Any outsider reading this thread would find a very clear original voice of divisiveness, and this latest post underlines that singular empirical result. Very divisive post. Your choice.
According to your signature: "The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane.” You have failed at life.
The San Francisco opponents to prop 8 were so dumb. They spent all of their time protesting inside the castro district. There were so many people the past week/month in the castro holding up signs, etc. It's preaching to the choir in San Francisco, esp. in the castro. They should have been protesting in the rural areas of CA. I voted no on 8, but I still don't believe in gay marriage.
Point #1: How is it that nobody has yet made a joke about weslinder's "goes both ways" statement? Point #2: I think that comparing homosexuality to polygamy is a closer analogy than homosexuality to interraciality.
I voted for Obama and No on 8. Heck almost every one I know did the same so i have no idea where basso gets his theory from that all of us in california who voted for Obama voted yes on 8. Certainly all those Mccain folk had to have voted no on it then?
Here in SF, a lot of gays believed that because they supported Obama so passionately, they would get the support of blacks in CA to vote no on 8.
This goes to show that religion can cut both ways, just as atheism/agnosticism can cut both ways. You could argue that religiosity and atheism are, in and of themselves, both neutral propositions that can be wielded for either oppression or enlightenment. Given two equally neutral propositions (tie), I choose the one supported by universally verifiable evidence, and discard the one that amounts to unverifiable wishful thinking (tiebreaker).
Same here. The last few days I did see a lot of yes to prop 8 people out organizing, and rounding up supporters, making plans to get voters to the poles on on Tues. I don't know what the reason it passed was, but it's too bad.
I'm sorry but I have to disagree with you. The rationale is not the same. To the blacks and Latinos (who go to church at higher rates than whites), it is a religious matter. To the non-religious like me (or you?), it is the same. Not everyone thinks the same way as us though. I think this is an interesting point and Basso deserves credit for posting this. I've read and heard too much crap about how racist, white Christians are the reason for Prop 8's passage. Even on this board, there is much vitriol and scorn of Christians. Those same who scorn Christians though, seem to think that Christianity is an exclusively "white" and "GOP" thing. I don't know for sure, but religious Jews (another traditional Democrat demographic) probably overwhelmingly voted Yes too. I must also add that both Obama and Clinton are both against gay marriage too. A lot of Republicans (myself included) are just a little tired of being branded "homophobe" when many traditional Democrat voting blocs are just as or even more intolerant. BTW - I voted NO on prop 8.
He's probably referring to this: http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2008/11/70-of-african-a.html 70 percent of black voters voted Yes on Prop 8.
Ah I see. It is a shame this did not pass. On a bright note though, I think it is only a matter of time....
So for those of you who feel marriage is a religious thing, how do you feel about atheists, agnostics, polytheists, people who have a faith that is not yours, etc. getting married? Are they to be confined to civil unions as well?
Really? Please enlighten me how interracial marriage was a religious issue. A bunch of bigots in a church does not make it a religious issue.
Are you serious? During the times of anti-miscegenation laws, people would routinely use racist interpretations of scripture to defend these types of laws. Is that not the same thing that is going on now?
