the tank. Jesus is turning on his cloud. You should all be ashamed!

Gay marriage is not a civil rights issue or a human rights issue. It is a personal choice issue. Homosexuality is a personal choice. Homosexuals choose to to be homosexuals. They were not created that way, they were not born that way – they choose to be that way. It is a personal choice that only about 3% of the population choose and now they want to force their personal choice on the other 97% and change not only a traditional institution of marriage but a sacred institution of marriage.
In our politically correct world is is right to allow everyone to have and exercise their own personal choices and we should be tolerant of one another but I do not believe that extends itself to redefining marriage.
From a spiritual perspective God created a man and a woman and sent them out from the Garden of Eden with the commandment to “multiply and replenish the earth”. If it had of been two men or two women it would have been impossible to carry out God’s plan. Those who support gay marriage should be happy that their parents were not gay or they would never have been born.
The Bible also states, “Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination” Leviticus 18:22. In the New Testament homosexuality is listed among some of the other most greivious sins that can be committed. “Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, not idalaters, not adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind. 1 Corinthians 6:9
There are a number of other scriptures that condemn homosexuality including,
Romans 1:27;1 Timothy 1:10 and Jude 1:7.
As far as those who gave money to support Proposition 8. Individual members of the Mormon Church may have contributed money but the Church as an organization did not.
I believe that marriage is between a man and a woman and that the gay community does not have the right to change that to Party A and Party B.

I agree with Prop 8. The Mormons were NOT the only church that was involved with supporting Prop 8. If the discussion is about equal rights then the No on 8 people should start respecting rights of those that vote YES on 8. This is what makes democracy. I don’t agree with the No on 8 people violating private property. Trashing peoples good name and business reputation. Family business. Gee that doesn’t seem very “tolerant”. Which is what they scream at us when we go to church. It’s not respecting civil rights when they come on private property and spray awful words on our homes. Give me a break. If they were to put all this energy and effort to making sure a CIVIL Union has the rights they are seeking, it would be great. Go to court and change those things. Leave Marriage defined between a Man and Woman. The people in California have spoke on this issue TWICE. This is a democracy. The Mormon church has already said it does not oppose Civil Unions. So go for it!!!

==If marriage is so sacred, shouldn’t the heterosexuals who are allowed to marry treat it more seriously? ==
Irrelevant to the issue at hand.
==I find it hard to reconcile the 50% failure rate of marriage with all the religious militants decreeing that it’s biblically ordained and sacrosanct and so gosh-darned precious.==
The rate of marriage failures is irrelevant to the fact that God joined a man, as husband, and a woman, as his wife — WHAT, not who.
==…I’m not sure why that gives them the right to impose their beliefs on everyone else.==
What would have given you the Right to impose your beliefs on the rest of us had you won the election?
==Straight people are allowed to marry…==
It isn’t what God made them — heterosexual — that qualifies them for marriage. It is that they are men and women, marrying each other. The man may claim to be homosexual. The women may claim to be homosexual. There is no discrimination in the law that defines “marriage” as the union of “man” and a “woman.” A person claiming to be homosexual can be a man, or a woman.
==I feel that anyone who has considered all of the implications and wants to make the commitment should be allowed to try.==
Those who claim to be homosexual are allowed to try. A man who claims to be homosexual may marry a woman who claims to be homosexual. Where’s the discrimination?
==When the anti-gay marriage people perfect the whole marriage thing they may then have the right to dictate to others what constitutes marriage.==
So, to YOU, the First Amendment relies, for one thing, on whether heterosexuals perfect marriage, is that it?
== Until they get it right, they should shut up…==
No.
Now what?

Griff…
You are an idiot!
Being gay is not a CHOICE!
People are born gay. Take the time to ask a gay person if they would choose to be rediculed, tormented, hated, bashed, threatened, made to feel less than equal and fear for their lives in certain situations.
YOU ARE WRONG!!!
NO ONE would choose these tortures!
Give me a break, it’s exactly this narrow minded, living under a rock mentatlity that breeds hate.
Educate yourselves poeple!

“I find it “curious” that Mormons have trouble with gays pursuing life, liberty, and happiness, but have no trouble with polygamy.”
“mormons believe in polygamy..”
***Just to clarify for anyone not willing to do an ounce of research…WE DO NOT ADVOCATE OR PRACTICE POLYGAMY! Those that still practice this are not part of our church anymore – say it with me: “Mormons do not practice or preach polygamy!!!” Now pass it along to all your friends that continue to ignorantly believe this.

==Being gay is not a choice…==
Yes, it is.
==… and is they should be afforded the same rights as everyone else==
Where is the discrimination in a law that define “marriage” as the union of the “man” and a “woman”? Aren’t all those who claim to be homosexual men and women?
Therefore, a man who claims to be homosexual may marry a woman who claims to be homosexual. They have the same Rights.

For the second time Californians have voted to keep the sanctity of marriage to be between a man and a woman only.
Please accept our right to keep it that way.

==Being gay is not a CHOICE!==
Yes, it is.
==People are born gay. ==
There is no uncorrupted, unbiased, scientific evidence in favor of this.
In other words, no one is born homosexual. Your choice makes you homosexual. Those who say they are homosexual chose the homosexual, alternative-lifestyle orientation option.
==Take the time to ask a gay person if they would choose to be rediculed, tormented, hated, bashed, threatened, made to feel less than equal and fear for their lives in certain situations.==
A normal person wouldn’t choose it. But it’s a crazy world, isn’t it.
YOU ARE WRONG!!!
NO ONE would choose these tortures!
Give me a break, it’s exactly this narrow minded, living under a rock mentatlity that breeds hate.
Educate yourselves poeple!

This is why we have the vote, to decide how we wish this country and state to be run. I didn’t vote for Obama, the majority did, but because I and others disagree shouldn’t mean that the majority are overruled to make me happy. The majority voted (twice) to define marriage as between a man and woman and the minority should show the respect they are so willing to demand that others show them and respect that voice. In time that may change and it will be a choice I will be asked to respect, but for now respect mine. I harbor no hatred towards homosexuals, but I don’t believe that parents should be forced to have their children taught something they disagree with. To make comments questioning someone’s education and religion are childish, disrespectful and just show that persons own lack of intellect.

Mr. So Not Incredible…
You are so narrow minded it’s not even funny. I pitty your family & if you have children I’m scared for the hateful closemindness you preach to them.
First of all only God can judge so get off your soap box.
Secondly, How do you know gay people aren’t part of God’s grand plan?
There are certainly a great number of Homosexuals that are genius, very successful, wonderful loving parents and God’s gift to all of us who have been lucky enough to enjoy their company, talents and colorful lives.
The world is a far better place in part because of gay people!!!

You might want to get a copy and read the LDS Church’s “The Family, a Proclamation to the World.” Then you would understand their support of Prop 8.
We do not hate anyone. We only care about traditional marriage.
By the way, the No on 8 Campaign raised more money than the Yes on 8 Campaign.

thank you Mr Incredible and Celt for speaking out so clearly and eloquently for those all of us.
PEACEFUL Protests are very truly an American right of freedom of speech – but these protests, and websites with pubishing of donor names, and the targeting certaing people and places and things is NOT called DEMOCRACY….it is called TERRORISM.

Isn’t it ironic that a belief system rife with allegations of polygamous, incestuous, child-rape would be the major proponents of Prop 8?

I am not a lawyer but it seems pretty clear to me that marriage has always been a civil right. Marriage licenses are issued by the state government not by any church. That’s why marriage has legal benefits. If marriage were simply a religious doctrine, it would have no legal benefits. That’s why the California Supreme Court overturned Prop 22 because it violated the Equal Protections section of the California Constitution. Prop 8 will be overturned for the same reason. Since May 2008, same sex marriages have been legal in the state of California. 18,000 same sex couples were married under those laws. Many of those married couples have children. Those are just the facts. The electorate cannot rescind the rights of a minority with a simple majority vote (Prop 8 passed by only 4%). We all pay taxes. We are all equal in the eyes of the law. We are a nation of laws. And the voice and will of the people is a very important part of our democracy. But it is not the only part. We have a judicial branch for a very important reason. It keeps the majority from unjustly discriminating against a minority. Justice is blind. It seeks what is fair and equitable for everyone. Prop 8 will be overturned.

“By the way, the No on 8 Campaign raised more money than the Yes on 8 Campaign.”
Oohhh…if this is true…how come that is convienantly left out of the newscasts and protests??? Sorry, but money isn’t the only thing that gets things passed – people make up their own minds and the people of California have spoken – - – TWICE.

==Special attention was paid to keeping the country free from allowing religions to try to impose their particular views and morals on the overall population.==
Not quite. But nice try trying to rewrite history.
== Now we have religious organizations using their massive power to actually change our state constitution…==
Everybody and anybody can have influence on everybody and anybody else. You people do the same things. It just so happens that the right and correct side won.
==… and remove basic rights from citizens.==
No Rights were removed. A man who claims to be homosexual still may marry a woman who says she is homosexual. The law does not require that the man be heterosexual. It does not require that the woman be heterosexual. So, there is no discrimination in the law that defines “marriage” as a union between a “man” and a “woman.”
==Religions have done major damage here…==
To the homosexual agenda, for sure. As Martha Stewart would say, “It’s a good thing.”
==… and it will surely backfire as the population will come to realize how insidious religious dogma can be, especially when it crosses over into politics.==
I vote the Word of God. I will always vote the Word of God. There is nothing in the Constitution that precludes me from taking the Word of God into the polling place.

==It’s funny how you continue to say that being gay is a choice.==
You find it funny, do you?
However, I’m quite serious. Those who claim to be homosexual chose the homosexual, alternative-lifestyle orientation option.
== Do you even know a gay person?==
Yes.
== I’m here to set the record straight.==
So am I.
==I AM GAY…==
You SAY that you are homosexual.
== AND… IT’S NOT A CHOICE!!!==
And it IS a choice. You chose the homosexual, alternative-lifestyle orientation option.
==As early as I can remember I have been attracted to the same sex.==
That’s what you say, anyway.
== I have never known any different.==
You have never allowed yourself to know any different.
== I have dated women to try it and make sure I wasn’t just confused.==
Oh, so THAT’S it. Women didn’t like you, and, so, you decided to go homosexual. Nowwww we understand.
== It is absolutely not a preference. ==
It is absolutely a preference.
==I would love to have biological children one day, so why would I “Choose” to be gay? ==
It’s a crazy world, huh.
==Your view on this is just ridiculous.==
In order to justify YOUR view, you’d have to think that my view is ridiculous.
==SO stop spreading LIES!!!==
I never started.

The churchs spend alot more money on charitable causes. What about all the money Obama spent on his campain? The legistature legislate not judges. I Think the blacks should be offended equating gays not being able to marry with blacks not being able to sit on the same buses etc. They were not trying to redifine an institution. There has never been any proof homosextuals were born that way. Why was it put on the ballot in the first place if it didn’t mean anything? I say the people have spoken.

why isn’t there abc, nbc, cbs, fox coverage of the hate groups going into the church flinging condoms, displaying obscene material and having lesbians kiss on the pulpit? or the lady in palm springs who was spat on, her possessions destroyed and vehemently insulted? talk about hate and intolerance and media bias. before the election a no on 8 proponent was hit by a lightweight plastic sign and got extensive coverage for days. ridiculous. doesn’t everyone know same sex relations is unnatural besides being morally wrong? why is it being normalized by media? every tv show has gays or some gay aspect. noone is born gay and noone has to be gay. gays are lost and broken. most were abused or had absentee father. once they have gay sex they have extreme guilt, but after a few times they are hooked for life. why is this?

Denying certain rights to one group while allowing the same certain rights to another group is UNCONSTITUTIONAL.
MY right to wed has absolutely nothing to do with YOUR religion. Gays are not asking to be married in YOUR churches, by YOUR figureheads. We simply request that we be treated as equals under the eyes of government law (not religious law).
Remember SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE??? Not everyone is Jewish. Not everyone is Buddhist. Not everyone is Agnostic. Not everyone is Pagan. Not everyone is Muslim. Not everyone is Atheist. AND NOT EVERYONE IS CHRISTIAN. If we rule marriage a Christian right only, how do we handle Muslims, Pagans, and Buddhists? Should their marriage rights be taken away as well? Let Christians have the patent, copyright, and trademark on marriage, is that how this works?
This is SO SILLY. You don’t get married simply because you’re Christian or heterosexual. And you don’t get married just to breed either. You get married because you want to seal the deal… secure your partnership… commit your lives to one another… it’s an expression of LOVE. Plus all the legal benefits too. Don’t complicate the matter!
We aren’t looking to “force” anyone into anything they aren’t comfortable with. We aren’t demanding gay marriage be taught in schools or any such nonsense as this. It has absolutely nothing to do with heterosexuals, churches, or schools. It’s about gays receiving the SAME legal treatment and respect as heterosexual couples — NOTHING MORE.
THAT, my friends, is all we demand. Don’t get it twisted.

==why isn’t there abc, nbc, cbs, fox coverage of the hate groups going into the church flinging condoms, displaying obscene material and having lesbians kiss on the pulpit?==
Because they are the same people who worked under the cover of “journalism” to get Obammy elected.

This has nothing to do with civil rights. 8 passed because Marriage should be a man & woman only to produce children within the family. That is written in the old & new testament of the Bible. Guys may live together know one is stopping you all, and your rights.

Because Mormons and other conservative Christians support the traditional family does not mean that they are spreading hate. It means they are pro the traditional family. I dont understand why a minority of the population should have the right to redefine the centerpiece of society, the family. I see no tolerance or dignity coming from the gay community on this, only hate and plain old meanness. I am supposed to respect that?
Posted by L
These thoughts resonate with me. But it’s not only Mormons and Christians who have a stake in this issue, but members of the Jewish and Islam faiths, as well. If gays are permitted to “marry”, they may want to be married in a mosque by an Imam. If the Imam refuses on religious grounds to do so, he could be sued to force him to perform the ceremony on an “equality” basis, and/or sued for discrimination for his failure to comply. ALL churches of ALL faiths will ultimately be forced to “marry” homosexual couples.
Ultimately, religious texts such as the Bible and the Koran will be treated as Hate Speech, because they teach against homosexual practices.
Currently in schools throughout our country, Gay marriage is beginning to be taught to primary school students as an equally valid lifestyle choice as Heterosexual marriage.
Don’t get me wrong; I am not against rights for Gay couples. They should be able to obtain insurance for their life partner, have their beloved with them in the hospital, pass property to the survivor in the relationship when one partner leaves this life, and other rights that can be granted by Civil Unions, or Life Partnerships, or essentially any other terminology which does not have a religious connotation.
I am not trying to keep rights away from Gay people. I am trying to protect my own rights, and the rights of millions of other Americans who fail to forsee where this militant Gay agenda is trying to lead this country.
Forewarned is forearmed.
A word to the wise…

==Denying certain rights to one group while allowing the same certain rights to another group is UNCONSTITUTIONAL.==
In Bakke, the United States Supreme Court said that groups have no Rights, that only persons have Rights.
So, a man who claims to be homosexual may marry a woman who says that she is homosexual.

Mr. Inc…
Marriage is just as meaningful to gay couples as it is to heterosexual couples so stop saying marry your best friend. That’s just ridiculous. You marry the person you’re IN LOVE with.
What point are you trying to make, because it’s rather pointless that you continue to post non-sense.
And yes the supreme court will not permit prop 8 since it’s unconstituional because as by definition if violates my FREEDOM!!!
Mr. Inc.. go back and read the definition of Freedom once again so that you FULLY understand my rights!

God created marriage to be between a man and a woman! Not two of the same gender! I agree with the Mormons on this issue. But I don’t agree with Mormonism. The people voted in California let it stand. Or, maybe we should revote also for the president if he is not the one you wanted.

Satan is the biggest liar. John Hanner you are being decieved. You are twisting truths and confusing yourself. If you seek you will find the truth, love and peace. At least try and read the bible,what could it hurt? I’ll pray for you and hope you will not propagate Satans lies.

Just to be clear, as a California-tax-paying-resident, it is not just the Mormons opposing gay marriage. It is anyone who believes in the sanctity and sacredness of “marriage” as it has been defined for centuries…as a union between a man and a woman…period. The fight against marriage is not tied to the LDS church, or the Roman Catholic Church, or any church for that matter directly. Of course churches are going to support the cause of keeping marriage between a man and a woman. Just as one would expect a member of PETA not to show up wearing a fur coat to their annual convention. If it is part of your doctrine, or belief system it is only natural to choose sides strongly. I am not a gay-hater, or discriminatory against homosexuals in any way. I believe they should be able to form a union, have it recognized by the law so matters of wills, home ownership etc. can be shared, but it should not be called marriage. Call it a “sameage”…why not just make up a word to define it? Maybe a supporter of gay marriage can explain to me why the big hoopla about using the word “marriage”? Is it the flowers, and the big cake, and the overly expensive party? Or is it simply the envy of traditional marriage where love between a man and woman can produce something so amazing as human life. There is a reason you envy and want that for yourself…because marriage in its true form is a beautiful thing. Bringing life into this world is the most unbelievable event ever. Unfortunately, try as they might, that is something homosexuals will never have the ability to do where the child is both of the parent’s biological child…it is a simply the facts. So, whether you like it or not, gay union is infinitely different in that respect alone, and therefore should not be termed “marriage”. It comes down to semantics really. I don’t think the majority of people out there are truly opposed to homosexual couples going about their daily lives, and committing themselves to one another. We’ve become used to seeing them on HGTV looking for homes together, and helping fashion-challenged straight men on Bravo,but when they seek to tamper with the “family values” and structure that is the cornerstone of so many people’s beliefs they cross the line.
Why is it that the people that were at my polling place trying to convince me to support gay marriage, harrassing all the people in line, aren’t being thrown in the spotlight in the media? Why are only the people opposing gay marriage made out to be the bad guys? Because the world is skewed towards the few, and not the majority. This is the second time we Californians have voted down gay marriage, and apparently that doesn’t mean anything. There was talk awhile back about putting a “non-gender specific restroom” into public schools, because there were some confused youngsters who didn’t feel comfortable using a men’s or ladies’ restroom. But, apparently that is not singling out, or being divisive by having gay and non-gay restrooms. How is that different than segregation in the south? It’s really very comical how one-sided the media is, and how most of the country goes along with it. Barack Obama was voted in, and 95% of black voters voted for him…but, that’s not a race issue according to the talking heads on the news channels. Yet, if a white voter voted for McCain it was because he or she was afraid of having a black man in office. RIDICULOUS! Wake up America…the constant bombardment by media outlets, swaying your belief systems, and testing your values is not accidental. It is a carefully orchestrated, intentional promotion of whoever’s agenda is paying the bills, and bringing in the ratings at that moment. That 24 hour ticker across the bottom of the news broadcasts is only offering one viewpoint. Be sure to research issues, and be informed before buying into what the media is promoting.

==Marriage is just as meaningful to gay couples as it is to heterosexual couples ==
The marriage of two sisters, for example, is just as meaningful to them as it is to anyone else. So, love between them being what it is, and nothing for you to judge, you don’t mind two sisters marrying. Is that it?

Boycotting establishments because the owners voted a certain way or protesting in front of a church that supported Prop. 8 speak volumns about those boycotting or protesting…they speak of tolerance but apparently only if it agrees with their agenda. Since the majority of Blacks as well as well known entertainers supported President elect Obama by substantial monetary donations, should Republicans boycott anything related to Blacks or Hollywood or Oprah? Rediculous! This holds the same reason as those protesting the Mormon Church, restaurants, theater, etc. The last I checked, we still live in a democratic nation…let the people decide by vote. The people of California have spoken twice. Let the decision stand.

I voted for a similar amendment in Arizona. I am not religious at all. However, I believe at its heart, marriage is a religious institution. The grand majority believes that the state should recognize this religious institution of marriage, so our government recognizes people as married or unmarried. The people in a state have a right to democracy and thus have a right to vote on the definition of marriage, and in California, they did so. Marriage was originally intended to between man and woman by these religions. I don’t have a problem on the separation of church and state on this, because I do not believe it oppresses anybody who fails to participate, or insists that anybody particpate. It’s not like they are forcing all men to marry a woman, or forcing all women to marry a man. Gays have the right to live together unoppressed by non-gays. But marriage at its heart comes from these old religions such as Christianity, and I believe changing marriage to include gays is pointless. The only way I can see this changing is if there is a well-established religion in which people of the same sex are married. Then I can see those people saying that the government is discriminating by recognizing marriages as defined by those other religions whilst not recognizing theirs. But of course no such religion exists, and if one suddenly appeared, would obviously be one artificially created to help gays make gay marriage legal.

The Constitution is supposed to protect civil rights, not take them away. This is a civil rights issue. If civil rights for all minority groups were put to a vote of the electorate, we would still have bans on interracial marriage. African Americans and women would not be allowed to vote. Schools would still be segregated. Asians would not be allowed to own property in California. The role of the courts should be to protect the rights of minority groups from the tyranny of the majority. There is something seriously wrong with a referendum process that requires 2/3 majority to pass a bond measure, but only a simple majority to amend the Constitution. The California Supreme Court acted properly when it ruled that gays and lesbians are a “protected class”, and that as such, their civil rights needed to be protected. When bans on interracial marriage were in force, the vast majority of voters approved of these laws; if left up to the voters, these bans would never have been overturned. It took a ruling by the US Supreme Court in 1967 (Loving vs. Va) to start the process of undoing these heinous laws. Were these “activist” judges, subverting the will of the people? They were, if you apply the same “logic” used by Proposition 8 supporters. If you read the US Supreme Court decision, and substitute “gays and lesbians” and “sexual orientation” for “racial classification”, you will understand the core of the argument for same sex marriage:
The court ruled that Virginia’s anti-miscegenation statute violated both the Due Process Clause and the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. In its decision, the court wrote:
“ Marriage is one of the “basic civil rights of man,” fundamental to our very existence and survival…. To deny this fundamental freedom on so unsupportable a basis as the racial classifications embodied in these statutes, classifications so directly subversive of the principle of equality at the heart of the Fourteenth Amendment, is surely to deprive all the State’s citizens of liberty without due process of law. The Fourteenth Amendment requires that the freedom of choice to marry not be restricted by invidious racial discrimination. Under our Constitution, the freedom to marry, or not marry, a person of another race resides with the individual and cannot be infringed by the State.”
On the 40th anniversary of this historic decision, Mildred Loving, the party to the lawsuit, issued this statement, whose eloquence expresses the hope of all gays and lesbians that someday, they will be able to enjoy equal rights under the law:
“Surrounded as I am now by wonderful children and grandchildren, not a day goes by that I don’t think of Richard and our love, our right to marry, and how much it meant to me to have that freedom to marry the person precious to me, even if others thought he was the “wrong kind of person” for me to marry. I believe all Americans, no matter their race, no matter their sex, no matter their sexual orientation, should have that same freedom to marry. Government has no business imposing some people’s religious beliefs over others. Especially if it denies people’s civil rights.I am still not a political person, but I am proud that Richard’s and my name is on a court case that can help reinforce the love, the commitment, the fairness, and the family that so many people, black or white, young or old, gay or straight seek in life. I support the freedom to marry for all. That’s what Loving, and loving, are all about.”

I am a direct descendent of the Plymoth Pilgrims, a Revolutionary War veteran and my ancestors were persecuted and evicted from Missouri. They, in turn, crossed the plains in covered wagons to the Salt Lake Valley because they believed in the Book of Mormon. For generations, my family helped build America with blood, sweat and tears. Because of my family’s sacrifices to preserve freedom, the gay people today are able to live their lifestyle without being executed. Be thankful that you live in the land of America.
When it comes to redefining marriage, the line is drawn. Marriage is between a man, a woman with the blessings given from God.

==I support the freedom to marry for all. ==
Everyone, of age, is free to marry.
A man who claims to be homosexual may marry a woman who claims to be homosexual.
A man who is heterosexual and a marry a woman who is heterosexual.
Equal protection abounds.

Satan is the biggest liar. John Hanner you are being decieved. You are twisting truths and confusing yourself. If you seek you will find the truth, love and peace. At least try and read the bible,what could it hurt? I’ll pray for you and hope you will not propagate Satans lies.

Homosexual behavior is about choice and sex. We all have lines we try not to cross. Obviously some of us want to do whatever we want, regardless of Gods truth,or even Democracy

The Cult of Mormons used to be blatant RACISTS. Remember? They saw black people as inferior and would not let them hold certain positions in their cult. People seem to forget that these days.
Fundamentalist Mormons still have bizarre beliefs about bigamy. We see it all the time in the news about Mormons with a dozen wives. Remember watching the children being removed from the fundamentalists in Texas? These people condoned old men marrying young girls! They are the arbiters of our morals???? These are the people dictating policy in California now??? That is insane.
Any group that needs to oppress others to feel powerful is not doing God’s will. It is not up to anyone on this earth to interpret God’s will for anyone else. Beware of FALSE PROPHETS. The Mormon’s follow a false prophet. We should be Banning THEM from spewing their vitriol, lies and hate. Any church that pushed proposition 8 should have their tax exempt status taken away.
Science tells us that homosexuality is NOT a “choice” as some of these uneducated fools here have said. People are born gay just as they are born black or hispanic. There is no choice involved. Being gay is as much who you are as your gender or your race. Some of the responses here are a reflection of just how bad our educational system has become. People- READ a book! Turn off your televisions and take a science class. The ignorance of some of the statements here is absolutely amazing.

Mr. Inc… says…
–No man may marry another man.
No woman may marry another woman.
Equal protection abounds–
So does your stupidity. 18,000 gay couples JUST DID in CA!!! AND these marriages will STAND!
Since May 17, 2004 gay couples have been getting married!!!
AND as of TODAY gay couples can wed in Connecticut!!!
Jesh I guess you really do live in a small town!

dgubera -
Homosexuality is not a choice. This is a lie that heterosexuals love to spread. Show me PROOF? I am straight and every GAY friend I have will clearly tell you that it is NOT a choice!
You say…
–Homosexuality is about sex. So is Beastiality and Pedophilia.–
This is the most ignorant statement of the night. Isn’t the purpose of Hetersexuality about sex? um Reporduction?
Seems that the biggest threat to our children is the 20% of hetersexuals committing adultry & the 40% of heterosexuals getting divorces!
Make divorce illegal!

California relax gay people are here to stay and we’re all better for it. Hello we couldn’t go to Disneyland if we didn’t have gay people!
The supreme court will over turn prop 8 just like the allowed same sex marriages 6 months ago. So take a chill pill.. your lives won’t change.
“IF YOU LIKE IT OR NOT”
I love GAVIN NEWSOM!!!!

The people of California have voted down gay marriage three times now. I think that’s indicative of the electorate’s wishes. All this rancor and harassment by the gay community – because the vote didn’t go their way – is counterproductive. I’m as annoyed as they are and want to yell through my TV, “Knock it off!”
I’m also insulted by the gay community’s blanket assumption that anyone who supported Prop 8 is a hate-filled religious extremist. Hate played no part in my decision and I have no religious objections to gay marriage.
What I haven’t seen is any discussion of the issue that was on my mind as I voted – possible (likely) unintended consequences of broadening the civil definition of marriage. I wondered about who else would make the case that their rights are being trampled and who’s business is it anyway who one loves and marries? For example, would plural marriage be argued using this precedent? How about a brother and sister (or whatever familial combination) who’d like to marry? What about a person who wants to marry his or her dog/cat/horse/pig/whatever? It may sound ridiculous but I can see how a case could be made by all manner of wackos and degenerates!
Personally, I think gays should marry ONLY within the context of religion and let the civil definition stand. Domestic partnership rights remain for non-traditional couples (not just gays) so all that’s really needed is a clergyperson and the big party!

I support the Prop8. I got a question for all you guys that are gunning for your ideas on this issue. What does the Webster Dictionary say? The definition of marriage:1.the state of being married. 2. a wedding 3. a close union.
married: 1.being husband and wife.
2. having a husband or wife. 3. of marriage -n. a married person.
marry: 1. to join as husband and wife.
2. to take as husband or wife. 3. to unite – vi. to get married. Now I do not have to tell you what the definition of husband and wife is also, now do I? Why do we even need to blame the church for what is already established as the definition of a marriage, of between a husband and a wife? Call it something else. You must also educate yourselves and not be ignorant. Also if you know your bible you know that men who lie with men are called sodomites. An abomination to GOD. I myself was molested by one of you Sodomites when I was a child. You should not teach this kind of abomination to others. The people have spoken. Grow Up!

Based on reading the above blogs, I believe that we can see the agenda of the liberal media. I haven’t done an official count, but it appears 2-1 in support of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints AND many many many other churches, including Roman Catholic, that were all behind Prop 8. It simply isn’t a MORMON thing. I ditto many of the above statements that say the voters have decided, it’s the majority that rules. I didn’t vote for Obama, yet I support the decision of others and support him as our new president. I won’t protest, I won’t destroy church items.
There has been reports of LDS Church buildings being vandalized following the election. This simply isn’t the way things are done in America.

I agree with the fact that we must respect the majority vote – but I don’t understand why people get so upset about Gay Marriage. People should be allowed to marry if they want to – what’s the problem with that? Many heterosexuals who marry are not associated with any church or religion — no one is looking to ban them (or are they?). Stop beating up on homosexuals and let them live their lives in peace and freedom. If some people put as much energy into their own lives as they do in trying to control the lives of others, they’d be a lot happier and a lot less interested in poking their noses in other people’s business.

it discriminates so it is a civil rights issue.
it’s not a moral issue, because what you consider moral others do not. Just because a fairy tail book says it, does not make it true.
Genetics has already proven that being gay is genetic in nature, so if you believe in God, then God approves.

It seems only one other poster has mentioned this…These protesters are protesting the wrong group!
Prop 8 passed because 70% of BLACKS voted for it!
If the gays in CA want to complain about the outcome, why are you protesting Mormons? If your really upset about it, have the b@lls to confront the group that actually made the difference!
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/11/05/MNH413UTUS.DTL
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2008/11/05/state/n111547S31.DTL
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-gayblack8-2008nov08,0,1601616.story

People who need to CONTROL other people, like the religious right who “stand up” against Abortion, Gay marriage, Mixed marriage, Divorce, etc., grieve me greatly. Were we not all made in the “image and likeness of God”? If there IS a God, that is. Live and let live, people!

I believe that people need to stop legislating what other people do if it isn’t hurting anyone. Gays do not chose whom they love, they are born that way.
For all those saying that if the people voted it should stand, I say if that were the case than the president elects parents would never have been permitted to be married either. Women would not have the right to vote, neither would blacks.
It is time that we quit trying to regulate personal issues and get back to working on matters that have a real impact on everyone, like the failing economy.

Prop 8 was a re-hash of a previously passed proposition. California didn’t want gay marriage then, and it doesn’t want gay marriage now. If the whole marriage thing is desired because it’s a way to express true love, than a civil union should be sufficient. If it’s about sharing health benefits, then anyone who lives together (roommates, grandchildren, friends, cousins, pets) should be able to share the benefits and not just gay couples.
As a quick point of clarification, polygamy is not a tenet of the “Mormon” Church which encouraged a no vote on Prop 8. There are the fringe radicals who created their own church many years ago, not connected to the “Mormon” Church of this issue, who are into the polygamy scene. “Mormons” who are polygamists are excommunicated from the “Mormon” Church.
I believe marriage is between one man and one woman.

Bonnie wrote “Gay marriage” does not exist. Marriage only happens between a man and a woman as God intended.
Actually God/dess did not invent marriage, man did in order to claim the woman as property. God/dess only created sex.
Today marriage has become a means of saying to the world I love this person and want to spend my life together with him/her. Throughout the ages there has always been homosexuality, today it is just out in the open.

John wrote “If you can find a religion that is believes that marriage between two homosexuals is okay, then I say that it should be law. But I know of no religion that believes that.”
Wiccans believe in it. One of our laws state that “All forms of love are beautiful in the eyes of the God/dess”

I am a gay man. My partner and I love eachother very much. We just was to exercise a right given to every American, to marry eachother and be protected by all the rights that goes along with marriage. Who in their right mind would vote against love????

I totally agree with the Mormons (and the Catholics and other religions who supported this Amendment) — Gays should not be allowed to marry. Marriage is a sacred covenant that should be between a man and a woman. That is how God intended it to be.

I am a native, non-mormon Utahn and have observed the hypocrisy of the Mormon church first-hand, most of my life. The LDS’ stand against gays is kind of like the pot calling the kettle black. Though the church doesn’t officially condone plural marriage they still tolerate and take a blind eye to polygamy and there are numerous polygamists throughout the Salt Lake valley. What is more perverse? Marrying several women (many who are still children?) or marrying someone of the same sex?. Combine that with a church that baptises the dead and has celestial marriages and we are talking kinky. How many spiritual wives does Mitt Romney have?
I whole heartily support boycotts against Utah because the church felt the need to once again mix politics with religion. However, people should also target LDS business interes such as Beneficial Financial, Pepsi, Disney, Bonneville Broadcasting, etc.

Mike_C I will agree with you that 1st graders should not go on a field trip to a gay marriage, but then they should go to a straight marriage either and why would the school even sanction such a thing.
If you think just because a couple isn’t married that junior in 1st grade isn’t going to encounter a child who has gay parents and thus the parents having to explain than I think you live in a fantasy world.
Being married changes nothing in the situation other than the couple will have the exact same rights in dealing with health and death issues regardless of their sexes.

I am not attempting to use this a rationale for saying no to gay marriage. I am saying the entire issue is not as simple as those who support gay marriage want to make it. Their choice of behavior does have ramifications for the rest of us. To say it does not shows incredible ignorance.
=====
I do not see how the actual ceremony changes the ramifications for the rest of you and I am not ignorant. A gay couple living together and having children would pose the same ramifications and needed explanations so using that as a basis to deny them civil rights is ludicrous. We just elected a bi-racial man to the White House in this country and all of these arguments being made here were made about 30-40 years ago, they were just about the rights of blacks not people who are gay.
It is time that the religious sect of this country quit trying to impose THEIR beliefs on the rest of us. Those screaming the loudest are the least Christian most intolerant people I have ever encountered and it is in every part of their lives and they are actually the biggest hypocrites in the world.

MIguy wrote “It seems that legislature should stay out of who can marry whom – that is the responsibility of religion. The Christian faith is pretty clear on this issue.”
Hello, not everyone is Christian, stop thinking that they are. Nor should they dictate what religion I should believe in. How and what I practice is right for me. If Christianaity fulfills those individuals who are, great and I support them, but don’t tell me what I have to believe in.

TJackson wrote “What if a man is in love with six women and they love him, too? Shall we recognize their marriage because it makes them happy?”
The answer is a resounding yes!! There are many cultures in this world that we live in where men are married to more than one woman and even where woman are married to more than one man.

“The answer is a resounding yes!! There are many cultures in this world that we live in where men are married to more than one woman and even where woman are married to more than one man.”
There are also cultures in this world that wash their hands in goat’s p!ss. You up for that at your local McDonald’s ?

YO DEMITRI,
GO ask all those black voters who voted for Prop 8!!!!!
It should not be hard to find them, 70% of them voted for it!!!!

first off Gays do not need special rights to support the lifestyle they CHOOSE!Gays Already have the right to marry someone just like anyone does, as long as it is a man and a woman. They have the right to vote just like everyone else.To say they are a minority on the same level as Blacks and Women is so wrong. Blacks are born Black and women are born women. Gays may be born with a tendency towards homosexuality, just like some people are born with tendencies towards alcohol and drug addiction. It is a desease at best and you can still Choose not to act on it. You do not give special rights to an illness. Marriage should remain what it has always been, between a man and a woman. Choose wisely what your life will be!!

If marriag were defined as an exclusive uninon between two consenting adult human beings we could be allow gay marriage without the fear of opening it up to children, animals, or polygomy because children are not adults, animals are not human beings, and a polygamist would have to break the exclusivity of his original union. Prop 8 is discriminatory because it denys homosexuals the right to marry the person they love. Imagine if the country voted No on your right to marry your soulmate. Do you just say oh well, I’ll just find someone the county likes. I don’t think so. If God has a problem with gay marriage He will deal with it in his time but as Americans we have a constitutional obligation to extend equal rights to all of our citizens.

good stuff JC.

Glennis Ann Jensen wrote “We must get God back in the Schools, so that the children will go back to Church and learn of His goodness. Thank You.”
Hello, I am not Christian and do not want to be forced to worship that way.

I don’t want to see what God will do if gay marriage was ever allowed in our nation!!

Katy -
You said: “***Just to clarify for anyone not willing to do an ounce of research…WE DO NOT ADVOCATE OR PRACTICE POLYGAMY! Those that still practice this are not part of our church anymore – say it with me: “Mormons do not practice or preach polygamy!!!” Now pass it along to all your friends that continue to ignorantly believe this.”
Wrong. You believe that polygamy is an eternal law, and that it will be practiced in the Celestial Kingdom. It is STILL the doctrine of the church, it’s just that it was decided — for political reasons — to stop practicing it in this world. But you plan to practice it in the next.

Eric,
That is your definition…today…
The point is that the majority of people believe a marriage is between one man and one woman.
In ten years, if a minority group of people decide to make 4somes & partner swapping their thing and want to declare that as a legal marriage, what would you say then.
Some things in life are actually best when defined once and for all.
Civil unions should give you all the legal rights you need as a couple. If there are places where that is not true, then I would focus my battles there. You have a much greater chance of gathering a larger support base for that fight.

I find it somewhat odd (and maybe a little amusing) that the GLBT community, the very ones who are demanding tolerance from us “straights”, have tended publically to be intolerant of anyone who disagrees with them or their agenda. First of all, the protesters in California have never–I say again, NEVER–been denied the right to marry. They are advocating a false issue. The real issue is whether they have the right to REDEFINE what has constituted marriage for more than 5000 years of human history. And because I hold to the timeless wisdom of the afrementioned model, I am called a “homophobe”? PLEASE.

=Gay people deserve the same rights as others. =
==They already have the same Rights. Men and woman may marry, and there is no requirement that they be heterosexual.==
So all gay people in one male and one female pairs should get into a legally binding contract even though it’s a marriage of convenience just to be able to call themselves married?
I think there are enough straight people who live like that now and have no love lost between them.
When it comes to voting, majority rules, but I bet everyone on this forum hated being told to do something that everyone else said so, even through everyone else was wrong.

Mike C
If someone is into wife swaping and foursomes they are obviously not ready to commit to the exclusivity of marriage and therefore should not be allowed to do so, whether they be gay or straight. Also as an African American gay man I know that the only choice that I made in either matter was to choose to accept who I am dispite the fact that a lot of people don’t consider it to be normal. I may or may not be normal but I am me, and every American should have the right to be entirely and freely who they are as long as it is not bringing any harm to others. God gives us the free will to choose what path we want to take and no man should have the right to take that choice away. I beilve God is on my side and that is how I was able to choose love over fear. If you truley believe he is on your side I just ask that you step back and allow Him to be my judge.

JJ at 2:09 wrote “Marriage has, among other funtions, the place of protecting children and nurturing them to functional adulthood. This is most often successfully done by a mother and a father.”
Now that is where you are wrong. There have been many children brought up where both “parents” were the same sex and turn out just fine. And there have been many children brought up where there were “parents” of opposite sex where they ended up murderers, rapists, etc. On both areas some of these parents practiced some form of religion (doesn’t matter, bad and good among everyone). Human beings are human beings no matter where you are. Religious or not.

what was the point on passing the law if they were going to turn around and take it away. why do people care what gays do in the first place? its none of my business who’s married who’s not.

JC &
Mike_C (who is really Mr. Incredible)
Both of you are horridly and naively wrong. I am a 25 year old gay man. Growing up neighborhood kids would call me names, throw things at me and chase me on their bikes. All throughout High School I was called names, pushed, spit on and when I walked home from school people would throw rocks at me.
Many gay people have been beaten to death. Matthew Sheperd is one example.
I was grew up in a loving catholic home with a mother and father. I was born gay.
Do YOU think that I would CHOOSE to go through all of this? You are the blind idiots that spread the exact hate that caused me such torment growing up. Your familes and child are raised in a very unhealthy, close-minded enviroment which I feel very sorry for.
You both must live under rocks because everywhere in CA there are gay people. All of our major cities have large gay populations. Turn on you TV for crying out loud nearly EVERY primetime show has a gay actor!
We LIVE amongst you as your neighbors, we don’t cause you harm, we don’t have an adjenda, we don’t want to change your “traditional marriage”. All these things you continue to post are lies and hatered. Take a moment and ask a gay person to explain to you why they are gay, they will tell you that they have no CHOICE.
GAY IS NOT A CHOICE! WE ARE BORN GAY!
Any straight person who contests this is naive and refuses to face reality. Genetics have PROVEN this. So take your hatered somewhere else because as a gay man I WILL NOT STAND FOR IT.
We will be FREE! We will be EQUAL!
Because we are ALL GODS CHILDREN!
GOD LOVES ALL! GOD IS AN ALL FORGIVING GOD!
Stop saying that GOD thinks any less of us. WE ARE ALL SINNERS, EQUALLY!
NO ON HATE!
LOVE IS LOVE!

Mr. H… says…
–I don’t want to see what God will do if gay marriage was ever allowed in our nation!!–
Since May 17, 2004 gay couples in Massachusetts have been getting married!!!
18,000 gay couples got married in California during the past 6 months!
These marriages will remain valid!
AND as of yesterday gay couples can wed in Connecticut!!!
Mr. H, I don’t want to know what God will do to all you Heterosexuals who 40% of you get divorces, 20% of you commit adultry & another 10% are child molesters! This is our countries REAL problem. This is what churches SHOULD BE spending money on.
Want to protect marriage?
Make divorce illegal!
Make adultry a crime!
Jesh since you’ve never heard of gay marriage, I guess you really do live under a rock!

Mike_C
It amazes me how your argument continues to go to beastiality. Is this all you have? Is your life so pathetic that you have to resort to further belittling gay people?
Stick to the topic at point which is gay marriage between to consenting Gay Adult “human beings”.
If you want to bone your dog, be my guest. It wouldn’t impact me one bit, just like my marriage wouldn’t imapact you either!

James,
It takes the arguement to the point where you have to stop whining about yourself & actually think about where the lines have get drawn!
I’m sorry if your so caught up in your own issues that you fail to see the big picture here!
Gays are always whining that this has no effect on anyone, but you never look at the end game. That is what taking the discussion to animals does.
AND as usual, when you can’t intelligently dicuss the issue, you resort to name calling and avoid the real issue!
Next time, take a deep breath, and actually engage your brain long enough to ask yourself this question….
What is the line as far as the definition of marriage is concerned, and WHY?

I agree with the thousands of other people, Mormons and other religions too, who valiantly stood forth in protecting correct marital bonds. We can not let the confused and mislead voices of society effect our what is truly ordained of God, which is the union between a man and a woman. We must maintain and strengthen this type of family unit as the fundamental unit of society, or we well crumble as a diseased nation.

It is interesting how all of this is put on the Mormons. They made up an extremely small percentage of the voters. There are many other people who voted yes on Prop 8, they just weren’t as vocal about their feelings. Also the church itself did not spend any money in supporting it. The gay population however can be asked to speak out, but those who oppose it are supposed to sit down and keep their mouths shut. Sounds hypocritical to me. I also never saw any Mormons outside gay peoples homes vandalizing and destroying something that is sacred to them. Show some respect….the people voted.
P.S. Study some history, the Mormons haven’t practiced polygamy for over a hundred years, and their reasons had a lot to do with survival from persecution.

Why are you calling out The Mormons and not all the other groups that stood together with the Mormons in voting for this????

KA,
While Mr. Jeffs isn’t currently associated with the LDS, Warren Jeffs was the head of the FLDS church. He considers himself a mormon and the basis of the belief systems are the same!

Cathy said “It is time that the religious sect of this country quit trying to impose THEIR beliefs on the rest of us. Those screaming the loudest are the least Christian most intolerant people I have ever encountered and it is in every part of their lives and they are actually the biggest hypocrites in the world.”
Judging by many of the posts, you could easily substitute gay for religious and, perhaps, understand how the other half of the bloggers feel.
This is a polarizing issue and no one is going to be able to convince the other. I feel I’m in the wilderness out here because I have no religious objections to gay marriage. I don’t hate anyone and don’t think that’s a real issue – more like a “look over there.” Using such an offensive tactic to amp up sympathy for a cause is time-honored – but can backfire.
My issue is not religion but I don’t think the religious people on this blog – or out in the electorate – hate gays. Some do, I’m sure but the religious are mostly misguided. They think they KNOW what God wants and if you’re not falling in line with that, the religious feel compelled to “save” you. They see gay marriage as the road straight to Hell and you’re never going to convince them otherwise.

To All Christians,
John 3:16 (King James Version)
For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
“WHOSOEVER” – means any human being that believes in God will NOT perish, but have EVERYLASTING life including gay people!
Now let’s take a look at a couple of the 10 commandments…
*** Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days you shall labor and do all your work, but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord your God. In it you shall do no work ***
All christians can’t work on Sundays if you do you’re breaking this sacred law.
*** You shall not commit adultery ***
No christian can cheat on their spouse!!!
*** You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor ***
This commandment forbids misinterpreting the truth in our relations with others which means any christian who gossips, lies or spreads hate against another human being is breaking this sacred law.
The above commandments need no explanation. They mean exactly what they are saying. It’s quite amazing how many of these commandments are being broken on a regular basis, even by Christians themselves. YET christians have no problem pointing the finger, telling gay people what they are doing are wrong.
This is called a hypocrite!
Whats the definition you ask?
“a person who acts in contradiction to his or her stated beliefs or feelings ”
Christians have NO ROOM to judge or point fingers since they themselves are the very sinners they despise!
SHAME ON YOU!!!

Stacy,
It is not about distancing ourselves from our past. I’m not ashamed of what our church did in a time when it was called for. It is about people not understanding and making assumptions about things they know nothing about. Warren Jeffs is not a Mormon and even though the name of his church is similar to ours, I am sure if you asked him he would tell you he is not a Mormon.
But this is not about polygamy or Warren Jeffs, it is about Proposition 8. I just don’t know why all of this hatred is directed only at our church when we were again a small number of voters. And the vandalism to our temple is just disrespectful and immature.
If someone has a problem they have a right for their voice to be heard, but why take it this far…….is it really going to get them what they want? Is this behavior going to change the mind of all of those who voted Yes….to me it’s a confirmation of a right decision.

I agree with the LDS Church. And thank you, LDS Church, for having the guts to stand up against these bullies.

Kelly,
There are approx 7,779,316 mormons. That is no “small” number. Not to mention that it is one of the most wealthy groups in the US… Just look at how LARGE your “temples” are. Marriott corporation is Mormon based for example.
And who are you to preach to the rest of the US when mormons have one of the most controversial beliefs systems?
Here’s a excerp from your previous “President of the Quorum of Twelve Apostles” which is the governing body of the Mormon Church…
***Brigham Young declared: “Intelligent beings are organized to become Gods, even the Sons of God, to dwell in the presence of the Gods” (Discourses of Brigham Young, p.245)***
How many Gods do you believe in? Are we our own God?
This is just one of the many examples why not one religious belief system is right or wrong. There are so many belief systems in the USA your head could spin.
The primary reason the LDS temples are being protested is due to the fact that they were the largest “organized” yes on 8 support group. LDS members single handedly raised the most money which funded the yes on 8 commercials which spread the lies that lead to prop 8 passing.
You speak of African Americans voting yes on 8… well that’s because they were mislead by the lies and untrue commericals paid for by the LDS group.
TAX THE LDS!!!

Proof that fundamentalists selectively quote the Bible:
A lesson about the book of Leviticus . . .
Homophobic fundamentalists often quote two particular verses that seem to be against gay people. These two verses, both of which appear in the book of Leviticus, are . . .
“You shall not lie with a male as with a woman. It is an abomination.” (Leviticus 18:22)
and . . .
“If a man lies with a male as he lies with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination. They shall surely be put to death. Their blood shall be upon them.” (Leviticus 20:13)
Below, we’ll take a look at other scripture verses that are in the exact same book (Leviticus) as the above verse. This exercise proves that those preachers who are so enthusiastic about quoting the book of Leviticus to affirm their personal prejudice against people who are gay or lesbian become awfully quiet when it comes to other verses that appear in the very same book.
Remember, this isn’t about faith whatsoever. It’s about people who have pre-existing anti-gay prejudice in their hearts. They choose the Christian Bible as the tool with which they attempt to affirm and legitimize that pre-existing prejudice.
Sadly, the truth is that they just don’t like gay people.
“For everyone who curses his father or his mother shall surely be put to death. He has cursed his father or his mother. His blood shall be upon him.” (Leviticus 20:9)
Imagine what would happen today if we killed every child who was disrespectful to his parents. Fundamentalists explain this verse away, saying that it is part of the Old Levitical Holiness Code and is not meant to be taken literally.
But the above verse is just a mere 3 verses before Leviticus 20:13, one of their favorite anti-gay scriptures which, of course, they do choose to apply literally.
It’s just incredible, isn’t it?
Fundamentalists change their entire methodology of scriptural interpretation when it suits their purpose, even when dealing with verses that are a just couple of sentences away from each other!
“If a man lies with a woman during her sickness and uncovers her nakedness, he has discovered her flow, and she has uncovered the flow of her blood. Both of them shall be cut off from her people.” (Leviticus 20:18)
Imagine what would happen today if we deported every man and woman who had ever had sex together while the woman was having her period. Fundamentalists decline the opportunity to take this verse literally, which is merely 5 verses after Leviticus 20:13.
“Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves. You may also buy some of the temporary residents living among you and members of their clans born in your country, and they will become your property.”
(Leviticus 25:44-45)
Did you ever wonder where racist, uneducated people in the 19th century got the idea that slaves were just property and not people? Directly from the above verse, which fundamentalists do not, of course, take literally.
“Do not cut the hair at the sides of your head or clip off the edges of your beard.” (Leviticus 19:27)
“Bible-believing” fundamentalists never preach against the evils of shaving, as they do not take this verse literally for our day. Of course, they most certainly would do so if they had a personal bias against shaving, but apparently, they do not.
“…and the swine, though it divides the hoof, having cloven hooves, yet does not chew the cud, is unclean to you.” (Leviticus 11:7)
As you can see, the book of Leviticus also prohibits the eating of pork (a swine is a pig). Of course, fundamentalists do not choose to use this verse to preach against eating pork. Sadly, however, they have no problem abusing the Bible to condemn gay and lesbian people. Remember, it’s about their personal prejudice against gay people, not about a true desire to understand what the Bible actually says.
“…do not plant your field with two kinds of seed. Do not wear material woven of two kinds of material.” (Leviticus 19:19)
Farmers in this country almost always grow more than one kind of crop in their fields. In fact, they often must do so for ecological reasons. Fundamentalists do not apply this verse literally. If they were to preach against farmers, there would be an uproar, and rightfully so.
Fundamentalists also ignore the Biblical command to not wear clothes that have two different kinds of material. The shirts that many fundamentalists are often seen wearing must be a cotton/polyester blend, the most common in the United States of America. They may be “Bible believing” Christians, but this is yet another verse that they don’t believe should be applied to today.
An “abomination?”
Fundamentalists also like to use Leviticus 18:22 to justify their anti-gay prejudice. That verse says, “You shall not lie with a male as with a woman. It is an abomination.” Perhaps you have heard some people refer to gay people as an “abomination.” They get the idea directly from Leviticus 18:22.
But did you know…
• The Bible says that eating shrimp and lobster is an abomination:
“But all in the seas or in the rivers that do not have fins and scales, all that move in the water or any living thing which is in the water, they are an abomination to you.” (Leviticus 11:10)
“They (shellfish) shall be an abomination to you; you shall not eat their flesh, but you shall regard their carcasses as an abomination.” (Leviticus 11:11)
“Whatever in the water does not have fins or scales; that shall be an abomination to you.” (Leviticus 11:12)
In conclusion . . .
The above exercise proves that anti-gay fundamentalists selectively quote the Bible. They enthusiastically and openly embrace those parts of the Bible which affirm and justify their own personal, pre-existing prejudice against gay people, while declining to become as enthusiastic about verses like the ones listed above.
After all, how many times have you heard a fundamentalist say that eating shellfish was an abomination? But they sure don’t hesitate to say it about gay people, do they?
What does that tell you?
By far the largest force that’s killing the sanctity of marriage is DIVORCE!!! 40% of all marriages end in Divorce. Let’s make divorce Illegal since THAT’S the REAL problem here. So what’s the meesage we’re sending to our children? Get married whenever yout want… and get a divorce whenever you want! Practice what you preach!!!
NO ON H8!!! PEACE!!! LOVE!!! NO WAR!!!

For me who’s always liked and admired the gay community, I’m deeply disappointed by the churlish manner by which it is protesting Prop 8. There’s a real “sore loser” feel about it. The people of California voted – not for the first time mind you – and again said no to gay marriage. Who’s to blame for those previous losses at the polls? Mormons? Catholics? Blacks? Or is it just the majority of Californians? I don’t always like or agree with what my fellow Californians do – but I have to live with it, as do we all. That’s democracy. It doesn’t always go your way.
I’m not saying I condone a tyranny of the majority, either. Though the gay community may think this is the most important thing on everyone’s mind, in reality, this issue just isn’t vital or compelling enough to overturn the vote. Domestic partnership remains the law even though Prop 8 passed. Life on earth is not imperiled by this outcome. Everyone calm down.
Now for the civil rights issue. Gays have come a very long way in the last 30-40 years. However bad it was, it’s highly insensitive to compare that journey with those in the African-American community.
Gays in this country have endured hardship and violence, no doubt, but were never subjected to the kind of segregation and degradation African-Americans were. Unless a gay person deliberately reveals it, gay is not visible. The same advantage can seldom be utilized by African-Americans.
Using hate and civil rights to demand the vote be overturned would be valid IF these weren’t just straw-man arguments here. They’re a shameless use of hot-buttons meant to elicit the maximum sympathy for the cause. Neither is truly relevant.

Gov. Schwarzenegger recommends and feels confident that the supreme court will overturn prop 8 due to the fact that it directly violates the constitution.
Remove all religious beliefs from the issue and all you have left is legal union and civil rights. No one can take that away, therefore prop 8 is unconstitutional and will be overturned.
Accept it! Change is COMING!

I don’t understand why these people are so concerned about what somebody else does. If two people love each other and are of legal age, let them marry.
How on earth can it affect your life if two men or two women marry? Or is it that you just want to control other people’s lives so you can feel superior?
And what does “protect marriage” mean? Protect it from what? Widespread, wanton happiness?
I’m straight and I don’t understand why people are homosexual. But they are PEOPLE. If any two humans are lucky enough to find each other, let them marry, for god’s sake, let them marry.

Stacy,
All I can say to you is that some day I hope you truly understand who we are and what we are about. You have many misunderstandings, as many people do about our church and it’s members. Our arguing will not get us anywhere, so I guess we’ll just have to agree to disagree. I do wish you well.

I agree with the majority of voters!
Why does the pro-gay/liberal left preach tolerance – that is, unless you disagree with their opinion – then they’re the most intolerant people I know.
The same liberal left scream “civil rights for us”, yet deny the basic right of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness to the pre-born child.

Sorry that was for Eleanor not Kelly

Eleanor,
So you’ve been affected in someway by the 18,000 gay couples who wed in California this year? Please share with us how you’ve been directly affected/impacted.
Furthermore, have you been directly affected by the thousands of gay couples who have married in Massachusetts since May 2004?
It’s more than obvious that the answer is no. You and the rest of the country more than likely had no idea that gay couples have been getting married since 2004 in Massachusetts. Thousands of gay couples have wed over the past 4 years and guess what… NO ONE HAS BEEN AFFECTED!
And please get your facts straight when discussing what civil and legal rights gay people do and don’t have. Civil unions ARE NOT the same as marriages.
Just to point out 3 major differences;
Taxes – Indiviuals in civil unions cannot file as married therefore do not share the tax benefits married couples do. Since many gay couples are wealthy this is a major issue.
Health Insurance – Many insurance companies do not provide the same insurance benefits or plans to same-sex couples in civil unions.
Social Security – If a same-sex partner passes on, their significant other will not get their SSI benefits.
There are over 1,000 legal differences between the two, some minor and some major.
Proofs in the pudding…
It’s really sad that anyone would have to beg for rights in today’s modern society.
All minority groups should embrace one another in their constant battle for freedom and equality.

Trish says –
*** The same liberal left scream “civil rights for us”, yet deny the basic right of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness to the pre-born child. ***
Who are you to proclaim what an un-born childs life would be like gay or straight? That is an impossibility.
At least make vaild arguments.

Bill and Vickey,
This is what you’ve claimed…
–I hear all this talk that we should be tolerant, but yet the gays are not tolerant of us at all, unless, of course, we agree with them.–
Gay people aren’t tolernt of hetersexuals? WHAT? We live in a heterosexual dominant world, how are we not tolerant?
We don’t ask for your approval. We don’t ask you to agree with us.
The problem at hand is the fact that YOU want US to live according to YOUR rules by taking away our civil and legal rights. THAT is where we will most definately speak up and fight for those rights.
We’re plenty tolerant of your divorces, adultry, porn, hatered, child abduction/abuse/molestations, multitude of religious beliefs and horrible sense of dress to name a few…

This idea that morality doesn’t impact society is simply wrong. The founding fathers recognized the importance of religion in setting up the foundation of this country. Protecting marriage is critical to the future health of our society. Additionally, reduces my civil right to have marriage recognized for what it is.

ABC News is asking the wrong question. This isn’t a controversy between mormons and homosexuals. Supporters of proposition 8 and traditional marriage are comprised of a broad collection of people from all kinds of faiths and backgrounds. Framing this as a “mormon” question is incomplete and introduces a religious bias that is misleading.
I do not believe gay rights is remotely similar to racial or gender rights. Sexual preference is a choice. I am fine w/ civil unions and the granting of various tax and insurance benefits to gay couples but marriage is a sacred institution between a man and woman that is critical to the foundations of our society. The traditional family must be protected. I support proposition 8.

Concerning POLYGAMY, it is now against LDS doctrine but this has not always been the case. For a majority of the Nineteenth Century, polygamy was practiced by the Salt Lake based Church. Even today men can be married to more than one wife for all eternity. Nevertheless, the practice had to be discarded before Utah became a state. The revelation called the Manifesto prepared Utah to be admitted to the Union.

In the spirit of the season I just want to say that I am thankful to live in a country where we can differ in opinions and lifestyles and we can voices our differences without fear of arrest and imprisionment. I’m thankful to live in a country where we can vote and where we respect the voice of the people. I did not vote for Obama, yet I plan to uphold him and respect him as the president of this great country. I did not vote for prop. 8 yet I plan to respect the voice of the people and the law. Things change, and things will continue to change. This is not the end of anything. Yet, for me at least, this is not the begining of me becoming prejudice or expressing hateful thoughts against those who do not share my beliefs. If I do that then I am the bigot, not them. Let us all be thankful for all the amazing freedoms we do enjoy!!

Tanya,
On what basis can you make the claim that people are not born gay? What proof do you have?
We would all love to know!
I’m frankly sick and tired of straight people claiming that “if” gay people marry then ALL HELL WILL BREAK LOOSE!

Tanya,
Gay couples have already been getting married since May 2004 in Massachusetts. THOUSANDS of gay couples have already married!
In California 18,000 gay couples have already married!
Where have you been Tanya?
You all must come from the same small town that doesn’t have TV or news!
NONE of you’re misearble selfish lives have been affected in the LEAST!
The biggest problem here is a HUGE lack of education. That is very apparent here by the comments that a lot of you have made.
FACT:
Gay people are BORN GAY!
If you don’t believe me, then take the time to sit down with a gay person and ask them.
I don’t know how many times you stubborn people have to be told. It is ignorant that you would choose to continue to spread this lie rather than listen to the millions of gay people who have told you that they are BORN GAY!
and lastly Tanya,
The biggest threat to marriage is yourselves. Heterosexuals are the majority and with Divorce, Adultry, Molestation, Porn, Child Abuse/Abduction/Abandonment/Rape, Alcoholism, Drugs, Murder, Gangs and the list goes on… This is what is fuelilng the distruction of your sacred marriage
Why aren’t the religious organizations spending their $40 million dollars on actual problems this country faces on a daily basis. Turn on the news, each and everyday these are realities.
So focus your concerns, and marriage protests on your hetersexual distroyers!
Sick world “we” have to live in.

Separation of church and state is a must! Otherwise which religion is right and which is wrong? Who’s laws would we be forced to live by?
Every religion feels that “they” are the superior ones. Which if you really think about it is so naive. There are easily over a hundred religious beliefs. Do you think that everyone but your religion is going to hell?
Give me a break.
This world, this civilization is far bigger than it’s inhabitants and the multitude of their religions.
Live your own life, not others. Treat everyone as your equal, after all we all bleed red…
I pray the supreme court will over turn prop 8. It positively is unconstitutional!

Is marriage a civil right? I like the following quote from “Matt Kinnaman”.
Those who contend that marriage is a civil right must contend with additional questions. Is graduation from school a civil right? Is a government job? How about being a son, or a daughter, an uncle, or an aunt? What about a graduate degree? Employment? Housing? Health? Business ownership? A driver’s license? Membership in the National Organization of Women, the NBA, the PTA, the AARP, the Priesthood?
Just as it is with these institutions and definitions, so it is with marriage—each one is defined with exclusions in place, and once it becomes anything we want it to be, it is nothing at all. Marriage is an institution, not a civil right. It has nothing to do with first- or second-class citizenship. Marriage either has an enduring, unchanging definition, or it will have no definition.

Larry the cable guy…
That’s a very naive statement. I love how straight people bring in so many outside examples that are totally irrelevant to prop 8. I mean we’re throwing around marrying pets, dating the kitchen sink and take our cars out on dates… give me a break! FOCUS PEOPLE!
Marriage comes with LEGAL benefits. It benefits human beings, not animals. Gay people are seeking the same LEGAL benefits. Keep church out of this. This is a LEGAL issue.
Larry,
All of the examples you’ve provided such as graduating from high school, earning a graduate degree, owning a business and getting a drivers license are all earned “rights”. EVERYONE can achieve all of the above listed items. NO ONE is “banned” by the constitution that they are less equal and don’t have the “right” to achieve these things.
So you point is … pointless!
Like so many other comments on this never ending blog… pointless…blabbering!
I don’t care when you take care of yourself “in the privacy of your own home”… you shouldn’t care when I bake a cake in mine either!

My best friend got married two days ago… Happiest day of his life. Him and his partner have been together for longer than I’ve been alive. How could anyone want to take this away from them. It’s just wrong. We need to keep church and state separate. shouldn’t the churches lose tax exempt status now that they are preaching politics? So much for for believing god loves everyone….

This issue is not about Mormons. It is not about sexual orientation. It is about how marriage is defined. I will never allow my children to attend a school that is forced to instruct views of marriage that do not include a man and a woman. Really, no one wants to mistreat any orientation, but where is the limit? Get a grip and support another institution that enumerates the same legal status gays desire under another name. That is what courts and the ACLU thrive on.

Emma 3:54 am
Couldn’t have said it better myself.

Gay people everywhere UNITE!!!
WE ARE FREE!!!
This will be a nationwide coming out!!!

I agree with the Mormons and other Christian Churches that were againist gay marriage. The Mormons seem to be taking the brunt of the protests when in fact, many Christian faiths voted and participated in getting amendment 8 passed. It certainly took more then just the vote of the members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints to pass the amendment.

My understanding of the coalition in CA is that it was made up of men and women, single and married, young and old, Black, white, Hispanic, Asian, Polynesian and mixed racial configurations, and from a variety of religious traditions. In CA the majority has voted twice that marriage is between a man and a woman. Majority rule is how a democracy runs. Any other way is anarchy

Why is it that when you disagree with someone elses position that you are labeled a hater? Aren’t the very rights that they embrace in voicing their opinion the same rights you have to oppose it?
Many groups united to fight prop 8 for many reasons, but none of them was central to hate. The resulting scenario is just like a spoiled child who didn’t get it’s way pounding their fists and kicking their legs while laying on their bellies screaming, “You didn’t give me what I wanted, you must hate me.” I have found that the best response is to leave the room and let them have it out alone.
Seems like it isn’t those who won in this case who promulgate hatred, but those who lost.
Oh, and this response isn’t homophobic, it is democratic.

I don’t understand why people are so intent on protecting the word marriage. Social stability is not gained from the word itself that comes from the commited family bonds that are created when a marriage takes place. Whether that family be gay or straight it contributes to our nations social stability when that group of people pledges to take care of each other. Marriage is just a word if gays are allowed define their relationships in this way it will only contibute to our nations social stabilty because it is the bond not the word that matters. My point is that if you think that gays should have civil unions with all the benefits of marriage just under a different name, that’s a silly argument because you basicly agree with supporters of gay marriage. All committed bonds, or marriages if you will gay or straight, will only strenghen the nations social stability.

Lisa,
No one asked you to “fight for legal backing”.
So don’t worry sweetie, just go back home and sip your “God juice”.

I absolutely don’t see what the big deal is here. What are you people fighting for? Gay people are already getting married in MA. They have been for the past 4 years! None of you have been affected in the least! Many of these couples that have wed have children! None of you were here barking over the past 4 years.
Why all of the sudden do you have a problem with it?
The real problem here is that you all are so board that you have nothing better to do than try and force a minority to live by your religious beliefs. You are all dead wrong! People will live whatever life they want regardless how you feel and if you do or don’t support them so get over it!
You’re only making yourselves look bad. In 10 years from now it WILL BE in the history books that mormons attempted to breed hatered into Californias contstitution. No a good way to try and build your membership.
SHAME ON YOU!!!

While many hate groups backed Prop 8, it’s doubtful that it would have passed without the propoganda financed by the deep pockets of the church.
And now the hate groups are whining piteously because they’re being targeted by the same sort of protests and boycotts that they’ve inflicted on others for years?
How deliciously ironic.

Some people just feel the need to subjugate others and deny them equal rights. The mentality of the pro-8 people here is the same mentality of those fifty years ago that would have denied rights to black people. There are always those that are full of hate that want others to sit at the back of the bus. There were those fifty years ago that insisted on separate but equal. The “majority” in the South was consistent in it’s oppression of minorities and insisted they had the right to deny other’s their rights because they were the majority. The same people used the Bible to justify their racism just as the people here repeatedly use the Bible to justify their homophobia, just as others once used the Bible to justify the burning of witches. It is just ignorance and our founding father’s had enough sense to understand the power of ignorance and that is why the wrote into the Constitution safeguards from that ignorance. Fifty years ago the Mormon church was on the frontline of racist organizations just like they are on the frontlines now of homophobic racism. Fundamentalists are the same ignorant people everywhere, whether they are Muslim extremists like the Taliban in Afghanistan or Christian fundamentalists in America. They want to control other people and subjugate others to their ignorance. Justice, intelligence, science and equality will eventually win out though. Obama was evidence of how far we have come in the last fifty years. Proposition 8 was eveidence of how far we have to go.

What I get tired of is people always using the bible to denounce homosexuality. What they don’t talk about are verses like Leviticus 11:4-7 which says among other things you can’t eat swine. Wonder what the hog farmers would say about that. Do you eat clams, oysters, or lobsters? Don’t. Leviticus 11:9-12 specifically states that you can only eat fish with scales and fins otherwise it is an abomination. Other verses to look at are Leviticus 18:19, Leviticus 19:15-19, 27-28, Leviticus 24:17 states all murders must be executed. Think of that the next time there are protests at the prison when someone is about to be executed for murdering someone. I’m not even going to get into the laws written about a women’s menstual cycle, but if look up the previous references, you will find it. Deuteronomy 21:18-21 talks about a disrespectful son to his parents, being a drunkard and being stoned to death because his parents can’t control him. Romans 1:29-32 talks about murderers, boasters, and debaters. Roman 2:1-3 don’t judge others. While studying the bible I found that Psalms 139 says it all. God knew who I was going to be before I was even born. My point is, when the religious right want to use the bible to condemn homosexuality, go ahead, but use the entire bible to fight against all of God’s laws the bible states also. Don’t pick and choose which of God’s laws are to be enforced. Otherwise it very hipicritcal of them to do so.
And by the way, when was the last time a heterosexual stated they chose to be that way? If I chose to be gay, then straight people must have choosen to be straight. The next time you are talking to a straight person ask them when they made the decision to be straight!
Partnered for 27yrs and still in love with the same teriffic woman I met all those years ago. That is what marriage is about. Love. It is also a Civil Right. That of which homosexuals do not enjoy. At least not in the now BLUE state of Indiana.

Stan,
Late for your KKK meeting?

Jill,
That was just magnificant!!!
Thank you for taking the time to share with us!

Hmmmm…this is all about rights vs. rules. The Mormons believe the RULES must be followed at all costs. But doesn’t the constitution (which Mormons believe is an inspired document) protect those RIGHTS of the ordinary citizen? A smell a rat in this moral dilemma.

God made Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve. Everyone has a choice.

AMEN!!! to Kurt’s comment!!

Cynthia,
I worked in the entertainment industry for years, and have friends that are gay and I don’t ever recall anytime in our conversations either side calling each other names or trying to impose our (each other’s) beliefs upon each other. And we engaged in some pretty open and in-depth conversations. I also have lost some dear friends due to aids and still miss them. Also growing up I had a couple of school teachers and some of my classmates and friends in high school that were gay. These friends are not calling me up and calling me a bigot because I chose to believe that marriage should be between a man and a woman. In fact, my friends seem to be happy in their relationships and are in successful careers and like who they are. I feel we truly respect each other for who we are and not what we are.
I do understand that there are a lot of people in conflict on this issue, but the saddest part about all of this is how the protestors are targeting my religion and my church, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, for its position on this issue. From the blogs that I have read and the comments that I have seen on other websites and here, it seems to me that some of those opposed to this Proposition have the hate that they claim that we have towards them. My Church does not hate gay people, nor do I and it does sadden me to read some of the comments posted from people on both sides. I would hope for all of our sake’s we could start truly seeing things as they really are and not how we perceive them to be. I believe Bill Cosby was very profound when he said: “Hurt people, hurt people.” If we could only truly love one another as Jesus loves us all, it is my understanding and belief that He atoned for all of our sins, hurts, and pains and he will be the final judge based upon the laws he has placed upon us all.
I have included an excerpt from a statement from the LDS Church. You can read the rest at lds.org. I believe it says all that needs to be said:
“We hope that now and in the future all parties involved in this issue will be well informed and act in a spirit of mutual respect and civility toward those with a different position. No one on any side of the question should be vilified, intimidated, harassed or subject to erroneous information.
It is important to understand that this issue for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has always been about the sacred and divine institution of marriage — a union between a man and a woman.
Allegations of bigotry or persecution made against the church were and are simply wrong. The church’s opposition to same-sex marriage neither constitutes nor condones any kind of hostility toward gays and lesbians. Even more, the church does not object to rights for same-sex couples regarding hospitalization and medical care, fair housing and employment rights, or probate rights, so long as these do not infringe on the integrity of the traditional family or the constitutional rights of churches.
Some, however, have mistakenly asserted that churches should not ever be involved in politics when moral issues are involved. In fact, churches and religious organizations are well within their constitutional rights to speak out and be engaged in the many moral and ethical problems facing society. While the church does not endorse candidates or platforms, it does reserve the right to speak out on important issues.
Before it accepted the invitation to join broad-based coalitions for the amendments, the church knew that some of its members would choose not to support its position. Voting choices by Latter-day Saints, like all other people, are influenced by their own unique experiences and circumstances. As we move forward from the election, church members need to be understanding and accepting of each other and work together for a better society.
Even though the democratic process can be demanding and difficult, Latter-day Saints are profoundly grateful for and respect the ideals of a true democracy.”

I agree with the Mormons. A marriage should be between a man and a woman. Prop 8 does not take away any rights of gay couples and it was passed by the will of the people.

The media and this Blog are filled with human perspectives. If one simply reads God’s word in the Bible with a sensitive conscience the answer is there. He is the ultimate authority.

Christine,
Too bad that Adam had more fun with Steve so he dumped Eve! LOL

TAX THE LDS & ANY RELIGION THAT BREAKS THEIR TAX CODES!!!
The main reason that prop 8 passed was due to the LIES that were spewed by their campaign.
Here’s a list of Facts…
Facts v. Fiction
Proposition 8 would eliminate fundamental rights for a group of Californians.
It’s unconstitutional and flat out wrong!
Fiction: Prop 8 doesn’t discriminate against gay people.
Fact: Prop 8 is simple: it eliminates the rights for same-sex couples to marry. Prop 8 would deny equal protections and write discrimination against one group of people—lesbian and gay people—into our state constitution.
Fiction: Teaching children about same-sex marriage will happen here unless we pass Prop 8.
Fact: Not one word in Prop 8 mentions education. And no child can be forced, against the will of their parents, to be taught anything about health and family issues at school. California law prohibits it.
California’s top educators including Superintendent of Schools Jack O’Connell and California Teachers all agree: Prop 8 has nothing to do with education.
Fiction: Churches could lose their tax-exemption status.
Fact: The court decision regarding marriage specifically says “no religion will be required to change its religious policies or practices with regard to same-sex couples, and no religious officiant will be required to solemnize a marriage in contravention of his or her religious beliefs.”
Fiction: A Massachusetts case about a parent’s objection to the school curriculum will happen here.
Fact: California gives parents an absolute right to remove their kids and opt-out of teaching on health and family instruction they don’t agree with. The opponents know that California law already covers this and Prop 8 won’t affect it, so they bring up an irrelevant case in Massachusetts.
Fiction: Four Activist Judges in San Francisco…
Fact: Prop 8 is about eliminating a fundamental right. Judges didn’t grant the right, the constitution guarantees the right. Proponents of Prop 8 use an outdated and stale argument that judges aren’t supposed to protect rights and freedoms. Prop 8 is about whether Californians are willing to amend the constitution for the sole purpose of eliminating a fundamental right for one group of citizens.
Fiction: If Prop 8 isn’t passed, people can be sued over personal beliefs.
Fact: California’s laws already prohibit discrimination against anyone based on race, religion, gender, or sexual orientation. This has nothing to do with marriage.
Fiction: Pepperdine University supports the Yes on 8 campaign.
Fact: The University has publicly disassociated itself from Professor Richard Peterson of Pepperdine University, who is featured in the ad, and has asked to not be identified in the Yes on 8 advertisements.
Fiction: Unless Prop 8 passes, California parents won’t have the right to object to what their children are taught in school.
Fact: California law clearly gives parents and guardians broad authority to remove their children from any health instruction if it conflicts with their religious beliefs or moral convictions.
Stop spreading lies and get your FACTS straight!!!

It is the depravity of human nature regardless of law to be discriminatory and show partiality. Different people groups gravitate together. This is evident in every city that has a China Town, Little Tokyo, Korea Town, German Town, etc. Prejudice, has even been proven to be evident in infants. The scientific measurement of the reaction of a baby to someone who is beautiful or ugly is different. And, statistics show that beautiful people are more apt to be hired over homely individuals with the same qualifications. God uses the simple things to confound the wise according to his standards. He looks upon the heart of man. There’s a spiritual reason that nudity has not been the norm since the fall of man. Our freedoms are limited by our sinful choices, according to God’s law. And the bondage of sin is deadly. Thank God that there is still some moral restraint upon our land. Otherwise, there would be no reason not to legalize nudity. There is a difference between preference and purity. All babies come in “birthday suits”, some are red, yellow, black and white and all are precious in God’s sight. Regardless of race, physical characteristics, age, the issue is purity of heart. An employee elect, could be uncomely, have a birth defect, ect. , but that does not justify immoral behavior. People of color, from poverty, in wheel chairs, ect., can prove to be people of character. But, immorality is never justifiable. And, if it were, what would keep the next legislation form being a nudist campaign. When I voted yes on proposition 8, I was voting to preserve the dignity of decency.

To: Terry Walker,
If you would walk thru the bible from beginning to end looking at the whole counsel of God with a genuinely sincere desire to understand his word, and with eyes to see and ears to hear what the author of time says, then it would be evident to you that God is consistent in character. I challenge you not to overlook the cross of Christ, which evidences God’s sever MERCY and GRACE to all who repent and trust in the crimson thread of redemption. Sin is not what we do it’s who we are; we are all born in sin. Law is a necessary measuring rod to reveal the consequences of sin. But GRACE is the smile of the Heavenly Father on his imperfect children who trust in the protective provision of His guiding word. Just last Sunday night at my nondenominational Bible church such a soul confessed his waywardness, repented of homosexuality, and was baptized. He said it was not an easy journey, but thru the GRACE of God he was saved from this sin and now walks with God. I have heard numerous other testimonies of such turn a rounds. I have known gay people who have great personalities, and I wish that they as well as everyone could know the greatness of God’s GRACE. Terry, when I was in high school there was a dairy farmer with your’ first and last name who taught weekly Thursday night bible studies to the youth. And he had so much love, that he would get up every Tuesday morning at 4:00 AM with dairy donations and cook for hundreds of high schoolers who came to pray before school. Don’t ever argue or doubt the love of God, because in the end the creator has authority over His creation. Terry, God’s parental love and guidance is there for you to follow if you choose to do so. He knows you, and He wants you to know Him and HIS GRACIOUS LOVE FOR YOU. The peace of God surpasses all human comprehension. And, peace with God is only possible thru Christ who proved His love for you. The” spiritual adultery” of “godofobia” is an insult to God’s loving sacrifice for His disobedient children. I’m sorry for those who have shown unkindness to you in Christ’s name. It is with kind regards that I am writing to you, and praying for you that you will be open to receive this message.

I believe all Americans who believe in freedom, tolerance and human rights have a responsibility to oppose bigotry and prejudice based on sexual orientation. – Coretta Scott King

Ultimately all human arguments will be silenced by God, and very knee will bow and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord of Lords and King of Kings!

I read in the newspaper that exit polls suggested the gay marrige ban was supported by 7 of 10 black voters and a majority of latinos. I have not seen any demonstrations against other churchs. How come so much hate against the Mormons?

Separation of Church & State!
It is an impossiblity to live according to the beliefs of multiple religions.
You pick which religion you practice and live your life by therefore gay people should have the right to live their lives the way they want to.
That’s only HUMANE!
If you want to live by a dictatorship or be a dictator then maybe YOU should live in another country.
This is the LAND OF THE FREE!
Stop trying to change that!
Every Human being deserves the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happeniness. Which means we all make our OWN decisions!!!

Liz says;
– Homosexuals should be satisfied with all their civil rights… –
Dear little ignorant Liz. Tommorrow we’ll take away your right to vote. Then we’ll no longer allow you to marry outside of your race. Then Wednesday you will have 1,000 less rights under the law.
Doesn’t that sound fair? If gay people are forced to live “less-equal” then straight people should be prepared to have their rights taken away also.
We are either “all” equal or we’re not. There’s no in between. Or we might as well start living in the past because we’ve made NO improvements.
FYI… United States Constitution says…
Amendment 14 – Citizenship Rights
No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
“The equal protection of the laws” – This is why prop 8 will be overturned. It is a direct violation of the US Constitution.
And since most of you on here don’t clearly understand the term “equal” here’s the definition…
1 a (1): of the same measure, quantity, amount, or number as another
c: like for each member of a group, class, or society
Now that we’re all on the same page… let’s focus our energy on more important issues affecting our children and society like gangs, drugs, violence and DIVORCE!!!

Two concepts that come to mind are: Where does Fundamental right comes from? Do all citizens have fundamental rights?
• I believed everyone has a fundamental right. Therefore, if everyone has a fundamental right then how does society balance everyone’s fundamental rights?
Society balance fundamental rights by thinking of the mass and for the greater good. Fundamental rights are not absolute and to give fundamental rights absolute supremacy will create chaos. Therefore, there are limits to fundamental rights. For example, China has a policy of one child per family. If China were a democracy and if the Chinese people agreed (voted) with China’s national policy for one child, then obviously the fundamental rights of the minority (to have more than one child) would be denied.
• Still another example, I believe that it should be my fundamental right to married as many women as I like.
Yet, society says that I can only marry one woman at a time. In addition, I not only have a fundamental right but also a God given right to have as many children as I want. Obviously, society has placed a limit on my fundamental right. More importantly, women can argue the same; that it is their fundamental right to have as many children as they want because the bible says to go and pro-create.
The argument that fundamental right is absolute or guarantee despite society’s idea of the greater good or that it deny the minority (Gays and Lesbians) their fundamental right is weak in a democracy society.
• The next concept about a fundamental right is its origin. Where does a fundamental right come from? God or the Government/State!
If the State or Government gives an individual its fundamental right it is deciding what is the best way to balance a citizen’s Fundamental Rights. Meaning, the State or Government decided to balance all citizens’ fundamental right through laws or by voting. In essence, the State or Government is seeking the Greater Good for Society.
If fundamental right is God given then a marriage is between a man and a woman. Therefore, marriage can not be between two mans or two woman, especially in heterosexual’s environment. God stated to Adam and Eva, “be fruitful and go and multiple.”
The committed relationship between a man and a woman, a heterosexuals, relationship, in God’s eye, is not seen a sinful, rather fortification. In contrast, homosexual’s relationship is seen as sinful – fortification, or abomination.
For Homosexuals to say to Almighty God ignore our sinful nature-fortification (The gays and Lesbians are not asking God to forgive their sinful nature but to ignore the sinful nature.) and to accept the committed homosexual relationship is blasphemy. For example, I robbed a bank and later I write to the Governor of the “Banana Republic State” and asked that Governor to ignore the robbery and to make my robbery legal is asinine.
God had the option to create man and man for pro-creation. Instead, God created Adam and Eve for pro-creation. Who are we to say to God ignore our sins and bless the committed “homosexual relationship.”
In addition to those two concepts, the question does the State has its own fundamental rights as an entity? Yes, a State or Government does have it own fundamental rights and it incorporates its rights through legislation, laws, and voting propositions.
Finally, if citizens voting privileges are going to be ignored what trend or precedent are we setting? Those against Prop 8 did not protest before the Nov 4, 2008. They were going to accept the outcome if they won.
Correct me if I am wrong. According to the California Supreme Court in May 16, 2008, it stated, “In a 4-3 decision, the justices rule that people have a fundamental ‘right to marry’ the person of their choice”….. . Taken out of contents, some person will see he/she has a right to marry their sibling.
We all have fundamental rights – The fundamental right to marry my sister, brother, mother, father, or dog will be the next campaign. What standards will the courts use to deny those individuals their fundamental right to marry sibling, parents, etc?
For these reasons I voted yes on Prop 8.
Respectfully yours,
Eric

for·ni·ca·tion [ fàwrni káysh'n ]
noun
Definition:
1. consenting sex involving somebody unmarried: sexual intercourse between two consenting adults who are not married to each other
2. sexual behavior considered immoral: in the Bible, sexual intercourse between a man and woman who are not married, or any form of sexual behavior considered to be immoral
fornicate (1)
for·ni·cate [ fáwrni kàyt ] (past and past participle for·ni·cat·ed, present participle for·ni·cat·ing, 3rd person present singular for·ni·cates)
intransitive verb
Definition:
have sex outside marriage: to have sexual intercourse outside marriage ( formal )
[Mid-16th century. < ecclesiastical Latin fornicat-, past participle of fornicari< Latin fornic- "arch, brothel" (because prostitutes in Rome solicited under building arches)]
for·ni·ca·tor noun
fornicate (2)
for·ni·cate [ fáwrnikət, fáwrni kàyt ] or for·ni·cat·ed [ fáwrni kàytəd ]
adjective
Definition:
arched: with an arched, vaulted, or bending form
[Early 19th century. < Latin fornicatus< fornic- "arch, vault"]
the bible has been used to justify beating women and children, the death penalty, slavery and any number of things that go against what many people would consider proper treatment of another human.
remember abraham had more than one wife, the first of which was his half sister sarah.
then we have king david whom knowingly slept with bathsheba, another mans' wife, and he then had her husband killed by sending him to the front lines of a battle so that she could be his wife uncontested, not just a conquest for the night. God went on to call him a man after his own heart. now lets remember God would have wiped out abimelech and his nation had abimelech touched abrahams wife sarah. yet when david actaully sleeps with a married woman and has someone killed on top of it…he is called a man after Gods heart when he is appointed to be king after saul God said..'I have found David son of Jesse a man after my own heart; he will do everything I want him to do.' then as king david went on to commit adultery and then the icing on the cake, when bathsheba was sad because she found out her husband uriah was dead…david went to her and "comforted" "his wife" and they (david and bathsheba) concieved solomon. (for this info read genisis chapter 20, acts 13 and second samuel chapter 11)
so the very blood line of Jesus goes thru a poligamist who married his half sister and an adulturer and his wife.
the old testiment could run compition with the afternoon soaps.
then we have this little ditty from very old memory files but it is my understanding when you read all of the old testement laws on rape women under those laws are obligated to marry thier rapist. who in this day and age would find that acceptable?
please take the time understand to whom and for what purpose things in the bible were written.
bible gateway is a quick reasource for such things and lets you look at multiple versions of the bible at once.
people always like to talk about sodom and gomorrha as if it's sins were solely about sex…they were not. and they certainly were not soley about homosexuality.
also remember what happened to and with lot the man whom was the cause of abrahams asking God to save sodom and gomorrah.
lot was willing to give his virgin daughters to the mob outside his door instead of letting them have the angels that were more than capable of protecting themselves, they were after all the angels that God sent to rescue lot and his family and then destroy sodom and gomorrah.
then later, his daughters, because there was no other man available, got him drunk and has sex with him believeing that was the only way they would be able to procreate and preserve the family line.
people like to leave out the parts of the bible that make them uncomfortable.
and most people read and re read only selected parts of the bible and that only reenforces the beliefs they already hold.
there are so many things in the bible that contradict themselves…how do we rectify such variant statements as these…"let he who is without sin cast the first stone" and "do you not know that we will judge the angels?"
the gap between these two concepts is huge when you do not read them in context.
the first is a statement from john chapter 8 that was an answer in the begining of Jesus's defence of himself to the pharisees.
the later statement is made in first corinthians chapter six when it is talking about christians going to the courts and lawyers to settle disputes instead of asking another church member for help in settleing the dispute.
the two statements are not linked together in the bible but if you take them out of context you can say, see the bible makes no sense, on one hand we are not to make judments at all and on the other we are to be the very judges of the angels. which is not what either statement intends.
we all sin if we try and live by the law of the old testiment we will die by the law of the old testiment.
we are saved by grace.
we also must acknowlege that not everyone believes in the bible muchless that we all read the bible and hear the same message.
catholics, lutherans, evangelicals…on and on we go and that is just under the huge umbrella of christianity.
do buddists, hindus, seiks on and on not marry?
did the naitive cultures of the americas not marry before the mayflower arrived?
marraige has a very specific meaning to christians.
however, the uniteing of human beings for the purpose of mating is not soley a christian tradition.
and we have been given free will.
if you believe that homosexuallity is a sin that is your choice as it is your choice to believe in God as you define him.
but…as i keep telling one friend…just think of how many problems in the world would be solved if we just accepted that not everyone thinks, believes or feels the way you do or the way you think they should.
is being gay a greater sin than cheating on your wife? is it a greater sin than lying on your tax statement? is it a greater sin than refusing to help the poor?
how do you decide what sin another has the right to commit?
that may be an odd way of stating it but…if the sin that they are committing does not cause you to sin…
i can not hate people i have known all my life just because i have found out that they love someone of the same sex. in stating that am i sinning? or am i sinning if i hate them for thier choice?
might they be judged by God, yes they may.
but am i without sin…no.
so i choose to tread lightly.
i will not cast the first stone.
nor will i deny them the right to order thier life as they see fit.
am i sinning by simply acknowlegeing thier free will?
i don't think anyone on earth is wise enough to answer that.
and yet again i will put it out there that there are so many respectible (not the inflamitory gutter issues that some have raised) ways that the issues gay people are fighting for could be applied.

Oh, I forgot, the poll asked us if we thought Mormons were wrong to get involved in Prop.8. Again, religion has been around since the beginning of time and if a religion wants to get involved to keep things the right way, I don’t think there is anything wrong with that. Everything I read said Catholics, Evangelists, Protestants, and many other religions stood up for marriage between a man and woman only so why is only one religion get hate threats, violence, law suits, news coverage? In fact it has made me want to check the Mormons out, if they are getting that much hate from gays and lesbians maybe they are good religion to belong to.

I just realized that I had mistaken who posted the comment that I responded to. It was not Bob. It was actually jeni nykole. Please accept my apologies for my mistake.