Gay Marriage Supporters Take To Streets

Protesters Rally In California, Utah Over Proposition 8

(CBS/AP)  Thousands of protesters angered by the passage of a state measure banning gay marriage took to the streets Friday in San Francisco and Long Beach, while thousands more protested outside the headquarters of the Mormon church in Salt Lake City.

The marches were the latest of several demonstrations held throughout the state this week after the passage of Proposition 8, which would amend the California Constitution to define marriage as between a man and a woman. The measure overrides a state Supreme Court ruling in May that briefly gave same-sex couples the right to wed.

In Salt Lake City, a crowd of about 2,000 chanted "Separate church and state" and waved rainbow flags outside the headquarters of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, which encouraged its members to work to pass the amendment by volunteering their time and money for the campaign.

Some protesters held signs with messages like, "Mormons: Once persecuted, now persecutors." Church officials offered no statement on the rally and march Friday night, but had called for civility and respect before and after Tuesday's vote.

The protest in Long Beach attracted about 2,000 people who were escorted by police as they marched through streets chanting and holding signs in support of gay rights.

Police said the march was peaceful, though there were some verbal clashes between gay rights activists and supporters of Proposition 8. Three people were arrested for trying to lead protesters past police lines.

The demonstration in San Francisco included about 1,000 protesters escorted by police who marched down Market Street during rush hour and ended at City Hall. No arrests were reported.

Lisa Davis, 42, among the protesters on Market Street, held a sign that read, "You gave rights to chickens and took away rights from human beings." The sign referred to the passage of Proposition 2, which requires better treatment of farm animals.

As the protesters made their way southwest on Market Street towards Castro Street around 6 p.m., some joined hands across Market at Ninth Street, reports CBS affiliate KPIX-TV in San Francisco. The barrier stopped traffic for more than an hour, causing honks from vehicles, some in support and others in annoyance and an urgency to get past.

Those who made it to Dolores Park chanted, played music and danced, prompting the temporary closure of Dolores Street at 19th Street.

Police Lt. Neville Gittens said three people were arrested for being drunk in public but added that they did not appear to be part of the protest, just observing.

Gittens said that by about 8 p.m. the protest broke up peacefully.

Davis said she planned to propose to her girlfriend during the march.

According to the CBS News Election and Survey unit’s analysis, black voters overwhelmingly voted in favor of Prop. 8 - by a 70 percent to 30 percent margin. Hispanic voters overall favored the measure as well but only by a 53 percent to 47 percent margin. White voters were slightly on the side of approving it, 51 percent to 49 percent.

There is disappointment that the African-American community, which just saw the election of the first black president, voted overwhelmingly against same-sex marriage, reports CBS Early Show correspondent Hattie Kauffman.

Gay rights groups and same-sex marriage proponents have filed at least three court challenges against the ban.

[rationaltalk]

There is no soical reason for gay marriage.

Posted by blackyowe at 10:27 PM : Nov 09, 2008

Now, on this point, you could not be more incorrect. Marriage gives couples stability and security so that they can be more productive members of society. It also reduces promiscuity, which in turn, reduces the transmission of STD''''s. So, you see, there are some rather compelling reasons to allow gay people to marry, even if you believe they will ultimately go to hell for it. Also, wouldn''''t you rather they marry each other than your daughter or son?

[voidmaster-2009]

complete deregulation is another word for ''''Anarchy''''
A friend of mine likes to say ''''all things in moderation'''' to which I reply how much rape, robbery and murder is ok and how much is ''''too much''''?

Posted by ToolMangler
***
Well, just for the record . . .

I for one am an anarchist -- really. I sincerely believe that government should taking a flyin%u2019 leap. In the meantime, I am quite aware that humanity as a whole is not sociologically mature enough to survive true anarchy. So I do not push it, I just live it.

As for how much rape, robbery, etc. would constitute too much; that would be determined by how quickly you used (your own -- not the cop%u2019s) deadly force to end it.

[voidmaster-2009]

Hmmm. Is the party here over?

[ffoulkes-2009]

Again, the question: If two men or two women seek to marry each other, how are you harmed in a manner that justifies your forcible response?

Posted by VoidMaster at 06:10 PM : Nov 09, 2008
________________________________________________
Moral decay of a society affects ALL members of that society. Allowing same s ex marriage is adding to the decay of society, and adding it to law actually legitimizes that immoral behavior, thus adding to the decay further.

[ffoulkes-2009]

Continued...
didn''t CONDONE any acts that go against His commands...We all sin, but we shouldn''t put into place laws that make that sin legal or moral.

[ffoulkes-2009]

All of these religions claim to worship a god that, if we are to believe anything they say, created free will. And yet, I know of few religions -- and NONE calling themselves Christian -- that do not actively work against free will.

My question to any and all of them is: If your god created free will, then who do you think you are to ignore it?

Posted by VoidMaster at 05:57 PM : Nov 09, 2008
_________________________________________________
God created free will, however he also created discretion. He gave a free will to allow people to do as they will and face the consequences of their own actions. In giving free will he did not in any way CONDONE

[ffoulkes-2009]

It seems to me that it ought to be a simple matter to get prop-8 overturned at the Federal level if the case can be made that it represents unequal protection under the law.

Posted by VoidMaster at 04:19 PM : Nov 09, 2008
__________________________________________________
I would Laugh my arse off if it turned out their law-suit wound up changing the US Constitution...to AGREE with prop 8!!!

[rationaltalk]

If religionists better understood the concept of separation of Church & State, they would realize that the wall of separation actually protects their religion. Our secular government allows the free expression of religion and non religion. Today, religions flourish in America.
Posted by odinnasgaard at 10:51 PM : Nov 09, 2008

Right you are! Can you imagine if one version of the Christian Church controlled our government? What would become of the rest? Freedom of religion means that government is free from religion. The religious would do well to remember this, lest we become like Iran.

[odinnasgaard]

Allah is just an Arabic word for God (used by Arabic speaking Jews, Muslims and Christians), and refers to the God of Abraham in all 3 religions.

The U.S. government derives from people (not God), as it clearly states in the preamble: "We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect Union....". The omission of God in the Constitution did not come out of forgetfulness, but rather out of the Founding Fathers purposeful intentions to keep government separate from religion. Of course many Americans did practice Christianity, but so also did many believe in deistic philosophy. Indeed, most of our influential Founding Fathers, although they respected the rights of other religionists, held to deism and Freemasonry tenets rather than to Christianity.

Although the Constitution does not include the phrase "Separation of Church & State," neither does it say "Freedom of religion." However, the Constitution implies both in the 1st Amendment. As to our freedoms, the 1st Amendment provides exclusionary wording:

"Congress shall make NO law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof...."

If religionists better understood the concept of separation of Church & State, they would realize that the wall of separation actually protects their religion. Our secular government allows the free expression of religion and non religion. Today, religions flourish in America.

[rationaltalk]

The separation of Church and State protects our freedom to worship and to be Americans. And I will fight to the death to keep it that way! I do not want a Religious Right Police to come into power now or ever!!
Posted by krondor2000 at 10:33 PM : Nov 09, 2008

You are very wise. He who lives by the sword, dies by the sword. The religious right will continue to live in fear until it learns to stop making everyone else afraid.

[rationaltalk]

There is no soical reason for gay marriage.

Posted by blackyowe at 10:27 PM : Nov 09, 2008

Now, on this point, you could not be more incorrect. Marriage gives couples stability and security so that they can be more productive members of society. It also reduces promiscuity, which in turn, reduces the transmission of STD''s. So, you see, there are some rather compelling reasons to allow gay people to marry, even if you believe they will ultimately go to hell for it. Also, wouldn''t you rather they marry each other than your daughter or son?

[krondor2000]

The Bible will never replace the Constitution. The Ten Commandments will never replace the Bill of Rights. This is why we have the separation of Church and State. If the Religious Right is successful in destroying these two sacred documents, then we will not have to worry about Al-Qaeda, bin Laden or another 9-11 attack. The Religious Right will have done the dirty work for them by destroying these United States. The Bible must remain in the homes and churches. The Constitution must remain standing in every part of our government. The separation of Church and State protects our freedom to worship and to be Americans. And I will fight to the death to keep it that way! I do not want a Religious Right Police to come into power now or ever!!

[rationaltalk]

This is as much about children as anything. Kids deserve to have a mother and a fat her and a home with balance and security. There is no soical reason for gay marriage.

Posted by blackyowe at 10:27 PM : Nov 09, 2008

Oh dear, I think you might be confused. This proposition was about gay marriage. It had nothing to do with the rights of gay people to either have or adopt children. You are muddying the waters by confusing the issues, but perhaps that was your intention?

[blackyowe]

This is as much about children as anything. Kids deserve to have a mother and a fat her and a home with balance and security. There is no soical reason for gay marriage. This country does not allow plural marriage even in Muslim communities. Marriage is two people of the opposite *** coming together to form a unit. I could wish all day I was a tree but it would not be so and it would not be unkind if my neighbors said "you are not a tree"! I am all for Gay folks getting protection under the law against discrimination in the work place and all that. I wish no one would say rotten things about them or deny them their health benefits but I reserve my right to hold onto traditional marriage as it always has been as union between a man and a women for the good of the children and all of society. Good marriages have and always will be the best place to create harmony and an environment for children to grow up and be well adjusted adults.

[rationaltalk]

Again if we had been founded on ISLAM, you WOULD NOT be enjoying the freedoms you have today.

SEE SAUDI ARABIA or IRAN if you don''''t believe me and PLEASE get and education on American history instead of reading REVISIONIST history that distorts the strong faith our our founding fathers in the Lord which allowed them to establish our great nation.

For they knew that freedom and liberty comes from the LORD (The real one, not "allah"), NOT the government.

Posted by SocialismSux at 09:35 PM : Nov 09, 2008

I must admit that I find this a strange paradox. While on the one hand denying gay people the freedom to marry, you are on the other hand, berating Muslim nations for imposing their religion on others. I find this a little fishy. Also, if the U.S. was founded as a Christian nation, how do you explain the First Amendment?

[rationaltalk]

In "Muslim law" (it''''s called Sharia), homosexuals are EXECUTED. This happens in Iran all the time, and in countries like Saudi Arabia.

To make the BEYOND ABSURD comparison of Christianity to Islamic law is not only intellectually dihonesty off the charts, but it''''s down right irresponsible.

Again, Christians would never call for the BEHEADING of homosexuals.

We simply pray for them, and hope that one day they come to repentence of their sexually perverse sin and come to know the Lord.


Posted by SocialismSux at 09:32 PM : Nov 09, 2008

Okay, so you are better than Muslims because rather than kill gay people, you simply deny them equality. Why don''t you simply treat them fairly? I mean, according to your Gospel, Jews are not going to heaven because they do not believe that Jesus is the Saviour. Yet, you certainly would not deny Jews equal rights, would you?

By the way, I use to work with a Muslim woman and she did not advocate killing anyone, nor stripping them of their civil rights. In fact, she lived more like a Christian than many Christians I''ve known, i.e., she did unto others as she would have them to unto her.

In conclusion, if you want to FloydZepp to stop the hate, perhaps you should show him by example. You could begin by aplogizing to the Muslims you have certainly offended with your post. They are not responsible for what extremist Muslim governments are doing any more than you are responsible for the Spanish Inquisition.

[socialismsux]

And one more thing RationalTalk,

It was George Washington who correctly stated:

"It is impossible to rightly govern the world without God and the Bible"

And it is also George Washington who implemented swearing in on the Bible while taking the oath of the Presidency, which still stands to this day.

The "Treaty of Tripoli" IS NOT a founding document and it DOES NOT reflect the founding of this nation, which was overwhelming founded on CHRISTIAN principles and values.

And you my friend should be BEYOND thank ful for that.


Again if we had been founded on ISLAM, you WOULD NOT be enjoying the freedoms you have today.

SEE SAUDI ARABIA or IRAN if you don''t believe me and PLEASE get and education on American history instead of reading REVISIONIST history that distorts the strong faith our our founding fathers in the Lord which allowed them to establish our great nation.

For they knew that freedom and liberty comes from the LORD (The real one, not "allah"), NOT the government.

[socialismsux]

RationalTalk

-Use your head, would you?

In "Muslim law" (it''s called Sharia), homosexuals are EXECUTED. This happens in Iran all the time, and in countries like Saudi Arabia.


To make the BEYOND ABSURD comparison of Christianity to Islamic law is not only intellectually dihonesty off the charts, but it''s down right irresponsible.

Again, Christians would never call for the BEHEADING of homosexuals.

We simply pray for them, and hope that one day they come to repentence of their sexually perverse sin and come to know the Lord.

Muslims on the other hand believe it''s ok to EXECUTE them, again, by their ISLAMIC(Sharia) law.

FloydZeppd is one of the biggest Christian haters on this forum. There isn''t a day that goes by on these forums where he doesn''t bash Christians in one way or another.

Most of the time he says "Freakanvangelical" or something slanderous along those lines.

Have fun agreeing with this moron, but he has no idea whatsoever what he is talking about and his main mission on these forums is to solely draw attention to himself and to bash Christianity.

He''s one of the best on here at doing so.

[toolmangler-2009]

Who''s us?
Posted by newz4i at 09:20 PM : Nov 09, 2008



Don''t worry about it,

[toolmangler-2009]

complete deregulation is another word for ''Anarchy''
A friend of mine likes to say ''all things in moderation'' to which I reply how much rape, robbery and murder is ok and how much is ''too much''?