Added: 3 years ago
From: KingsFoolNoOn8
Views: 3,370
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (39)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • Because that "word" carries with it rights as well as responsibilities. It's not changing the meaning of the word. There are already over 18,000 gay married couples in CA. There have been commited, monogamous, life long gay couples since time began. The only difference is that before prop 8, they had the same rights as straight couples. Why deny them rights?

  • That was a beautiful song and even more amazing music video. Thank you for contributing to the message of love in the face of separation wrought by Prop 8. Tremendous job :).

  • Thank you for making sense. Everyone seems to be forgetting that Prop 8 impacted the lives and families of millions of Americans. While many would say that we lost I believe that we have only just begun. It is said that "While I breath, I hope" and I'm not done yet!

  • Thank you. We are proud of the work. I really like your phrase your quoted "While I breath, I hope".

  • This runs deeper, we are humans that breath and look like you, we don't know why we are gay, we simply made lemonade out of lemons, and you guys want to keep reminding us of shamefulness, you are not winning, your just buggin'. If you were a Christian, you would tell your "Extremest Brother's and Sister's" that you do not agree with them. I won a preaching contest when I was young, I believe in God. My God totally thinks I rock, as I hope yours does too, but mine takes all creation in, not some.

  • Let's forget about Prop 8 for a minute. Let's look at the concept of democracy as a whole. What kind of world would we live in if after every election the losing side took up arms to vilify and destroy the winning side, and seek to reverse the results obtained through any means possible?

    We would have anarchy. Anarchy has a way of biting back those who promoted it.

    Part of the democratic pact is "tolerating" the voice of the people and seeking to unite sides, not dividing further.

  • Section. 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. 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.

  • that should say 14 amendment section 1. my bad

  • Does that mean that a brother can marry his sister because they are both citizens of the United States? How about an adult who wants to marry an eight year-old? How about people who want to have more than one spouse, as some Muslims do?

    What do we tell those people?

    Furthermore, why put an issue to vote if it should have never been put to vote? What is the point if going through the exercise of voting if the result is going to be contested, anyway?

  • incest causes inbreeding, an 8 year old is too young to understand, and in societies and religions that support polygamy tend to treat women as property.

  • ...and perhaps gay marriage causes no breeding at all. Could that be one of the reasons a lot of people won't accept it?

    Perhaps something is to be said about the propagation of our species - a healthy species.

  • What does not breeding have to do with it? Inbreeding causes problems, legalizing gay marriage won't turn people gay so it won't cause a population decline.

  • oh that's why old people and infertile couples aren't allowed to marry?

  • They'll have children in the hereafter...a notion foreign to most people. As for the old, what better way to finish off one's life than as a grandparent or great-grand-parent?

  • and that is what i am saying it should not have been put into the ballot it is against the constitution

  • Then, take it up with the leadership on the NO side. This is too-little-too-late.

  • its not too late, the supreme court can over-rule this.

  • The supreme court is a flavor-of-the-day body. But, for some of us who are viewing the gays' capricious rejection of the voting results, their vehemence towards the Mormons (who would be the first responders should an earthquake or any other catastrophe flatten W. Hollywood or S. Fransisco) these tactics are reminiscent of spoiled, self-centered, children, not compassionate and civilized adults. What could the sacrament of marriage do to turn them into more selfless and law-abiding human beings?

  • They are law abiding, the mormons donated a lot of money to a comity that dedicated itself to taking away these people's rights, they have every right to be pissed off at the mormon church.

  • Oh I see. If only Mormons hadn't contributed as much they would have been spared. So, if the NO side had won it would be fair for the losers to threaten and terrorize the biggest contributors of the No side? Where do we draw the line? Should the losing side be given license to destroy the contributors of the winning side? That's the kind of dead-end, mind-numbing, self-serving logic the planet is suffering from. If God wanted Adams and Steve to marry he wouldn't have created Eve.

  • Wow you really like to stick words in people's mouths don't you? I never said they should destroy or hurt anyone or anything. But they do have the right to protest, they were wronged by these people and they are showing their disdain for the actions of this organization.

  • Sending white powders in sealed envelopes is a form of terrorism. Those were sent to Mormon Temples. Do you watch the news? Irrespective. Have you heard of Sodom and Gomorrah? The city was destroyed by God. Take it up with God.

  • I do watch the news and I have not heard of any white powders sent in sealed envelopes (you may want to check the reliability of the news you are watching). Oh and by the way I am an atheist so take your god arguments some where else.

  • watch?v=I6hY_mnSepU

    watch?v=e14r_DY1XEo

    If you are an atheist why would you want to be associated with "theist" institution like marriage?

  • Marriage is NOT purely religious. There are other forms of marriage, you really don't know anything do you?

  • I can understand why you would say that if you don't believe in the story, etc. Let's agree to disagree.

  • Wait are you saying that marriage is purely religious?

  • I am saying its origins (if you believe in Adam and Eve) were purely religious. Wikipedia explains all the various types of marriage found in various societies at various times in history. Perhaps what needs to happen is an amendment to civil unions. That would satisfy all parties.

  • Marriage exists in all religions, and outside of any religion. I know about Adam and Eve, I have studied the bible, and that is no argument to deny these people their rights. Also, separate but equal was already deemed unconstitutional.

  • By the way we are not allowed to pass laws based on religion so its time to lay the whole Adam and Steve thing to rest ok?

  • Marriage in the traditional sense has always included God in the union. Now, suddenly, an enlightened minority with no procreation powers is interpreting God's original blueprint of marriage by buying out judges. It's ironic that you would want God to sanctify your marriages and yet not want laws passed based on religion. This is another example of the type of irrational, self-serving mentality so typical of the gay community. But, who cares about logic as long as you get what you want, right?

  • Irrational? Self-serving? All it sounds like to me is that they want to have the civil right of marriage - and that political laws shouldn't be swayed by religious interpretations. State and Church, not Sturch.. or Churate, although it sounds like a cool Dr. Suess colloquialism. Seems pretty logical to me. Oh, and "no procreation powers"? What about all the sterile boys and girls out there? \:

  • Consider voting rights. We extended them to women and blacks, but it stopped there. We did not further extend them to illegal immigrants, to children, to goats and chickens. The same is true of marriage. Extend it to gay people and it will stop there. It won't further extend to incest, polygamy, or beastiality. And I agree with you, the rights of a minority should never be put to vote by the majority. Civil rights are not a popularity contest. They're too prescious for that.

  • This vote broke the 14th amendment, it took away rights these people already had, that is against the constitution.

  • Wow great vid, and even better song! Rock on, we will get prop 8 repealed at some point. I may not be gay, but this is still a very important issue to me so never give up!

  • Powerful. I love it.

  • Wow, wonderful!!! Had a great cry and will pass it on to friends!

  • What a great video!

    I also want to remind people not to donate any money to the Knights of Columbus for they supported prop 8 by donating 1,250,000 dollars.

    We will win this fight. This will go to the supreme court and that is when it will pass throughout the other states too. I can see it coming!!

    Keep your heads up.

  • Thank you. We worked very hard to complete the video. Please pass it on to all you know. I am glad you enjoyed the song.

  • Wow! What a beautiful song and a beautiful video as well. As a Lesbian and A Christian I am disgusted by the evil that is being committed by these people in the name of my God. Thank you to the write of this song and to those who made this video for putting that hurt into words.

Loading...
Alert icon
0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more