Anyone else disgusted at Proposition 8?

[Lux Interior]

davester wrote:
They seemed a little bit agape at the proceedings but I talked to them and had the feeling that they were thinking "this isn't so bad after all".

Don't you get it? This couple is going to go back to Iowa and turn gay! They will get divorced and next thing you know, they'll want to marry their pets! How can you liberals be so blind!

We're doooooooooooooooooomed!

[mikeylikesit]

freeradical wrote:
I am disgusted with all voter propositions and initiatives, especially that nutty high speed rail bond issue that's going to waste tens of billions of dollars. Here's the latest laundry list on California's 2008 general election. This is no way to govern...

http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/election...008General

I agree it's a really poor way to govern since those who can afford the effort to mount the Proposition from idea to ballot are the most heavily financed special interests.

I'm a bit surprised at radiclals agreement since 90+% of today's Propositions in California represent either right wing reactionary sentiment or business special interests, two parts of his core constituency.

[kap]

Filliam H. Muffman wrote:

I try to bring up things like Britney Spears getting married for 55 hours whenever someone says marriage needs to be "defended."

:agree:

[papercup]

Proposition 8 is out already?

I just upgraded to Prop 6!!!

[Greg the dogsitter]

Black Landlord wrote:
The irony is that Gay marriage only became topical because it was on the Bush administration's short list of topics to shove in front of the media to kill any unwanted focus on illegal wiretapping and access to phone records and all the other things that matter most to the folks in the white house-- along with stem cell research and the "immigration problem" it's ascendency to an "issue" was purely incidental/accidental.

Ditto.

[mattkime]

Black Landlord wrote: along with stem cell research and the "immigration problem" it's ascendency to an "issue" was purely incidental/accidental.

in the time of jesus, there was heavy, passionate debate about whether pouring from a "clean" vessel into an "unclean" vessel dirties the clean vessel.

just because someone thinks there is a moral issue on something doesn't mean there really is one. some of these debate simply aren't worth having.

[$tevie]

The thing that is so irritating is that these sorts of referendums are deliberately tacked on to attract the Evangelicals and such to come out to the polls. "Well, Gladys, I don't like McCain so very much but by golly we have to get out and vote against those homos so I guess we will vote for McCain since we had to move the car anyhow." It's the worst sort of cynicism imaginable.

[Kiva]

it's completely sick...i generally avoid political discussions with other people..but this is one that I would go off on, if asked. It's putting bigotry into our state constitution.

I do think that, in the end, the yes on 8 people will pour a bunch of money into it and lose. Then we can ask all those jesus-loving folks if it would have been better to put that money into something jesus would have actually approved of: like helping poor or disabled people or something..

kiva

[vision63]

mikeylikesit wrote:
[quote=freeradical]
I am disgusted with all voter propositions and initiatives, especially that nutty high speed rail bond issue that's going to waste tens of billions of dollars. Here's the latest laundry list on California's 2008 general election. This is no way to govern...

http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/election...008General

I agree it's a really poor way to govern since those who can afford the effort to mount the Proposition from idea to ballot are the most heavily financed special interests.

I'm a bit surprised at radiclals agreement since 90+% of today's Propositions in California represent either right wing reactionary sentiment or business special interests, two parts of his core constituency.
I'm pushing hard for the rail initiative. I'd be surprised if it won however. Cool stuff never really wins.

As far as the Marriage Initiative goes, to me it has less to do with Gay Marriage than it does require us to address the limits of how government can infringe on our personal choices. Really, who are they to even sanction marriage at all. And the irony that Black Landlord mentions adds a nice bizarre touch.

[OWC Jamie]

$tevie wrote:
The thing that is so irritating is that these sorts of referendums are deliberately tacked on to attract the Evangelicals and such to come out to the polls. "Well, Gladys, I don't like McCain so very much but by golly we have to get out and vote against those homos so I guess we will vote for McCain since we had to move the car anyhow." It's the worst sort of cynicism imaginable.

The queers who deliberately destroy everything the gay community fights and works for couldn't possibly have anything to do with the "Evangelicals" who want to raise a family like thier parents may have.
[/sarcasm]