Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.

Proposition 8 opponents concede defeat – gay marriage banned in California

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. This sucks. Instead of banning gay marriage, homosexuality ought to be encouraged because it shortens life span by 20-30 years:

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9923159

    But it’s not enough. To really control population effectively I suggest we bring back smoking by propagandizing it in schools and colleges as yet another cool and chic lifestyle. But not regular smoking, that only takes 5-7 years out of a kid’s average lifespan. What we need is 4-pack a day heavy smoking. That would take out 20-30 years and be on par with homosexuality.

    Ideally we should promote heavy smoking and homosexuality together thereby yielding a combined 40-60 year life span reduction. Now that’s real population control efficiency.

    Please remember that unless stopped mankind will continue devastating the environment and destroying species after species. It therefore follows that anyone against homosexuality or heavy smoking is anti-earth.

    Robert

  2. i want to thank all the black voters for being wise. Good job!! for making the right decision. we have a lot of opposers, but i like how this made us unite in this way. a lot of russians missed the deadline to register , and couldnt vote.. in which of coarse they all wouldve voted yes. [no privacy needed] freedom of speech baby.(which would have made us win by way more than 52%) But to my surprise african americans helped out a big deal. yes. marriage should be between a man and a woman. and YES the BIBLE. the HOLY word supports it. no reason to hide it. If God is my life, then why should i hide the way that helped me make my decision. i want to give props to all the black preachers who state that openly either, becuase like it says in the BIble, “If God is with us, then who can be against us?” also.. In John 15:18 it says – If the world hates you, remember that it hated me first.Jesus wants us to know that we shouldn’t worry about being hated for righteosness sake. It is inevitable— that when you live a Christ-like life in a secular world you will be hated–b/c you are not like them. ppl tend to hate those who are different yet make change. He was the first to bear the hatred for being a light in a dark world. SO LET US KEEP SHINING. STAY STRONG MY FELLOW CHRISTIANS! GOD BLESS!!

  3. Inka, why the need to show off your stupidity and bigotry in a gay site with a incoherent rant like that? We’re simply dazzled by your command of English language, I can only assume a college education?

    Thankfully not everyone is a blindly foolish as you, if they wear, humanity would be still banging two rocks together to make a fire. To comment black people for supporting a gay marriage ban only shows irony, don’t you think, given that they were wearing chains 200 years ago in your country, the so called “land of the free”. Maybe if you and your kind actually followed the word of Jesus, you might deserve the name “christian”, but its clear you’re not a christian, and Jesus didn’t have much time for your kind.

    And if you were even slightly mathematically minded, 52% is *very* far a big majority… its a handful of voters. In 2000, the majority on Proposition 22 was 61%. See a pattern here, or are you bright enough? You better hope this doesn’t go back to the people, as the tide is in out favour, and the trend indicated *next* time it will pass.

    The battle lost is not the war lost, and we will have our victory when your kind is still screaming in fear at the sun to make sure it rises in the morning.

  4. TO ALL WHO DO NOT SUPPORT GAY MARRIAGE:

    I think you’re good people, like me. I pay my taxes that support my schools and religious institutions so they can give back to the community. I don’t hurt anyone and only try to help. I oppose people who try to infringe on religious freedoms, and I don’t seek to infringe upon what “marriage” means to you. I appreciate that most of you DO approve of ‘domestic partnerships’ and ‘civil unions’ for gay people, but please listen to why that doesn’t work.

    The federal government gives married people about 1000 rights. The state gives them about 400 additional rights. The reason the government is involved in marriage at all is to promote and protect stable, happy families as basic units of society. Obviously marriage is not solely for procreation, as we do not remove that right from you if you are infertile, elderly, or choose not to have children. When you marry, you are automatically entitled to those 1400 rights, including the right to visit a spouse in the hospital, be added to your spouse’s insurance policies, acquire property with your spouse and automatically inherit it if your spouse dies, and many more. These 1400 rights are not simply and easily written up in a single civil document, nor always enforceable; for instance, a person under a state’s domestic partnership can’t force the IRS to give him the tax breaks afforded to married couples. It is extremely complex and doesn’t always work; I am aware of gay people whose partners died and the deceased’s hostile family successfully asserted their ownership of everything in spite of the contract, leaving the survivor destitute. Imagine children being involved, and a deceased partner’s hostile family takes your children from you because your civil contract didn’t stand up in court proving you were next of kin! In Arkansas, the majority just voted to prohibit unmarried people from adopting, meaning a gay person can’t even adopt their partner’s children to ensure that if their partner dies the children will remain with the surviving parent they love!

    ‘Civil unions’ and ‘domestic partnerships’ permit OSTENSIBLY most of the 400 state-afforded rights of married couples, but NONE of the 1000 federal ones, and I can tell you from personal experience that the state ones are NOT equal. Just one example is that to get on my partner’s insurance policy, we had to provide my certificate of domestic partnership, copies of financial records proving we had co-mingled finances and lived in the same home for at least two years, and more. If I died, my partner would have to wait at least two years to add her new partner to the policy to prove the relationship was ‘real’. Married people don’t even need to provide a copy of a marriage license, and if their spouse died today, they could add a new spouse tomorrow. This is only one example out of MANY.

    Other rights are specific to helping children of married people, including ensuring automatic inheritance rights, the right of a non-blood related parent to pick up a sick child from school, alimony and child support to help with their care in the event of divorce, and many more. No matter the makeup of the family or how it comes to be — be it traditional nuclear, or grandparents raising their grandchild, or a blended family resulting from divorced people remarrying, or single parents, or adoptive parents, or childless couples, or gay couples — ALL of these people deserve the same rights so they have the best chances of happiness and contribution to society.

    What I would like to see the FEDERAL government do is create one proto-marriage type of relationship (‘civil union’?) that applies equally to all people who want it, including granting them all 1400 of the rights and responsibilities that “married” people currently enjoy, and then simply leave the word “marriage” for religiously-inclined people who want to further consecrate their relationship according to their religions. I think that is what the MAJORITY of us all want. Unfortunately, the federal government is currently leaving the issue to states to decide, so we are stuck wrestling for the one word that currently encompasses all 1400 of those rights, and that word is “marriage”. Granting the existing rights encompassed by one word to a minority is a lot easier than changing 1400 laws to encompass them. That’s really all there is to it, see?

    I understand many of you are afraid that legalizing gay marriage will lead to your children being forced to learn in school that homosexuality is “normal”. I will be the first to agree with you that homosexuality is NOT “normal” – the parts don’t fit and we can’t make babies. But consider that in one out of every 100 live births, a child is born with ambiguous genitalia (intersexed). If God creates 1% of babies that way, why do we then do surgery to “correct” them to one sex or the other and make them “normal”? God made me abnormal too – I’m among the small percentage of people whose wiring is crossed so I’m attracted to my own sex. My abnormality doesn’t lead me to hurt anyone. The worst law I’ve ever broken is the speed limit. Learning that homosexuals exist isn’t going to turn any child homosexual, but it will help the small percentage born with this abnormality to feel less alone. That’s really the worst that could happen.

    As for the slippery slope arguments that legalizing gay marriage will automatically lead to legalizing polygamy or incestuous marriages, those forms of marriage existed throughout most of recorded history but are too impractical or undesirable for the vast majority of Americans to even consider. As for legalizing gay marriage leading to legalizing people marrying pets or children, these can’t even give informed consent. Please stay off the slippery slope; the ONLY topic we’re asking you to agree on is legalizing gay marriage.

    We gay people and our families are being hurt by laws as they stand, and all we are asking for is the concession that the word “marriage” include us so we may enjoy its rights – and responsibilities. I will leave you with the words of Mildred Loving, who wrote this forty years after her 1967 legal case struck down laws barring interracial marriage:

    “Surrounded as I am now by wonderful children and grandchildren, not a day goes by that I don’t think of Richard and our love, our right to marry, and how much it meant to me to have that freedom to marry the person precious to me, even if others thought he was the ‘wrong kind of person’ for me to marry. I believe all Americans, no matter their race, no matter their sex, no matter their sexual orientation, should have that same freedom to marry.”

    Peace.

  5. Inka, I’m trying not to prejudge you by your irregular grammar and sentence structure but I do think that it indicates that you’re not much of a reader. Therefore you may not have read the Bible in its entirety and may not actually be aware that nowhere does it proscribe against gay marriage. The Bible does however celebrate several close and loving same-sex relationships, including that of Ruth and Naomi. I think it’s curious that, if being gay is the ultimate sin that the modern right-wing church likes to suggest, Jesus did not mention it as such and instead spent so much time trying to improve the lives of the persecuted. As the Yes on 8 vote suggests, you are in the majority (and therefore not hated by the world). It’s therefore illogical to use that quote from the book of John as you try to stir up further hatred against a minority who are already subjected to the kind of persecution which Christ (if He lived) would have condemned.

  6. If the president of the united states is black – gay marriage will pass in america and europe – it is just a question of time
    Women voting – women priest – abortion – anti race laws – and one day same sex marriage for all.
    Religion or not – it will pass

  7. Inka – thanks for those inspiring words from John 15:18 “If the world hates you, remember that it hated me first.” A great comfort for homosexual men and women everywhere who have to endure hatred, ignorance and violence from their fellow men on the simple basis of the way they were born. The message of Christianity is not only for those that like to wear it on their sleeve.

  8. Inka – I can’t really add much to what everyone else here has pointed out to you, but I’d just like to underline that the same religious right that prevented gay equality this time was the reigious right wing that tried (and subsequently failed) to prevent black equality previously. The KKK was supposedly a christian organisation, at least on paper, thus the burning crosses.
    It seems that a hardcore of so-called Christians feel they can only unite properly when they’re taking someone else’s human rights away under the flawed premise that “God told me to do it”.

  9. Very eloquent message Paula – the only thing that concerns me is that you refer to yourself as ‘abnormal’, your not – you’re gay.

  10. Why the HELL are they ignoring THREE MILLION ABSENTEE BALLOTS?! One of those votes is MINE!

  11. Back to Inca’a first statement – unless I missed a really big political change if they are Russian they can’t vote in an American election! Americans living in Russia maybe? If so then I would be less hasty to predict their result – they own a passport, so they must believe that the world isn’t flat for starters!

  12. Robert, ex-pat Brit 7 Nov 2008, 1:49pm

    Inka, apparently you know nothing of American history. If you recall, it was black people who were discriminate against for more than 200 years. It is the same people who voted for passage of proposition 8. They have learned absolutely nothing about their own history and the anti-miscegenation laws included (a law that forbade interracial marriages). Go back to your history books Inka, read and learn before you make such bigoted statements and while we’re at it, refer to the following link http://www.fallwell.com and learn about the hypocrisy of religion.

    Paula, last time I checked, there are 1324 federal rights and privileges bestowed on married couples and 400 at the state level.

  13. Inca, read this:

    “Almighty God created the races white, black, yellow, and red, and he placed them on separate continents. And but for the interference with his arrangement there would be no cause for such marriages. The fact that he separated the races shows that he did not intend for the races to mix.”

    Not my words, that of the Virginia Judge who defended anti-miscegenation/racial segregation. See how he uses GOD to justify his racism? Easy, isn’t it? If there is a God, I imagine that hating other people and using His word to justify it would sicken him.
    Inca, you’re utterly wrong in what you say and you sadden me. Don’t turn around and victimise other minorities just because you have YOUR rights now.

  14. Robert, ex-pat Brit 7 Nov 2008, 7:35pm

    Robert, go back to the cave and to the rock from under which you have crawled, you neanderthal! Amazing how you breeders beget ignorance from one generation to the next, you’re obviously living in a red “loser” state. Get over it, Obama won!

These comments are un-moderated and do not necessarily represent the views of PinkNews. If you believe that a comment is inappropriate or libellous, please contact us.

Top commenters this week

Latest stories

See all