Gay Marriage to Alfred: Your Thoughts

Well, that's certainly where I learned to be gay.

SB 777 yo

Those WA numbers are whack and in conflict amongst themselves.

The tab characters disappeared in the text paste. :(. Sorry. Most of that list goes under the breakdown of "Christian". I think if you stop the subsection before "other religions" it makes more sense.

The statement that LDS was 2nd largest after Catholic doesn't jive with the 20%/3% numbers.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Washington#Religion

There's a sub-subsection, too. Maybe that makes more sense?

What was interesting to me on Saturday was that there was less of the anti-Mormon, anti-anything feeling about it all and more of a positive vibe about making this a broad civil rights thing; not specifically pro-gay but anti-enshrining discrimination in the State Constitution.

That's way fucking cool and admirable! I wish I could be the same. As an ex-mormon right now, I am even more embarrassed than usual and really want to slap the fucking bitch Mormons all over America who rallied aagainst a thing that was none of their fucking goddamn business (since most do not even live in California).

Fuck those fucking shitpie assfuck dipshits.

Oh, I've felt that way, Abbott, I just don't want this to turn into THAT kind of fight.

If WA (or the country as a whole) ever ends up with some sort of civil-union thing that nobody dares call "marriage" even though it is, the wife and I want to get divorced and immediately get civil-unionized. If marriage is only for churches they can have it; just let us file taxes together, visit each other in the hospital, adopt kids, etc.

Fuck my parents, fuck the church leaders, fuck the people in my old Ward who have 'vote no on Prop 8' facebook campaigns, fuck anyone who paid tithing, fuck the bishops, fuck the stake presidents, fuck the corpse of Gordon B. Hinckley for writing 'A Proclomation on the Family' (a document of epic homophobia), fuck 'love the sinner hate the sin,' fuck hating the sinner, fuck Utah, fuck seagulls, fuck Joseph Smith, fuck prophets of all decades, fuck seminary teachers, fuck institute teachers, fuck fucking salty inland bodies of water, fuck the 2000 Olympics, fuck beehives, fuck Mormon hymns, fuck the Book of Mormon, fuck Moroni, fuck temples, fuck garments, fuck anointments, fuck baptisms for the dead, fuck it all.

Can anyone explain to me why Prop. 8 is such a huge national deal compared to the other 28 state constitutional amendments banning gay marriage? I don't remember anywhere near this level of outcry over any particular one of those. Is California more important because it's considered less socially conservative, or because it has a large population, or because of the out-of-state campaigning, or what?

Btw, I think you mean 'vote yes on Prop 8'...

xpost

yeah I do

Can anyone explain to me why Prop. 8 is such a huge national deal compared to the other 28 state constitutional amendments banning gay marriage? I don't remember anywhere near this level of outcry over any particular one of those. Is California more important because it's considered less socially conservative, or because it has a large population, or because of the out-of-state campaigning, or what?

For most people, it spoiled the liberal triumph of the Obama election -- oh, and in the case of one of my closest friends, he faces the very real dissolution of an arrangement he gambled on and lost.

Maria, maybe 'cause it's closer here than in other states and we have little gay oases like SF and West Hollywood. The out-of-state-funding I'm a little ambiguous about since I don't want to feel bad about donating money to campaigns in other states but I do wonder about LDS tax exempt status. Maybe it's just the zeitgeist.

(Thanks Mackro, I get it now.)

Is California more important because it's considered less socially conservative, or because it has a large population, or because of the out-of-state campaigning, or what?

All of these, but I think it was chosen not because it was "more important" as much as it was the least expected -- which ties into the less socially conservative thing.

Also "8" works a lot better into signs that want to spell hate "H8".

Results 1 - 10 of about 226 for rally "measure 9" oregon 2004. (0.13 seconds)
Results 1 - 10 of about 700,000 for rally "prop 8" california 2008. (0.24 seconds)

Can anyone explain to me why Prop. 8 is such a huge national deal compared to the other 28 state constitutional amendments banning gay marriage?

Because California is supposed to be "better than that".

Oh, oops, I am misremembering my numbers.

Results 1 - 10 of about 588 for 2004 "measure 36" oregon rally. (0.25 seconds)

I won't compromise my Christianity
'cause my momma taught me better than that!

Because California is supposed to be "better than that".

We are, in some ways, compared to even 2000, but the eastern half of the state is pretty 'red'.

It is funny to divide so tall a state by east & west. Funny meaning amusing to look at. Like it's a red & blue harlequin hot dog bun.

I do wonder about LDS tax exempt status.

I thought donating to propositions was protected as "free speech", no matter who's doing the donating...?

Also, none of the other states that banned gay marriage had legal gay marriage on the books. I think that plays a big part in people's outrage over Prop 8.

I have to admit they do like nothing otherwise that wld make them tax-exempt questionable. I mean like no church positions are paid & they don't spend their tithes on anything really but building more churches & assimilating/destroying to a broader mass.

they = Mormon Church

I totally understand why it's more important if you're actually IN California, it's just that I'm hearing huge levels of anger from people halfway, or all the way, across the country, including in states that have already passed these amendments. Perhaps it seems different than 2004 because people were also so angry about Bush's reelection then?

xpost - I think churches are not allowed to donate to candidates for office because they risk losing their tax-exempt status...don't know what the rule is for propositions, though.

xpost again - yeah, that does make a big difference. Hadn't thought of that.

fwiw, Mark Leno is OTM: the vv narrow margin of asshole victory and expensive and misleading campaign required to achieve it = writing on the wall. The battle may have been lost but in important ways the war is already OVER. Millenials will tip it.

I don't know what the polls were saying about Arizona, but I seem to recall Alfred telling us it was somewhat close in Florida. I think perhaps people thought it stood a real chance in California and also some of the gall may be in proportion to the joy over Obama's victory.

It's true. We killed the witch and those fuckers went and poked us in the eye.

the writing is totally on the wall. the fact that legal barriers have had to be erected (where before there were none) is a sign in and of itself. And only 40 years after Stonewall signalled it being (kinda sorta) okay to be out and gay in the country (in certain parts, at least)

I am in the Stonewall Queer-Straight Alliance! Man can those peeps bro down. (Magpie-like tangent.)

Even the Prop 8 folks were very careful to state that they were all about, like, civil union type rights and stuff.

bullshit

Also, none of the other states that banned gay marriage had legal gay marriage on the books.

This is not true.

Bullshit that they said it or bullshit that they meant it?

Because yes it's some horseshit, but the fact that they made it a talking point tells ya which way the wind's blowing.

Yeah, if they'd meant it, they would have written civil unions into the prop

Bullshit that they meant it, and 77% bullshit that they said it.

And civil unions are some Jim Crow shit anyway.

^^^disagree

Basically, when Oregon passed the measure, it was to prevent lawsuits from being tried. The Att'y General had said, as I recall, that he didn't think the argument (that not allowing gay marriage was a form of sex discrimination, which was prohibited in the state constitution) would be valid; but it's kinda hard to imagine that it wouldn't be, which is one reason why there was the push to put language specifically outlawing it in the state constitution.

fair

xp

we went over this on the election thread - basically the end-goal should be to separate the religious institution of marriage from the civil rights accorded married people by the government so that EVERYONE gets the same recognition under the law (same visitation rights, same healthcare benefits, etc.)

x-post

Yeah, I'm more inclined to go the other way and say the gvmt should keep their nose out of marriage altogether. xxxp

I have even managed to get some Republicans I know to admit that marriage is a religious ceremony and the State should recognize nothing other than civil unions, though they still, sometimes quite sincerely I believe, keep bringing up the polygamy canard.

Yeah, I'm more inclined to go the other way and say the gvmt should keep their nose out of marriage altogether. xxxp

all well and good except that our government has specific legal mechanisms in place for recognizing marriage - and they ain't about to re-write the entire tax code knowhutimsayin

Then why aren't Mormons pro-gay marriage, if it'll lead to legalized polygamy?

But if a civil union is the same as marriage but with a different name, that sounds pretty "equal but separate"

As I've said elsewhere, why would a devout Catholic want his/her state to call and recognize as a marriage, a union, even between a man and a woman, where one of them is divorced and therefor, according to the Church, an adulterer?