Issue Date: 10/6/08
Prop. 8 is about meaningless semantics
If passed, Proposition 8 - a proposition on the ballot for the Nov. 4 California General Election - would eliminate the right for same-sex couples to marry.
While the right was previously banned in the state, the Supreme Court of California voted May 15 to allow same-sex marriages in a 4-to-3 decision.
An item as controversial as gay marriage should not be left up to seven people in the Supreme Court who are not elected but instead appointed. With the subject on the ballot, Californians get to have a say in the matter.
Former California Governor Grey Davis signed a domestic partner bill into law in 1999. This made California the first state to recognize same-sex couples. In California, domestic partners have most of the same legal rights as married couples.
The last time this country had separate but equal opportunities for two groups of people, the civil rights movement was in full swing.
While California has been scrutinized over the matter, it is one of only two states, the other being Massachusetts, to turn a great amount of attention toward the subject.
Same-sex marriages have been a lightning rod for controversy in religious groups. Religious groups fear same-sex marriages will disgrace the sanctity of marriage.
If about 50 percent of marriages end in divorce, how can we say the term has any sacredness in the first place? The idea has been made into a joke.
In retrospect, it is an argument over a word. If marriage is a sacred term, the groups using it for countless centuries can voice their disgust with it being used in any sense they feel unfit. However, if it is a matter of hatred or non-acceptance that makes religious groups fight so hard to hold onto the word, that is just being too stubborn to change. Besides, in America, there is the idea of separation of church and state.
The passing of Prop. 8 takes away from homosexuals some of the validity that comes with a marriage. Rather than being able to introduce a significant other as a husband, wife or spouse, same sex couples are left to introduce their "domestic partner."
The word marriage itself has no power. People put emphasis and context behind the word and believe it to be something more than a definition of an action. The late George Carlin had seven words that couldn't be said on television, but they still served a purpose in the English language.
A same-sex marriage may not be a marriage as we know it, but it is still a union of two human beings who love each other.
After the election, whichever way the vote goes, it doesn't affect the law on a federal level. While couples may be "married" in California, their union will not be recognized in most of the United States.
Shakespeare famously said a rose by any other name would smell as sweet, but would a couple's union by any other name have as many benefits?
While the right was previously banned in the state, the Supreme Court of California voted May 15 to allow same-sex marriages in a 4-to-3 decision.
An item as controversial as gay marriage should not be left up to seven people in the Supreme Court who are not elected but instead appointed. With the subject on the ballot, Californians get to have a say in the matter.
Former California Governor Grey Davis signed a domestic partner bill into law in 1999. This made California the first state to recognize same-sex couples. In California, domestic partners have most of the same legal rights as married couples.
The last time this country had separate but equal opportunities for two groups of people, the civil rights movement was in full swing.
While California has been scrutinized over the matter, it is one of only two states, the other being Massachusetts, to turn a great amount of attention toward the subject.
Same-sex marriages have been a lightning rod for controversy in religious groups. Religious groups fear same-sex marriages will disgrace the sanctity of marriage.
If about 50 percent of marriages end in divorce, how can we say the term has any sacredness in the first place? The idea has been made into a joke.
In retrospect, it is an argument over a word. If marriage is a sacred term, the groups using it for countless centuries can voice their disgust with it being used in any sense they feel unfit. However, if it is a matter of hatred or non-acceptance that makes religious groups fight so hard to hold onto the word, that is just being too stubborn to change. Besides, in America, there is the idea of separation of church and state.
The passing of Prop. 8 takes away from homosexuals some of the validity that comes with a marriage. Rather than being able to introduce a significant other as a husband, wife or spouse, same sex couples are left to introduce their "domestic partner."
The word marriage itself has no power. People put emphasis and context behind the word and believe it to be something more than a definition of an action. The late George Carlin had seven words that couldn't be said on television, but they still served a purpose in the English language.
A same-sex marriage may not be a marriage as we know it, but it is still a union of two human beings who love each other.
After the election, whichever way the vote goes, it doesn't affect the law on a federal level. While couples may be "married" in California, their union will not be recognized in most of the United States.
Shakespeare famously said a rose by any other name would smell as sweet, but would a couple's union by any other name have as many benefits?
Viewing Comments 1 - 8 of 8
Mike
posted 10/07/08 @ 4:00 PM PST
If I'm not mistaken Obama has pledged to get DOMA repealed and therefore couples whose marriage is recognized by their state of residence would also be eligible for Social Security benefits and other federal benefits currently denied. (Continued…)
Timothy
posted 10/07/08 @ 4:21 PM PST
Anthony,
I'm disappointed at your lack of civic knowledge. Although Supreme Court justices receive appointment, they are also subject to election by the people. (Continued…)
You know you miss me!
posted 10/09/08 @ 7:03 PM PST
Hey! Don't hate on Anthony. He supports the gays whole-heartedly. Trust me, this I know.
Marie
posted 10/13/08 @ 9:46 AM PST
Children deserve to have a mother and a father and that being said even in nature amongst the mammals, let alone Biblical or religious beliefs, there is male and female
Most persons are taught to respect others, However a marriage is between a man and a woman to continue humankind and the family unit. (Continued…)
joshua saposnekoo
posted 10/23/08 @ 11:23 AM PST
i'm not "religious" but i believe jesus christ died on the cross for me so that i may be forgiven by him when its my turn to die, we're supposed to love our neighbors, not rally against propositions or politicians, i know alot of christians who hold this idea like they have to control what goes on around them, in all truth, the bible teaches you how to live a humble life, and how to be saved, not to rally or put anyone, or group down. (Continued…)
Robert
posted 11/21/08 @ 10:51 AM PST
I have no major religious views and I am not homophobic, but marriage is centralized around having a family and reproducing. Having two men or two women live together, obviously unable to reproduce, and trying to call it "marriage" is like modifying a Volkswagen Beetle to look like a Lotus: Though it may look exactly the same, it's clearly different upon closer examination. (Continued…)
Wilma Walker
posted 3/22/09 @ 12:19 AM PST
That looks like lots of fun. When I was in college we didn't had so many fun activities.
Katrina Arkwright
posted 3/23/09 @ 3:25 AM PST
That looks like lots of fun. When I was in college we didn't had so many fun activities.
Post a Comment