Proposition 8

Uh oh's....

a controversial topic.

I will attempt to lay out my thoughts succinctly. Well, how about with limited verbosity?

What is Proposition 8?

It was a California State ballot measure.
The ballot measure was an amendment that would override portions of the ruling of In re Marriage Cases.[16] The Constitution, as proposed by the measure, would include a new section (Section 7.5) to Article I, placing it between the state Equal Protection clause and nondiscrimination in business and the professions. The new section reads:

Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.

California's State Constitution put the measure into immediate effect on November 5, the day after the election.

Whats that mean?

If you are gay... no marriage for you. But you can have civil unions. This would only affect California though.

Whats the big deal?

Well you see... if you were gay, before this measure passed you could get married...

Proposition 8
(as of November 26, 2008, 1:48 pm PST)[2]
Votes Percentage
Yes 6,838,107 52.3%
No 6,246,463 47.7%
Blank votes 296,462 N/A
Total votes cast and counted 13,412,761[3] 100.00%
Voter turnout 77.5%

Now if you are gay, you can not get married. It would also invalidate all previous marriages that had occurred between gay couples. So if you are gay, you are probably pretty pissed and not married anymore.

This proposition was pushed through by a coalition of religious organizations. Now to the good part...

My take on it

This is a civil rights issue.

Wait nooo..... marriage is between one man and one woman, the Bible tells me so! Thats great and all that the New Testament supports that general idea, but California is not a Constitutional theocracy. Nor is its constitution the Bible.

Its citizens are entitled to equal rights and that is what this issue is really about. Civil unions are not the same thing as marriage under state and federal law. This means those who are in a civil union do not share the same benefits as those who are married. This means a specific demographic (Gay California citizens) of the population are refused rights that all others enjoy.

So I say call it whatever you want, civil unions, marriage, permanent couples... whatever. But confer the same civil rights to all citizens.

Oh, and my thoughts on the religious groups that are complaining about gays being pissed at them... I do not buy in to that whole we are poor religious victims boohoo pity us nonsense. When you lobby to deny rights to your fellow citizens you cross the line from being an objective observer of politics to politically active citizens. If you are an active citizen who fights for legislation you better be willing to accept the blowback that occurs (legal of course) from your actions. Especially when it relates to citizen rights. Example: If some group pushes to deny a person marriage rights if they follow a certain religion, you should not be surprised when the victims of that legislation call out those who targeted them. It is the same principle here.

I get that some very religious types feel that the "word" marriage is being violated. But this proposition was not about a word, it was about the rights of citizens and denying them legal benefits that everyone else enjoys.