Last week's election was historic in a major way--with the election of Barack Obama, a Democrat and a liberal supported by many Hollywood folks, it looked like racism had been retired in favor of change and that a more conservative viewpoint had at last been trampled by a promise of liberal change. But in California, while last Election Day was a strike against racism as a campaign issue, it wasn't a total win for liberals. Witness the "Prop 8" situation.
While most of the people I've encountered in LA voted no on 8--which meant a vote in favor of equal rights for all marriages, even between spouses of the same sex -- the proposition passed by a narrow margin, causing an uproar from equal rights supporters, celebs and civilians alike, and spawning public rallies against what is being called the "gay marriage ban."
Many celebs have been vocal about the outcome. Wanda Sykes, Lance Bass and Rose McGowan attended a protest on Wednesday; Sean Penn called the decision "shameful," and Christina Aguilera and Madonna both expressed their disappointment with the outcome.
And then there's Oscar and Grammy-winning singer-songwriter Melissa Etheridge, who surmises that if she doesn't have the right to marry, that renders her "not a full citizen"-- and as such, perhaps she doesn't have to pay taxes:
"I don't mean to get too personal here," Etheridge wrote. "But there is a lot I can do with the extra half a million dollars that I will be keeping instead of handing it over to the state of California. Oh, and I am sure Ellen will be a little excited to keep her bazillion bucks that she pays in taxes, too."
Celebrity DJ Samantha Ronson also had something to say about the fact that a proposition dedicated to humane treatment of animals passed, while human marriage rights are not equal in California:
"I guess people care more about farm animals than they do their fellow man, that's really sad to me," Ronson wrote on her MySpace blog. "Yes, I am glad that the chickens will have more room and better conditions as they wait to die, but I just think it's frightening that people show more compassion for tomorrow's dinner than for the chef."
Add to Del.icio.us
Add to Technorati
Add to Digg
Add to Newsvine
Add to Facebook
Add to StumbleUpon
Subscribe
The metaphor for the fountain absolutely does fit into this analogy. I understand that your faith, your "God", tells you that he created man and woman and that man and woman is biblically the natural order. That's all fine and dandy that you believe in that. I'm not arguing or discussing your religion. I think it's great that you have faith in something and I'm not trying to take that away, or say that your faith is wrong regardless of my own personal opinion. However don't force feed me that faith of yours if I happen to be an atheist person who doesn’t believe, or live by the same rules, of that God that you believe in and construct your morals around. Church was separated from state for a reason. That's why we no longer teach religion in schools anymore. Because here in America we are built on a system of many different religious beliefs and we are tolerant and accepting of those religious differences. I'm not saying that you have to support or agree with two people of the same sex getting married. You don't have to give them your blessing, you don't have to attend their wedding, and you don't have to teach your children that it's right or "moral", but you do have to be tolerant of those differences. Homosexuality does exist in this world and you are calling them second class citizens by saying they aren't deserving of this title which you call marriage. This is a title which you have built a definition for it around your own religious agenda. We are supposed to be such an advanced nation of tolerance and acceptance and yet we still practice such intolerance toward this one group of people who only wants to have the same expression of love that you have. Our history has shown and proven to us what intolerance and inequality looks like and its effects, and right now there is absolutely no difference between this unjust law and the laws that existed 50 years ago, or 100 years ago, 200 years ago which discriminated against other groups of minorities. You are condemning and punishing a group of people for not following of biblical belief of yours. Well just for a second try to pull that religion away from the state. Gay marriage won't change or affect your life in any way so don't pretend that it will. I don't care what argument you present to me, the fact is, gay marriage has nothing to do with you and your family. It has everything to do with the individual person. So I say keep your faith and believe strongly in it. But keep that faith to yourself and your family individually much like I will keep my belief and my faith to myself individually without imposing it on you. There is no place for your religion in our state or national constitution. We, as a state, have take several massive steps backward and I guarantee that weather you like it or not, marriage between two people of the same sex will eventually, and very soon, exist and be very much alive within California, and within this country. You can decide to be on board with it or not. But progress will happen weather you like it or not. That's the natural law of life.
Sergio: You are very capable of expressing your opinion, but that is all it is and I have enjoyed hearing it. It has given me the opportunity to think critically about the issue and for that I am appreciative.
I think I it boils down to one difference: you believe gender is irrelevant in marriage whereas I believe it is definitional. My opinion has nothing to do with the fact that you are gay, it has to do with what I think marriage is.
My thought process is not: I don't like gays, so I'll try and figure out some way to thwart them. Rather it is: my definition of marriage is strictly gender-specific and if the truth of that definition hurts some who feel otherwise I am sorry, but I cannot change that. It's not mine to change.
Anyway, it's been fun...
Exactly! And yours is an opinion just as much as mine is which means that my opinion is just as valid as your opinion is. I don't think you're a bad person by any means. And I definitely appreciate your opinion. I'm actually very grateful that you've even ready my comments and have expressed a rebuttal of your opinion which I have also read and considered. Like I said, I'm not trying to change your opinion by any means. I just want you to see the other side of the coin and to understand the other side of the coin. There were a lot of people who were affected by this decision and I'm sure there will be a lot of people affected by the decision if/and/when the proposition gets overturned. I definitely don't want you to get the impression that I am discounting your opinion and expression of thought because I actually enjoy reading your thoughts and trying to understand the other side. I just keep responding because I, myself, have questions and comments. So I thank you for educating me and have really enjoyed this back and forth debate that we've had. No harm, no fowl. I've always known that in the end we would just agree to disagree. But like I said, I appreciate, and respect your opinion and thoughts and wanted to learn more about them. That's the only reason why this thread has gone on so long. Your thoughts have intrigued me. So thank you... regardless of our difference of opinion... haha… we agree to disagree. You're a good guy.
- Sergio
... also, please know that I have never once taken any offense to, or have been angered by, any opinion that you have expressed and offered to me. I am considering your views as constructive knowledge for me and being tolerant and appreciateive of your different opinion. Besides, a good debater should know and understand both sides of his argument and I thank you for eloquently introducing me to the other side of that argument.Regardless of our differing opinions ha ha
More and more of us are WAKING UP, America. No taxation without equality; simple math.
Now the feds will need to repeal DOMA and DADT, grant us FULL equal rights (including marriage), and begin to start viewing our families - OUR FAMILIES - as the tax-paying contributing members of society we are.....well.....we USED to be!
Because if our HOMES, our FAMILIES, our very BELOVED are not acknowledged and valued as other families are legally, whatever we do outside of that home will never be acknowledged and valued legally, such as adopting children, working without discrimination, or serving openly in the military.
FAMILY FIRST. What is more important than FAMILY?
We owe the IRS absolutely NOTHING until equal. NOTHING. Get it?
This is NOT a test.
This is NOT a debate.
This is NOT a vote.
This is definitely NOT a popularity contest.
This IS justice - GAY TAX PROTEST.
Post a Comment
By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.