PROPOSITION 8: A rather comprehensive look PT1

***PLEASE SEE NOTE HERE PRIOR TO COMMENTING***
Part One in a series where I try and address all the relevant points I've come across thus far in the great debate over prop 8 in California.

PLEASE NOTE THAT IF YOU WISH TO COMMENT THAT YOUR ISSUE MAY BE ADDRESSED IN ONE OF THE UPCOMING PARTS, FOR THAT REASON I'LL ALLOW OPEN COMMENTS IN THE LAST VIDEO BUT WILL BE PRE-SCREENING COMMENTS IN ALL BUT THE LAST SEGMENT IN THIS SERIES.

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• family
• marriage
• prop
• proposition
• homosexual
• no
• yes
• california
• seperation
• sex
• church
• judges
• constitution
• society
• love

[leavit2weaver]

Respect is directly tied to love. You cannot love if you do not respect. Equal rights are guaranteed by law- if or allegedly loving gay population had a true spirit of love about them, they would settle for the already legally mandated equality, and respect the beliefs of others. What was done by the judges in our capital, was not done in a spirit of equality or love- the MAJORITY of Californians and their established beliefs were flippantly negated. Yes on Prop 8= true love.

[HiveRadical]

They do not respect the children, they ignore the children and ignore what they want society to impose on children, that being condoning of a genuine 'separate' status. It's okay in their eyes for society to condone the separate children from a parent of one gender or the other but for society to not condone a transformation of marriage and complete disregard for the realities of gender that is 'equality.'

[nikmao]

Then I have a question, and I ask this because I really do want an answer.

Let's say that the rules were different, let's say for a minute that Muslim can't marry in California (of course they can, but let's now say that they can't). Would the rules be different? Would people stand up and protest, or would you say that they should be happy with what they already have...

[HiveRadical]

That's a wrong-headed comparison. The institution is independent of religious affiliation. Whether one is a Muslim, or an Atheist or a Latter-day Saint or an Evangelical are not factors that come anywhere close to approaching the degree of impact as is found with gender. If you have a same gender couple that are atheists and heterosexual couple that are atheists the heterosexual couple, all other things being equal, will produce dynamics far far far more advantageous than those of the other.

[skoonsf]

Dude, why are you hiding behind your over brightened face.

Gat marriage hurts no one and its inevitable that one day all of society will be treated equally.

The younger generation understands this and will make the change eventually.

I wish the little bigot brains would put their efforts towards living in peace - there is already enough war.

We're a smarter nation than this.

Wake up my friend - it's a new dawn and no one will get hurt. Relax and stop being afraid!

Let's stop the wars!!!!!!!!

[HiveRadical]

A question for you. Is people not getting hurt the only thing that matters?

How do you propose to stop the wars?

[nikmao]

No, I really don't think that it is. Because we are all people, and why shouldnt people of same sex be able to marry? Why should they settle less? We live in the 21st century and it's embarrassing to think that people who have been on this world for so long and seen so many things are so closed minded that they can't open there eyes for a second to the fact that we are all the same, and everyone should have the same rights. Whether you live in the US or other countries.

[leefpeeper]

Why do people care so much about what society is doing? Society...to me...is a myth. We don't care about our neighbors. We really don't. You really don't. We selectively care about our neighbors whenever we're looking for an argument to justify government control of peoples' lives.

[imhungry07]

No religious faction should have to accept a union they choose not to.

That said, the U.S. should not offer ANY type of rights or recognition for ANYTHING deemed to be a religious rite, including marriage. This would hit the heart of seperation of church and state. Any reference to ANY religious rite should be eliminated from any discussion relating to government. Discarding the use of these words will allow all people to be equal in their OWN personal beliefs-REGARDLESS OF WHAT THEY ARE.

[leavit2weaver]

Respect is directly tied to love. You cannot love if you do not respect. Equal rights are guaranteed by law- if or allegedly loving gay population had a true spirit of love about them, they would settle with the already legally mandated equality, and respect the beliefs of others. What was done by the judges in our capital, was not done in a spirit of equality or love- the MAJORITY of Californians and their voiced beliefs were flippantly negated. Please have true love, and vote YES.

[KJocelyn]

I feel that love is love. you can feel differently, but I'd rather live in a world of love than in a world of hate.

I hope my fellow citizens of California understand that this is an issue of human rights and of compassion. I hope they vote NO.

[Linsul]

I would suggest, if you would like to be taken seriously, that you get straight to the point, show your face like everyone else, and maybe REHEARSE what you're going to say beforehand and try it without all the "likes" and "ums."

Better luck next time dear. ;)