-
Jerry 08/14/2010 10:21:00 AM
It's tiring to hear the same lies over and over as uttered by the so-called religious "right". Both adult homosexual and heterosexual relationships are LEGAL relationships, and, as Judge Walker has said, neither is morally superior to the other.
The idea that gay marriage opens the door to other kinds of illicit marriage is nonsense of a high order. A sexual relationship between an adult and a child (child abuse) or between an adult and an animal (animal abuse) are both examples of ILLEGAL relationships and punishable in our society (like rape), as they are fundamentally non-consentual in nature. Likewise multiple wives (polygamy) and multiple husbands (polyandry) are ILLEGAL relationships too.
Historically, society has turned a blind eye to many examples of marriage which are condoned. A murderer on death row is allowed to marry; atheists are allowed to marry; serial divorcees are allowed to re-marry as much as they like; infertile couples and elderly couples who will never procreate are allowed to marry as well. No test is required to prove commitment. The only requirement until this time is that both partners be heterosexual.
Homosexuals who are in legal, committed relationships, and who pay the same kinds of taxes, have been categorically denied what the courts have defined as one of the most fundamental civil rights in our society.
Finally, the idea that same-sex unions is unique to our time is also untrue. For several hundred years, both the Eastern Orthodox Church and Roman Catholic Church blessed same-sex unions in a special ceremony. We know this because research has uncovered the actual text of the service that was used- in several languages (John Boswell: Same-Sex Unions in Pre-Modern Europe).
Two men or two women in a committed relationship should have the same access to a civil marriage license as their heterosexual counterparts. It IS a civil right, and society is the stronger for it.
-
Patrick Range McDonald 08/14/2010 6:11:00 AM
Hi Liz, Domestic partnerships are not equal. I was talking with a gay couple yesterday, who were waiting on line to get their marriage license as straight couples passed them by, and they told me they have to go through all kinds of waiting periods to receive various benefits that married couples don't have to go through. Also, in the past, and maybe even currently, there have been companies and even labor unions that have not extended benefits to an employee's domestic partner, only to a married spouse. I've noticed, too, that other people have brought up people marrying animals. Who exactly has been pushing for that? As far as I know, no one. Lastly, women such as yourself weren't allowed to vote. By your logic, they still shouldn't have the right to vote just because that's the way things had always been done in the past. Take care, Patrick Range McDonald, staff writer, LA Weekly
-
Liz 08/14/2010 5:49:00 AM
I see your point Jack.....But marriage should only be between MAN & WOMAN ONLY. Like it's been since the beginning of time. I don't see why they have to get married. As far as being equals they are equal isn't domestic partnership enough. Why don't we go further & have humans marry their animals. Senseless!!!!!!!
-
Jack 08/14/2010 2:31:00 AM
Liz and others like her just don't get it. We live in a Constitutional Republic, and the mob can't vote to take away the civil rights of a minority. And there's precedent in California election politics for this, that stretches back some 50 years. Nearly 50 years ago, the California Legislature passed the Rumford Fair Housing Act, which banned discrimination against "colored" (read black and latino) property renters or buyers.
About 2/3 (!) of California voters overturned the Rumford Act when they passed Proposition 14, which, like Proposition 8, amended the California Constitution. Proposition 14 said Californians could refuse to sell or rent to anyone for any reason. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Proposition 14 violated the 14th Amendment, and it didn’t matter how many Californians had voted for it -- it was racial discrimination, and unconstitutional. The equal protection clause that Walker cited in his Proposition 8 ruling is part of that same 14th Amendment.
-
LIZ 08/13/2010 7:06:00 AM
I'm just so disgusted with this whole Prop 8 thing. I just know I will not vote again since my vote obviously does not count. I still believe marriage is between MAN & WOMAN ONLY.......The gays have domestic partnership why do they need a marriage certificate.
-
Brian 08/13/2010 6:56:00 AM
It's not just younger gay people who feel this way. I'm closer to the half-century mark than many would care to admit, and for me, Prop 8 has always been more about equality, than anything else.
-
Hank 08/13/2010 5:35:00 AM
Regarding the comment in the article "I'm not really looking to get married, and it's just a certificate — I don't need a piece of paper to tell me I'm married."
Well, you may not need the certificate for your own feel good self, but if you travel out of California, a marriage certificate will get you one step closer to hospital visitation rights etc. Without it you are just "a friend" with no rights in the eyes of the law.
-
Jerry 08/13/2010 4:26:00 AM
Gay marriage is not needed as much as equality in the partnership as far as Insurance etc. then all the rights married people get and it doesn't need to slap people in the face and make everyone mad it needs equality with another name.
-
Patrick Range McDonald 08/13/2010 3:18:00 AM
Hi Anthony C,
In terms of diversity, I made the point of writing where everyone came from, before they moved to West Hollywood, which happens to be a gay mecca in the U.S. They come from all different parts of the country--from the Bay Area to Lexington, Kentucky, to Iowa--and there were two lesbians, two or three gay Jews, a Latino, and another gay man with Native American blood. That seems pretty diverse to me. They are certainly not all white preppies. You are correct, however, in how the "No on 8" campaign didn't do a better job of reaching out to people of color. In fact, I wrote one of the first, if not the first, article about that a week after Prop. 8 was passed in 2008.
http://www.laweekly.com/2008-11-13/news/the-left-39-s-dirty-laundry-over-prop-8/
Thanks for your input, though, and thanks for taking the time to read the piece.
Take care,
Patrick Range McDonald,
staff writer, LA Weekly
-
Anthony C 08/12/2010 10:23:00 PM
Not a very good article. Extremely narrow focussed and shallow.
The writer couldn't find a gay person outside of West Hollywood? Come on? The article kicks itself in the ass by seeking to discuss the diversity of views but then only talks to one segment of one community. There are many, many gays outside of WeHo (try Glendale, Manhattan Beach, etc.) Sounds like he was just lazy or ill informed. He could've have gone to Silver Lake for christ sakes.
Beside that point, many young people, gay and straight, are not interested in marriage right now anyway. Particular if you're not in a relationship. And especially if they're still in he youth driven party culture of West Hollywood. Talk to younger gays outside of West Hollywood (perhaps even some that are actually in relationships) and I believe you'll find that gay marriage is a practical and real issue for them not just a symbolic fight. It's not insignificant that the writer fails to mention if any of the WeHoians interviewed in the article are actually in relationships. Isn't that critically important to an article that asks 'are you interested in getting married'?
And on diversity, the issue with outreach and Prop 8, the faiilure of the No on Prop. 8 campaign was in not reaching out to people of color within the gay community and in the straight community. The writer only reinforces with his "WeHo only" view of the gay world. The No on Prop. 8 campaign conducted little to no outreach to gays of color. Hello? There are thousands of black, latino, and asian gays and lesbians living in Los Angeles. Have you been to Catch One or Fai Do Do? Unfortunately, old school gay activism has focused on the 1980's TV image of the white, gay preppy guy as the model. That is simply not true anymore, especially in California and in Southern California in particular.
A sad miss on both points for this article. Could've been great...instead disappointingly shallow.
-
Steven R. 08/12/2010 11:35:00 AM
Great article. I completely agree with this statement: "Younger gays don't see themselves as a subculture anymore...They have goals in life just like anyone else, and they want many of the traditional things that the mainstream has to offer." This is increasingly the attitude among the young, and I think we should embrace it. Subculture certainly has its place, but any struggle for equality belongs in the mainstream. Let's keep it there, front and center, until we prevail.
-
Miki Jackson 08/12/2010 10:18:00 AM
These young people have an excellent perspective. This is about equality over all, and that is what we must fight for. To be fair, a lot of us who are not as young see it that way. Robin Tyler, a pioneer in this fight and one of the original parties to sue the state, has said from day one that this is about full equality, our full rights as human beings.
One other thing, while Gay rights (and any other rights') activists always need and usually want, to reach out in every way - activists aren't some separate breed of human with "right's activist" written on their foreheads when born and a job divinely assigned. We are people just like everyone else, we are trying to do a job we have shouldered. Everyone who is waiting to be "reached out to" in some fashion that suits them perfectly ... I have a news flash - do what the rest of us did - get up on your own and go to work on getting your and everyone elses' rights. If you know enough to know about being "reached out to" you know enough to do it yourself. No one is sending a limo. Activists have being going to battle under their own steam since before there was a word for it, before any of us were born. No one is going to serve your (or anyone elses') rights up on a silver platter - you have to go and get them. You will feel much better having done it that way in any case.
