Melissa Etheridge Has A Point

Well I have a thought here for Melissa and Tammy-Lynn...you could instead move to a state where equal rights are enshrined into law. Massachusetts allows same-sex marriages and equal protections are covered under state law. New Hampshire allows civil unions and also provides equal protection. I believe that all of the New England states provide equal protection for all citizens and either outright marriage for same sex couples or civil unions. We are not called 'the cradle of liberty" for nothing. Come east my friends...the weather may be chilly but the living is fine!
Peace
JD

Actually the proposition was supported by almost 53%, I believe. It's a shame Prop 8 passed. Most of the minority voters who turned out to support Obama don't support gay equality. Perhaps if the liberal media in California had focused a little more on trying to persuade swing voters, rather than encourage every last youth and/or minority they could find, to support Obama, they wouldn't have unwittingly cost gays this huge civil right. Talk about a backfire.

Im tired of gay celebrities and everyone complaining about marriage, under law in California they have the EXACT same rights as a married couple. Legally they are afforded all the same rights they just dont get to call themselves married, instead they have to call it a civil union. If a majority of the people believe a "marriage" is between a man and a woman then thats the way it should remain and you can take your civil union and quit complaining. Literally thats all they are doing, complaining because its not like they are being unfairly treated, they get the same things a married couple gets, they just can use the word married. Besides I dont want my children going to school and having to hear that a marriage is between "two people, either man and a woman or a man and a man". Let us have our word marriage and you keep your civil union with all the same legalities as a marriage.

Sarah...Marriage was found to be illegal in California, if only allowed between a man and a woman, by the Supreme Court of the State of California who are entrusted by the state constitution to interpret the laws of California. What we are fighting for throughout the country are simple basic civil rights that are available to all manner of Americans except for gay men and women.

Separate but equal is not equal. Only equal is equal. Equal access and equal opportunity. What you are advocating is hate. What you are advocating is bigotry. What you are advocating is legally sanctioned discrimination against legal citizens of California which is against every tenet of why this country was founded in the first place.

Personally, I can't see a reason why I would want to get married beyond any tax breaks I may receive. It's an outdated and outmoded institution in my mind. But I'll be damned if people like yourself will be allowed to enshrine hate and discrimination into law without me fighting you tooth and nail. Because I will. I will do everything in my power to educate, enlighten and (ultimately) defeat disgusting legislation like Prop 8. You can count on it.
Peace
JD

"Let us have our word marriage and you keep your civil union with all the same legalities as a marriage".

I agree with this suggestion, Sarah. This gives everyone the same rights while protecting the standard institution of marriage. But others will not agree with you or me. They'll fight this until they demolish the man/woman philosophical, theoretical, sometimes religious basis for marriage. Doesn't matter what it means to many. Doesn't matter what you want for your kids.

Sarah & T-Bone, we get it, you don't get it.
Seperate but equal is not equal, and you're not looking to the larger picture, which is that you needs the states to enact change in order to enact change on the Federal level.

You are repeating the exact arguments that were used by segregationalists in the South. The basic argument was that blacks could be segregated because they were still being provided services by the state government, ie, even though they couldn't go to a white school, they were still being provided with a school to attend, they were still getting educated. Now, if that doesn't bother you, then I could see why you wouldn't be bothered by the fact that gays can be "civil unioned" but not married. It's a classic civil rights issue of seperate but equal is, in fact, not equal.

It's really not that difficult. What is difficult is to try and understand how someone could walk into a voting booth and vote to take something away from somebody else.

How does everyone feel about polygamy? Just wondering. My gay friends are often against polygamy and I just laugh and laugh at the hypocrisy of it all.

T-Bone . you've lost me on that last post (the polygamy one). I dont get the connection between 'gay' and 'polygamy'. Maybe I'm misreading. The bit I know about polygamy is that it is practised amongst certain regilious groups (Mormon Fundamentalists for one) and it is often the case that some old dude of 60 decides to take a 'spiritual wife' of 14 or 15 and get her pregnant. Which basically amounts to paedophilia in my book.

No, I'm talking about marriage between more than two consenting adults, which is most often the case with polygamy. The oppression and pedophilia is not the standard. Yes, it happens -- and that's the horrible stuff we hear on the news, but many polygamist families are made up of one man and two to three wives (all consenting).

i agree with sarah and t-bone completly.

i find it quite ironic that melissa has been supporting obama, who promises to rasie taxes on people with her income) and then refuses to pay taxes all together.

She has representation. I support gay marriage, but I think she needs to re-read those history books.

As I've written twice (although neither comment has posted). Polygamy is usually between 3 or more consenting adults. The Pedophilia/oppression thing is not the norm. Yes, it's the stuff you read about in the headlines, but it's not the case for all polygamists. It's often a case of one man and 2 or more wives -- consenting wives, that is.

Bottom-line: as a few people have pointed out, separate but equal is not equal.

And regarding polygamy: It was the Mormon Church in Utah (!!!!) which put in so much money into the Yes on Prop 8 campaign. I found it disturbing that a church whose members practice polygamy (some, not all) would argue that marriage is between a man and a woman. What the Mormon church really means is that marriage is between a man and his 5 fives. Yes, indeed I find it hypocritical.

And hailie needs some education. Or to get a job to understand how taxes work. Clearly, you do not realize that you get taxed by BOTH the federal and state government. The federal government can only raise federal taxes and the state government can only raise state taxes. Please educate yourself before you "speak."

Hey T-Bone...You're talking apples and oranges here. And my personal feeling is your throwing out polygamy simply as a "red herring" to distract from the main thrust of what Melissa Etheridge, I and others have stated.

Separate but equal is not equal. Only equal is equal. Prop 8 being passed means that the citizens of California (or at least 52% of them) are content with the idea of permanently enshrining into law legal discrimination against other legal citizens of California. That IS exactly what Prop 8 does. That's not exxageration but a simple fact.

If you, and others like you, can't see Prop 8 for what it is...then I am truly sorry for you. I will work to overturn Prop 8 but I find it more than a little unsettling that people like yourself would endorse blatant discrimination against your fellow citizens of California. It runs so counter to the ideals of what a democracy is and should be. I only hope that one day the light of reason will enter your mind.

Peace
JD

JD -- you still have not answered the question. Does a man have the right to marry 5 wives if they're all consenting adults? As you said, "equal is equal". Red herring or no red herring, the question of equality remains. If a man and a woman can marry, therefore under the Constitution a man and a man should be able to marry, then why can't a man marry five wives or a woman marry six husbands all at the same time?

This "gay marriage will lead to polygamy" non-sequitur seems prevalent among idiots and fundamentalists, because they divide the world into two camps, social norms and evil, and any give or weakness on one issue belonging to the "evil" camp is giving on all issues.

Never mind that gays, compared to polygamists, are a substantial and visible group within society, who attract legislative attention accordingly. Never mind that expanding the grant of existing rights of monogamous marriage is a completely different kettle of fish than creating rights for more complicated and less common systems of marriage. Never mind any of the sound logical arguments or emotional appeals in favor of legalizing gay marriage - the narrow, blinkered world which these little people inhabit is impenetrable to all reason, yet so fragile that the mere act of marriage causes it all to come crashing down. How sad.

T-Bone, gay marriage and polygamy are separate issues and it's a slippery slope fallacy to say that one must follow the other. And their exploitation is nothing more than a political maneuver of bigots and ignoramuses.

T-Bone I'll be happy to answer your question except for one small thing...Polygamy was not on the ballot in California this past Tuesday. If it was...we could have at it over a few drinks. However same-sex marriage was...which is the entire reason for this thread.

Polygamy has nothing to do with the issue at hand except that you are using it to obfuscuate the issue of same-sex marriage rather than just addressing it head-on. As Max stated...you're using the idea of polygamy to justify your beliefs in discrimination and inequality. That is your choice but it does give you the appearance of being a bigot.
Peace
JD

Just to note - I believe that there is a difference between marriage and civil union. In a civil union if your partner dies without a will the family of the deceased is legally entitled to all of the property and the living partner is left out in the cold. Also if there are children involved the family of the deceased could come in and take the children away from the surviving partner. So it is not the same thing at all. One more note - here in Canada gay marriage is legal and the world here did not end. We believe in equality for all.
Another note regarding the polygamy argument - that is a ridiculous argument and a totally different ball of wax.

YOu people Miss the point. Prop 8 the way its worded now puts the words "Eliminates Rights" Into our constitution. that makes it a threat to ALL Rights if it is upheld. this is a very dangerous legal precedent that has been set. It says people can write an ammendment that doesn't have to get a 2/3 majority vote in legislature then pass it to Eliminate ANY RIGHT FROM ANYBODY!!
This is no Longer a just a gay issue. A very dangerous Loophole has been put into our constitution and EVERYONES RIGHTS ARE AT STAKE!

Perhaps she can just go to prison for not paying her taxes. Isn't prison full of lesbians???? The beautiful thing about our country is it is a democracy, and the majority ruled. If she doesn't like it move to anothe rcountry without a democracy.