Comments on: Prop. 8 Anger Spurs Donor Blacklists

CBS Evening News: Online Donor Lists Prompt Boycotts Of Same-Sex Marriage Ban Supporters

[nothappyatall]

Heterosexual people get married. We can have civil partnerships."
Posted by klgrube1

Who cares? they are ALL civil partnerships! you CANT get ''married'' without a signed officially issued STATE DOCUMENT- the LICENSE, so just like licensing your DOG or boat you license your partner. This is so the STATE can get fees, control your assetts, liabilities, taxes and benefits.
You do not need a church to buy a license and be married. Marriage is a CIVIL CONTRACT, it comes entirely under CIVIL laws that is how Janet Jackson can marry some drunk gigolo in a bar, get divorced 2 days later and pop out his baby 9 months later

"Why should businesses and individuals be opposed of their names being released? Are they embarrassed about something? Well they should be. Shame on them for donating money to a cause which strips someone of their basic human rights.

Posted by Avigil2 "

Thats RIGHT! I agree

[klgrube1]

Okay, I''m repeating this post because no one responded to Sir Elton John''s very well-reasoned stand on Prop 8. He really is someone worth listening to. I''d like to think he speaks for the majority of the gay community.

I truly believe Sir Elton John has it right. Stop demnanding ''marriage'' and celebrate the very real rights granted to domestic partners. You worked hard for them, and they''''re yours! No one can take them away. Here''s the quote:

USA Today published an article yesterday in which Sir Elton John spoke about his position on Proposition 8. John clarified his position on Prop 8 while attending the annual benefit for the Elton John AIDS Foundation. He was accompanied by his longtime partner David Furnish, whom he joined in a civil union in 2005. John was quoted as saying, "We''re not married. Let''s get that right. We have a civil partnership. What is wrong with Proposition 8 is that they went for marriage. Marriage is going to put a lot of people off, the word marriage."

John went on to emphasize that civil unions grant same-*** couples the same rights afforded to married heterosexual couples. He stated, "I don''t want to be married. I''m very happy with a civil partnership. If gay people want to get married, or get together, they should have a civil partnership%u2026the word marriage, I think, puts a lot of people off. You get the same equal rights that we do when we have a civil partnership. Heterosexual people get married. We can have civil partnerships."

[irmcvet97]

As a straight man I can not understand why other straight people care if someone else is gay. This is a pathetic argument on the part of anyone who protests other citizens marrying whom they want.

Posted by hammy06 at 04:43 PM : Nov 14, 2008

Ah but if you want some narrow minded Red Neck to send their hard earned cash to YOU, it matters! IF you are a vile creature who wants power over those who have simple minds and are easy to scare, it matters!

[clovernyc]

Slowness - As it stands, anyone can enter into a civil union because it is fundamentally a contract that individuals enter voluntarily.

Homosexuals have the right to transfer property, share resources, pass on inheritances, to health insurance coverage, and in effect enjoy all the benefits of the marital contract. This is a civil union or a civil partnership.

If a particular church wants to perform a homosexual wedding ceremony, that church is within its rights to do so.

The issue here is whether that couple will be considered ''married'' in the broader society and the answer is

no

[clovernyc]

Hammy06 - You are right about one thing.

You do not understand.

[clovernyc]

Bear in mind that the ''pursuit of happiness'' for some means illicit forcible relations with an underage, unwilling victim.

You can separate church and state but you cannot separate religion from society.

Marriage is a religious institution with thousands of years of history.

All of your liberal yelping is not going to change that.

There is no such thing as a ''right'' to be married.

The courts do not have the right to redefine a religious institution.

Civil unions afford homosexuals all the rights and benefits of the marital compact.

There is really no issue here.

[klgrube1]

This is a quote I found yesterday, but I truly believe Sir Elton John has it right. Stop all this nonsense about demnanding ''marriage'' and celebrate the very real rights granted to domestic partners. You worked hard for them, and they''re yours! No one can take them away. Here''s the quote:

USA Today published an article yesterday in which Sir Elton John spoke about his position on Proposition 8. John clarified his position on Prop 8 while attending the annual benefit for the Elton John AIDS Foundation. He was accompanied by his longtime partner David Furnish, whom he joined in a civil union in 2005. John was quoted as saying, "We''re not married. Let''s get that right. We have a civil partnership. What is wrong with Proposition 8 is that they went for marriage. Marriage is going to put a lot of people off, the word marriage."

John went on to emphasize that civil unions grant same-*** couples the same rights afforded to married heterosexual couples. He stated, "I don''t want to be married. I''m very happy with a civil partnership. If gay people want to get married, or get together, they should have a civil partnership%u2026the word marriage, I think, puts a lot of people off. You get the same equal rights that we do when we have a civil partnership. Heterosexual people get married. We can have civil partnerships."

[avigil2]

This was such a good posting, it deserves to be posted again. Good job kellyskarma.

Let me get this straight (excuse the unintended pun). Chris Lee (or Li; the article uses both spellings), a Chinese immigrant, is offended that people are retaliating against him??? An immigrant from a different country who has presumably come here for a better life for himself and possibly his family is voting against the rights of natural born American citizens? As far as I am concerned, anyone who wasn''''t born in America should have no jurisdiction over the rights that natural born Americans are granted. But, further, NO citizen should have the right to vote on any other person''''s civil rights. It''''s offensive (and possibly even illegal; we will find out the court''''s rulings soon) that this was even on the ballot. It is as absurd as voting for Black people''''s rights. As for Chris Lee (Li), if he and his fellow immigrants think every American shouldn''''t have equal rights, then I respectfully suggest he move back to China and stop taking rights away from people who were born here. - Posted by kellyskarma

[hammy06]

As a straight man I can not understand why other straight people care if someone else is gay. This is a pathetic argument on the part of anyone who protests other citizens marrying whom they want.

[avigil2]

Why should businesses and individuals be opposed of their names being released? Are they embarrassed about something? Well they should be. Shame on them for donating money to a cause which strips someone of their basic human rights.

[juliemd]

Take our civil unions and move on, huh?

How about we trade, you take the civil unions and we''ll take marriage, which we want and legally deserve??? Your pious, supremist attitude is what is so wrong...

[hippychicky-2009]

Take your civil unions and move on.
Posted by Ord6591

Its not going to happen. We can''t move forward until the wrong is right again.
I don''t care what the right is called, but it needs to be equal to what every other American is privileged too.

[hippychicky-2009]

You are ruining your pathetic little world and you neither know nor care.

Get a life.

Posted by doorgunner3

I agree with you I think the amount of time and effort spent on this project, to even get it put on the books is crazy. And the amount of money poured into this, is sickening. How many people could be helped with this money. Instead people and their families are being hurt. With hate.

We have to stand and fight againest the unjust, without dissention there is no growth.

[ord6591]

It''s not whether or not you can be gay, it''s not whether or not you can have a civil union, what it is about is that you can''t usurp a label. The label isn''t going to be given to you, it''s not yours to take. Divorce courts are full of consenting adults who want to call what they were engaged in as ''love'', but their outraged spouses and the courts call it ''adultery'' - they aren''t allowed to simply sieze the label of ''love'' just because they want to. Take your civil unions and move on.

[hatesthecolt]

My argument has nothing to do with lifestyle choice.

It has to do with not being a pig.

There are thousands of real ills that need addressing. All the time and money wasted on this bedroom liberal crusade could have fed a lot of people.

And now the shrieking fetish warriors have taken to assaulting and ruining those that dare disagree with them.

You are ruining your pathetic little world and you neither know nor care.

Get a life.





--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by doorgunner3

Huhhhh?? I fyou object as you say you do to resources being poured into bedroom issues, how can you be in favor of Prop 8 in the first place? HUGE amounts of time, money and energy were poured into that proposition by those who were anti-gay; under your own standards, that would have been a waste of time. It wasn''t the liberals who picked this fight. So which is it??? Do you object to the "waste" of time and money or, as we all suspect, do you object to the gay rights.

[hippychicky-2009]

SO MUCH FOR TOLERANCE!

Posted by Mastersgts

Equality under the law is a right. "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness"

I am in the pursuit of happiness.
Honestly, as a community I think we are some of the most tolerant people. Because we know how it feels to be on the opposite side.

[doorgunner3]

My argument has nothing to do with lifestyle choice.

It has to do with not being a pig.

There are thousands of real ills that need addressing. All the time and money wasted on this bedroom liberal crusade could have fed a lot of people.

And now the shrieking fetish warriors have taken to assaulting and ruining those that dare disagree with them.

You are ruining your pathetic little world and you neither know nor care.

Get a life.

[doorgunner3]

It is not enough to tolerate me.

You must validate me.

I need your endorsement.

If I don''t get it, I will ruin you.

Okay?

[mastersgts]

If this is "tolerance", I now how to act against anything gay. Thanks for clarifying this.

[mastersgts]

Here is the bottom line: No one should be able to vote on someone else''''s basic rights. It''''s unjust.
And even in conneticit, and Mass. We still do not have the same rights under the law.
Equal but different is the cry, is that right?
Posted by hippychicky

First it is not a "right". Second the people of California said "NO". Third, THIS IS NOW THE LAW!
SO MUCH FOR TOLERANCE!