Prop 8 Nov. 15 Protest

[a.e.B.O.T.]

Ok, so today there will be protests across the nation... I am a news junkie, and I have heard a lot of issues regarding reactions to this proposition... anywho, I am curious how this protest will go in other towns...

[NinjaPoodle]

I will be there here in San Francisco taking lots of pictures.

[LightBulb]

Oh, awesome; I didn't know this was coordinated. I did sumble across a lively one while walking down the street in Morgantown, West Virginia.

It was sponsored by the BiGLTM (Bisexual, Gay, Lesbian, & Transgendered Mountaineers).

[BabyPiNK_FL]

I tried to go. i mean I did. I got there just after they finished. I guess I have trouble noticing the correct time of events . It was sad. I made such a pretty poster. It said "Str8 against H8" with the 8s in rainbow patterns.

It was so funny because when we went to get a henna tatoo down on South Beach before going home we were telling the guy how we missed our protest and he's like "Oh, I'm so sorry you and you girlfriend missed it." And my little sister was like, "No, she's my sorority big sis! Neither of us are gay!"

[a.e.B.O.T.]

well, I heard that there were 40,000 in SanFran... which is a hell of a lot me thinks...

[PhiGam]

They should have put these resources into lobbying and campaigning instead of protesting after the fact

[AGDee]

I think it's going to be some time before the majority of the people are willing to consider the idea of gay marriage in most localities. In 2004, Michigan voters passed the amendment to define marriage as "between one man and one woman" and we're a very blue state too.

I think we need to get rid of the term marriage altogether, except as a religious ceremony. Make the license for EVERYBODY say "Civil Union License" and make the rights the same as they are for marriage currently. This would be your legal version of marriage. The religious version would be up to the churches entirely, just like Baptism or other ceremonies are. The only thing is, I don't like the term civil union itself because I'm not sure what you would say "We're getting unionized" doesn't seem like a logical term to me. "We're getting civilized" doesn't work either. "We're being civil unionized"? "We're being partnered" ??? I just don't know what to really call it so that it makes sense. Take the religion completely out of the legal aspect of the whole thing. Then the government is allowing the same thing for any consenting adult and the churches can do what they want. The more I think about this, the more I think this is the way to go. It seems ridiculous to have to spend the kind of money it would take to do this when there is already a legal institution in place, but the term "marriage" has too many religious connotations to too many people at this point. This would better solidify a separation of church and state.

[ThetaPrincess24]

Originally Posted by PhiGam

They should have put these resources into lobbying and campaigning instead of protesting after the fact

That would have been the logical thing to do.


I support the ban, but I think civil unions should be allowed in every state.

[Munchkin03]

Originally Posted by PhiGam

They should have put these resources into lobbying and campaigning instead of protesting after the fact

I guess you're not familiar with the insane amount of lobbying, campaigning, and grassroot efforts that took place in California prior to the Prop 8 vote. Unlike Amendment 2 in Florida, which was obviously going to pass, polls taken about this were pretty much at a dead heat.

[Scandia]

There was one in my city yesterday that some of my friends attended. It was a protest for my state's similar amendment, but it would work for 8 as well. I was unable to attend because I was conducting a program at work that got a lot of people.

[a.e.B.O.T.]

Here is where I see the issue getting iffy... Ok, one of the big propaganda things during the yes on prop 8 campaign was that Catholic Adoption Agencies pulled out of Mass, because they were required to allow same sex marriages to adopt. Here we have the government forcing themselves on to religious beliefs, while the other side argues that religious beliefs should stay out of the government... I believe in gay marriage and gay rights... I believe it is their civil right to be recognized by the government. I ALSO believe in separation of the church of state, meaning that if a Church doesn't want to marry homosexuals, or provide them with adoption, they shouldn't have to... it gets iffy when you think about however, how far the church then would be allow to discriminate, and that is where I get perplexed

[LightBulb]

Prop 8 is evolving... No on Shrimp

[RU OX Alum]

Originally Posted by LightBulb

Prop 8 is evolving... No on Shrimp

hahahahaha

[agzg]

That Holocaust argument is really bothering me.

The Jews, Catholics, Homosexuals, Gypsies, etc., were all rounded up and persecuted. Not only them, but people who helped them, or liked them, sometimes people that were really only neighbors. Poles were persecuted, just by nature of being from Poland. Why does everyone forget this stuff?

Just because there are some logical fallacies involved in comparing separate but equal for Blacks/Whites, does not mean that it is not the most appropriate comparison to the Gay Marriage issue.

Unless the next step is not only to deny marriage rights, but then to round up all the Gays, friends of Gays, neighbors of Gays, people that know Gays, people that employ Gays, etc, then just to make a topper on it, people with red hair, and throw them in the gas chamber.

The two are not really comparable. Add on top of that that the Holocaust was a European experience (yes I know that many Americans were affected by it, but after the fact or they left before it happened), while the Black/White issue, as it's being discussed here, was an American experience.

Perhaps a closer comparison might lie in the Japanese internment camps. Except we're not rounding up every homosexual and making them live in camps because we're afraid of espionage.

[sigmadiva]

Originally Posted by alphagamzetagam

That Holocaust argument is really bothering me.

Good. Now you know how I feel when people try to make comparisons of gay rights with Black American struggle for civil rights - there is no comparison.

But, if the gay rights issue wants to align themselves with other people who have been persecuted, then why not the Jews too? Why not American Indians? Why not the Japanese in the US during WWII?

If gays feel that they are being maligned for what ever reason, then I don't think they should just base their argument on one group. There are plenty other groups out there too.

So, instead of just showing a White only / Black only water fountain, why not depict Jews being rounded up a forced to live in one area, and the same for American Indians.