Originally Posted By Mr F How is that proposition gonna work? How do you PROVE that someone is Gay or not before you let them foster children?
Originally Posted By oc_dean This is nail-biting: 12,193 of 25,429 precincts reporting (48%) Gay Marriage Yes, 2,983,710 53% No, 2,696,329 47%
Originally Posted By oc_dean And if it passes... means nothing in the long run. It WILL be contended with in one fashion or another. Just watch!
Originally Posted By Sara Tonin And most of the "experts" are saying this really won't affect people who have already entered into a valid, legal marriage.
Originally Posted By oc_dean I think now that Obama is president ... I think a feeling will sweep the country .. that will point it in the direction of being more tolerant and accepting. It won't be overnight, though. So, if this measure happens .. all it does it build an even larger momentum to knock bigotry and discrimination right back into it's ugly arse.
Originally Posted By WorldDisney This would really suck if this didnt pass . To all my gay and lesbian friends out there, I would feel bad if this does get banned. America is just an ebb and flow kind of a place, isnt it? The same country that overwelming voted for a Black President now cant stand the site of gays and lesbians married although they been doing it for years now and as far as *I* can tell, heterosexual marriage doesn't look like it has been destroyed or anything. *sigh*
Originally Posted By WorldDisney And O.C. Dean, I am SO freaking sorry! I completely forgot about the PM until I saw your name. You have every right to hate me . Expect an email soon, PROMISE this time!!
Originally Posted By fkurucz <<I can't tell you how much I dislike Mormons, no matter how this turns out.>> You are in good company then. Many Protestant Fundamentalists share your feelings of blanket condemnation.
Originally Posted By FerretAfros So it looks like they still haven't officially called it yet. It's kind of interesting to me, since they called many states that were a lot closer in percentages last night with fewer precincts' information, yet they're having a tougher time calling this single proposition. I guess we can all figure out which side the media outlets are on with this one. I was only able to find one article about it since yesterday, and it says that the people against it (and for gay marriages) say it's too close to call, but the people for it (and against gay marriages) called it a victory a few hours ago. I'm assuming that means it passed, as they can call these things fairly early with pretty accurate results. Last I saw last night, Yes was leading around 55% to 45%, which is a lot more than either Presidential candidate won most states by, so it looks like it passed. Here's a link to the only article I could find... "Sponsors of the ban declared victory early Wednesday, but the measure's opponents said too many votes remained uncounted for the race to be called." <a href="http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081105/ap_on_el_st_lo/ballot_measures" target="_blank">http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/200...measures</a>
Originally Posted By davewasbaloo Can I ask a question? Is this about romantic recognition or protection of family relationships? I was thinking about this (and I will not let my feelings get in the way here). But what if this were more about domicilliary rights - the protection of an adult couple inhabiting the same abode to be able to share tax, asset, and next of kin rights whether they be straight, gay, bi, or simply two elderly siblings sharing their home? Would that perhaps be a step change that would be acceptable to all parties as a step change?
Originally Posted By mele Sadly, dave, the pro prop 8 people feel that civil unions are all that is needed here. However, when told that civil unions do not cover everything and are not recognized federal level, they disappear and refuse to answer those questions. I am friends with a gay couple. One is American, the other British. Her British partner cannot come to America for them to be married because our government doesn't recognize their relationship. It's disgusting and so very wrong but people don't care about that. They're just afraid their children will hear about gay people and suddenly decide to be gay, themselves. They think by allowing gay couples to enjoy the same rights they enjoy, the government would be encouraging homosexuality. Their complete denial of the facts is frightening. They're so afraid of gays ruining their lives that they've refused to listen to the facts. They're choosing ot remain frightened instead of using logic. Not once have the pro Prop 8 people listened to the arguments. They just keep saying the same things, over and over, and we keep showing them how their fears are unfounded. It's very sad. Many families will be hurt by this but we've actually been told that the best families (and the ones that matter the most) are the "traditional" families. Unconcionable.
Originally Posted By BlueDevilSF Dave, I think I would say "All of the above." There are so many hoops we have to jump through in order to secure our property rights and the other things that straight married couples take for assumption and for granted. My partner and I had to make several trips to a lawyer to accomplish all of this, and I still worry we don't have all of our bases covered. I'm not so concerned about my family contesting anything, but I am concerned about his. I am also very concerned in light of my health situation. We have had to fight to get him treated and regarded as a spouse by the doctors and medical professionals I have to see on a frequent basis. So far they have been pretty respectful outside of an immediate medical crisis, but again, we have to be supervigilant about it. Can I expect him to receive the same treatment and consideration in the heat of a medical emergency as I would if I were straight and married to a woman? I honestly couldn't care less about the opinions of others on the validity of my relationship. If I did, I'd never sleep at night. So, I don't necessarily view same-sex marriage as an inclusionary issue. As I've said on numerous occasions, it is *always* going to be "us vs. them." The majority (and I'm looking at the LDS yahoos here) will never, ever come around on this subject. They cannot and will not see the human side of the issue, and that makes them dangerous. Personally I have always been in favor of civil unions as long as they grant the same, exact things. I am willing to let the people bleating about redefining marriage to keep the word "marriage." Language will catch up over time.
Originally Posted By gottaluvdavillains The news just said the bigot hate mongers won 52% to 48% they said the precincts not reported yet are not enough to change the result.
Originally Posted By ADMIN <font color="#FF0000">Message removed by an administrator. <a href="MsgBoard-Rules.asp" target="_blank">Click here</a> for the LaughingPlace.com Community Standards.</font>
Originally Posted By EighthDwarf I am really angry about this. I think "freedom of religion" has gone too far. It's time for "freedom FROM religion."
Originally Posted By davewasbaloo See, now I wonder if there is another approach that could be made here. I would love to see a world where families are protected - straight, gay, the elderly siblings etc. Why can we not have a situation where an individual defines their family (perhaps based on tenancy and duration periods)? With the protections that traditional marriage offers. This would help everyone then - makes it less about sexual lifestyle and focuses more on one's nuclear family. It protects the growing elderly population. It serves the interests of everyone here. What if a bill were served in such a way, then it would be easier to transition over time, while helping an even large cohort of the population?
Originally Posted By davewasbaloo >>>It's time for "freedom FROM religion."<<< This is definately where Jefferson got it right. The god squad has really screwed up America over the years.
Originally Posted By markymouse I know it looks really, really bad. But Yahoo is still going with the premise that it is too close to call because there are 3 million (yes, 3 MILLION) uncounted mail in and provisional ballots. That is a lot. And it could be a demographic that could go our way. People who are modern enough to switch to voting by mail are modern enough to leave gay people alone. I'm not optimistic. But that is why we shouldn't throw in the towel.
Originally Posted By Mr F What are you talking about WorldDisney? Prop 8 is NOT supposed to pass, If it did it would ban gay marriage, that is what we are all fighting.
