Jack & Jill Politics

No disrespect to anybody, but of all the problems facing the state of California and this is what's getting people all wild up? I mean, I can bet my whole life that the slave-like living conditions of [undocumented] orange pickers, or the janitors and cleaning crew working throughout the UC campuses would not get the people (both in favor and against Prop 8) to give a flying squat.

It is this type of identity/cultural issues that poisons our politics and both sides are guilty of it. Hey California, how about you fix your healthcare problems? your budgets problems? Or the fact that there are more homeless people in CA than in a whole lot of states combined? How about your education system?

Why can't we concentrate on giving all people all rights. If you do that then you don't have any of the lack of healthcare, which would give those who need medical attention on the streets off the streets, those who are on the streets because of overwhelming healtcare monetary problems off the streets. This would ease the system to help those who are on the streets for other problems.

I don't see how spending time denying rights to anyone is helpful or civil or just.

I don't understand the exceptional rights part. They are asking not to be discriminated against marrying. I do respect that you may feel that there is an issue with the idea of same gender marriage, however.

WHAT (society chooses NOT)?

The same society that CHOSED not to accept yr ancestor humanity NOT so long AGO?

How many Afro-Americans or Euro-Americans today or EVER contributed MORE to human kind than James Baldwin or Langston Hughes?

WOW!
Are you sexually THIS insecure?

After gay marriage is approved homelessness will not disappear. My point is that people are all wild up, yet the same folks (on both sides) dont give two whims about issues that affect far more people such as the education and healthcare system. The same can be said about the wage and working conditions for migrant workers. Show me folks putting the same kind of effort on behalf of the UC low wage workers, or the orange picker….Now there you have two groups of folks who are truly dehumanized and treated as if they were subhuman.

Is gay marriage the most pressing issue affecting the state of California? And would u compare your plight in life as a Lesbian with that of those who pick oranges in the fields? Or the array of homeless women and men in the streets of San Francisco, Sacramento, and Los Angeles?

Hey, I didn't put it on the ballot. But since you ask, there are Lesbians and Gay men picking oranges in the fields. And there are lots Lesbian and Gay homeless in the streets. Including Lesbian and Gay youth who have been kicked out of their families. We are everywhere. And it's not a zero sum game. Why can't we have a government that treats all people with dignity and respect and equality under the law?

If we were not granting exceptions to marriage there would not be an issue. Every human being in our society already has the ability to marry the opposite sex, regardless of what they want to do in their bedroom behind closed doors. Same gender marriage is therefore an exception to the present status quo.

Your riddle would best be answered at a red state site.

That;s what I feel I am saying.

Lets concentrate on treating everyone with respect and make sure that they have their civil rights that are basically human rights.
I don't see how spending time on a constitutional amendment propels human rights for anyone. It just makes the people who believe in the idea of marriage to be one man and one woman feel better about their own marriae somehow.. They spend their time working on this issue instead of issues that directly affects the lives of the people around them.

I am not gay. I don't really consider myself someone who pushes an agenda for the gay community. I don't see how their being allowed to marry though, being any concern ,let alone problem, to me. Change the wording of marriage to say two legal adults and be done with it.
Then a dedicated couple can have the rights of other dedicated couples. They can divorce and then lose those rights along with the other now not so dedicated couples. Those couples, same sex or mixed do not interfer in my daily life. They are free to unite and disband at their own will.

Usually I don't answer neanderthal remarks like yours but here goes: Do you think that childless heterosexual couple's should have their marriage license revoked?

I have three children from a same sex “marriage” so your theory is bunk.

I respectively ask how marriage hurts anyone?
DUI hurts us with the expense of police hours working the person through the system. It there is public damage, that too. What if someone is injured?

To the other post about rape and incest, I have to say even if it doesn't happen to me, which isn't true, it still affects me when it happens to others. The paralleling rape, DUIs , incest to a rite and a contract between two consenting adults is bizarre and frankly, troubling.

I am anxious to hear how a marriage has hurt society except in the monetary instance of two powerful families joining their estates.

If you have personal issues which will not allow you to discuss this rationally that is understandable

however if you choose to have a rational discussion and cannot refrain from making heathen remarks I will disengage.. The statements of fact I posted are backed by an avalanche of research as opposed to the personal anecdotes you are offering.

Childless couples are not the issue. The issue is that if the marriage is heterosexual it provides the most compatible stable unit for the development of children to the maximum of their potential. The benefits society grants to married couples is for society not for the individuals.

The benefits are granted by adults because it is our responsiblity to create a society that is most conducive to raising children vs. one which places it's priorities on aberrant sexual desires. Adults are to set standards which allow children to flourish in society not to satisfy some sexual needs of individuals.

At no time do same gender sex marriages model the norms society chooses to encourage. Whereas, childless heterosexual marriages do, given as they encourage men and women to marry thus creating far more stable communities vs. either gender engaging in promiscuous behavior or serial monogamy.

None of this is theory it is thoroughly researched facts on developing human potential and the impact of the same and opposite gender on the developing child.

Anyone who was raised without a father or mother in the home can attest to the emotional limitations such environments create. Most important being the inability or difficulty to relate to the gender abscence in the home. As well as the challenge of having their own relationship with the opposite gender having not ever had one modeled to understand the give and take involved in adult relationships particularly those which involve intimacy.

your last sentence is–in essence–why i will be voting against prop 8. however, i fully agree with AM2k6's point that california has many pressing urgent issues which need to be addressed. life-or-death issues (jobs, budget crises, homelessness, uninsured children, substandard public education) do not get the attention they deserve in this state, and that's a damn shame.

i do not see how marriage equity is a life-or-death issue, but i can't support a proposition that has discrimination as its basic premise.

It is funny that you mentioned the children as “bastards” since one of the key Republicans in this country, VP Dick Cheney welcomed a a “bastard” grandson about 2 years ago through his lesbian daughter Mary. Mary had this child, through artificial insemination, with her partner Heather Poe. I am almost certain that Cheney adores his grandchild, much like most loving humans do, since most humans know HOW to love regardless of what their sexual orientation is.

Now in the event that Mary Cheney is no longer available to take care of her child that she decided to raise with Heather Poe—is it fair for Heather to be shut out of this child's life since she is the woman who was loved and committed to his mother? Or does love conquer all in this case?

Better yet, will it be different because it is Dick Cheney's daughter, since we are all aware that Republicans/conservatives reek of hypocrisy—-and the moral rules only apply to others?

There's no contradiction once you realize who's pushing these issues in the first place. These WMD – weapons of mass distraction tactics – are just the cries of “there's the wolf” while they rob us blind.

Bastard refers to a child not born into a legal marriage. If you were trying to construe it's use as different from that your presumptions are wrong. The reason the children were bastards is because there was no father legally responsible financially to support the child. I have no issue with anyone recognizing any child that is solely their responsibility. However, under the law, no man is finacially responsible for children not legally born into a marriage.

Marriage is not about being fair. That is one of the non-logical arguments folks attempt to use to justify that which has no real justification. Heather has made a choice to enter into a relationship which grants her no legal rights. That is her perogative. I do not have to support her aberrant, deviant choices simply because you perceive not to as unfair.

What I think is unfair is to raise any child without a mother or father in their home. I am not concerned with the irrational narcissitic choices Heather makes as an adult. It is children who need to be protected from individuals who care more about their genital needs than doing what is in the best interest of children. How anyone could possibly think it was 'fair' to use your criteria to be raised fatherless or motherless to satisfy some adults sexual desires is beyond me, Now, that to me is cold blooded and cold hearted…no love there at all. When adult sexual needs supercedes children's RIGHTS it is inhumane.

Dick Cheney claimed that boy so that he would not have to endure the aberrant circumstances his daughter has placed that male child in. Dick understands the child needs to even if his own daughter is too caught up in having her sexual needs met that she didn't care enough to raise him with father.

He's not going to answer that, Liza, because he can't. In any case, gay marriage will not do anymore in society than hetro marriages, which means y'all should have the same opportunity for high rates of divorce just like we hets have.

I'm a Christian, but when I see what other “christians” do in Jesus' name, I literally throw up in my mouth because those individuals believe Jesus is either too dumb or too lazy to sort things out Himself. My job is to practice unconditional love and acceptance of everyone I meet – to be admiring of strengths and tolerant of weakness, as well as being accepting of all. If that doesn't fit with my understanding of God, I guess He will show me the way to go.

But that doesn't mean I impose my beliefs on someone else, especially if they don't want them. If gays are discriminated against, what's to stop the government from trying to overturn Loving v. Virginia and outlawing interracial marriages? I'm against any form of discrimination because if it's allow against one group of people, it will not be long before there's an attempt to extend the discrimination to others.

White Rose Buddy, what about THAT you don't see?

From what I've read here, it seems that whiterosebuddy seems to believe homosexual individuals are not actually humans, but some sort of sub-human species. Its that type of scary belief that you really can't reason with….you just can't. I don't understand it and I don't want too. I just pray there are more people who see discrimination in any form as discrimination in EVERY form.

I'll add… Barrack Obama's position is that it should NOT be Federally banned AND be left up to the states.

As is also the position of Joe Biden, Dianne Feinstein, Harry Reid and even Hillary Clinton. All very important Dems.

I'll add… Barrack Obama's position is that it should NOT be Federally banned AND be left up to the states.

As is also the position of Joe Biden, Dianne Feinstein, Harry Reid and even Hillary Clinton. All very important Dems.