I do not live in California, I live in Illinois. I mention this as it will give you the location of where I am in the case that you want to kill me for what I am going to say next.
I do believe that having something that would ban the marriages of gay people would in fact be defining marriage as simply between a man and a woman; a contra-definition which would be serving of an agenda. What all of this comes down to is: what is marriage? Why should government give incentive to marriages at all? From a societal standpoint of decades past, it somewhat kept relationships monogamous. In more recent times, marriage has become an empty shell of what it once was. Things like alimony, child support, etc. are bad residue.
The best thing to be done would be to give benefits to monogamous couples if that would help them out by relieving the costs of things in their lives From a government standpoint, marriage is only a classification for this, and essentially as long as a civil union and a marriage had the same benefits, then essentially nomenclature doesn't matter. Marriage over history though has had many odd things; in some countries multiple parter marriages, marrying young children off, etc. Marriage as an institution is only classification.
Thus I feel that marriage between gay people should be fine and allowed to exist, but people on all sides should quit griping over its name. Those against gay marriage think that they are being infringed upon and they are playing ignorant over divorce rates amongst themselves as well as other problems with their way of life. Gay people need to quit shoving it down others throats as "gay marriage", but just "marriage between those of the same gender"; I know it is the same, but "gay marriage" just seems different than "marriage" in name and legally the latter although equivalent is subconsciously more effective from a legal standpoint.
Aliento, some of what you say just seems hyperbolistic in how you feel as if these people are going to storm into your life like fascists. This gives a bad name to fascists who happen to be smarter. Nobody really thinks California is a lead though, sure it's big, but really, my state does not hinge on your state's actions. Meh. Just look, I get it that you want to be treated equally, as everyone should, but it is hard to treat gay people like everyone else just because they are different. If two gay men in the future wanted to have a baby of their own and there was some way to create an egg cell out of one of the men, should that child be born? I do not think it should as that would just be going against physical lines to get to a point of likeness (being like a man and woman) when men and woman were never physically equal.
Gah, but I would vote no.
Author
Topic: To all Californians...vote NO on prop 8! (Read 33680 times)