Proposition 8 passes in California

[estranged4life]

Originally Posted by Tellurium

^ I dislike breaking homophobia down into race categories. The implications of that are really problematic. There is only one reason people voted for Prop 8 and skin color has nout to do with it. There are reasons for correlations such as the above stats, but it's not really causal or practical information, IMO. But I guess people can't help but report the stuff. *shrugs*

(Disliking homophobia being SUPPOSEDLY decided and linked by race - which is why I posted the results shown and said "Take it for what it is" - in other words sounds like an excuse to me) but when NBC news had that segment on why Prop 8 failed, they showed these exit polls, but for some reason none where shown for white voters or voters by age...

When the law that defines marriage between only a man and woman passed here in 2006 it had ZERO to do with race, but I remember exit poll results showed that religion and 'protecting family values' had ALOT to do with the passing of that law - and of course the older the person the more likely they voted for that measure.

I see gay marriage happening sooner than later, and each election where such a law appears on the Oklahoma ballot I will vote in FAVOR to ALLOW it (Hopefully OTHERS in this state will give up the homophobic ideals too and SUPPORT those who want happiness with one they love)

[jbrownsjr]

Originally Posted by DavidMn

This has me so worked up! Its unbelieveable to me that as a law abiding citizen of the United States of America I cannot by law choose to marry someone cimply because they are the same sex as I am. There's no other way to put this, IT MAKES NO SENSE and I'm damn pissed off by it! I was happy about what happened Tuesday, but there's still a long way to go believe me! I also heard that the marriages already performed there may be challenged in court as not valid.

Quick to judge,
Quick to anger,
Slow to understand
Ignorance and prejudice
And fear walk hand in hand... Neil Peart...


dont give up David.. I certainly won't

[BombaySapphire3]

Naturally I voted no on 8 but I'm personally glad that gay marriage was not legal 25 years ago when I embarked upon the first of 4 failed long term relationships.The thought of the attorny's fees, alimony and divorce court from all that gives me a chill even now.I know when enough is enough so I have no plans to marry ,cohabitate ,or engage in a civil union with anyone.

[strandinthewind]

^^^^^^^^^

Bitter - party of one

[estranged4life]

Originally Posted by jbrownsjr

Quick to judge,
Quick to anger,
Slow to understand
Ignorance and prejudice
And fear walk hand in hand... Neil Peart...


dont give up David.. I certainly won't

"Witch Hunt" by Rush, a song whose lyrical content STILL resonantes in this modern era of hate.

[Dreamz19]

Originally Posted by estranged4life

Take it for what it is, but according to exit polls shown on NBC tonight, 70% of African Americans who voted in support of Obama in California also voted in favor of Proposition 8...Whereas Hispanics who supported Obama were less likely to vote in favor of Proposition 8 (I believe the stat for Hispanic voters was 56% in favor and 44% against) .

That exit poll was a CNN poll that only asked about 2,200 people about this. When they broke it down by the gender and race...black males were listed as N/A. It seems to be the only poll out there regarding prop 8 so I have a hard time putting much stock in it. It's a very small sample when you think of the millions of voters in Cali who voted. Some folks I talked to thought this was based on every single vote that was counted in Cali.

[strandinthewind]

Food for Thought

[estranged4life]

^^^I agree WHOLE-HEARTEDLY!!!

[SuzeQuze]

Yes, exactly. I'm still dumbfounded that Californians voted that way, I did not think they would.

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by SuzeQuze

Yes, exactly. I'm still dumbfounded that Californians voted that way, I did not think they would.

I just don't get the black hate out there. I mean about 40 years ago, these same exact arguments were being made to keep whites and blacks from marrying each other. In fact, their precious Obama would not have occured under that line of thinking. I mean, I am sort of like "how fukcing dare you - if it weren't for a few free thinkers out there who dared to buck the self centered, bigoted, money hungry religious leaders, you'd still be at the back of the bus - but, you can't apply that logic to others - fukc you"

Note - I fully realize not all black voters voted for Obama or for Prop. 8. But, the vast majority did.

Again, apparently, these same highly religous black people were not similarly moved by Obama's extremely pro abortion stance so that their faith prohibited them from voting for Obama. Rather, they, who had few rights about 40 years ago, apparently are loathe to give equal rights to other people who are hated for what they are. To add insult to injury, these same black people are still getting extra rights via Affirmative Action to right a wrong solely based on the color of their skin as opposed to anything they ever did. They see Obama as the beacon of hope that the effect of that bigotry is greatly lessened. Yet and again, Obama would not have existed because the definition of marriage right up until the time Obama was born considered a biracial marriage unholy, against God, etc. See Loving v. Virginia 388 U.S. 1 (1967) (the United States Supreme Court declared Virginia's anti-miscegenation statute, the "Racial Integrity Act of 1924", unconstitutional, thereby overturning Pace v. Alabama (1883) and ending all race-based legal restrictions on marriage in the United States.) Note - biracial marriage was not addressed in the Civil Rights act of 1964 - rather, judicial activism got rid of this abomination for us because the American public likely would have never voted to get rid of it. Again, rank hypocrisy on behalf of the majority of the black sommunity some 40 years later. Anyway, here is trial judge's reasoning in Loving:

The trial judge in the case, Leon Bazile, echoing Johann Friedrich Blumenbach's 18th-century interpretation of race, proclaimed that

Almighty God created the races white, black, yellow, Malay and red, and He placed them on separate continents. And but for the interference with His arrangement there would be no cause for such marriages. The fact that He separated the races shows that He did not intend for the races to mix.

Sound familiar

In its decision, The Supreme Court (those still hated and maligned by the religious right for judicial activism mind you) held:

Marriage is one of the "basic civil rights of man," fundamental to our very existence and survival . . . . To deny this fundamental freedom on so unsupportable a basis as the racial classifications embodied in these statutes, classifications so directly subversive of the principle of equality at the heart of the Fourteenth Amendment, is surely to deprive all the State's citizens of liberty without due process of law. The Fourteenth Amendment requires that the freedom of choice to marry not be restricted by invidious racial discrimination. Under our Constitution, the freedom to marry, or not marry, a person of another race resides with the individual and cannot be infringed by the State.

The Supreme Court concluded that anti-miscegenation laws were racist and had been enacted to perpetuate white supremacy:

There is patently no legitimate overriding purpose independent of invidious racial discrimination which justifies this classification. The fact that Virginia prohibits only interracial marriages involving white persons demonstrates that the racial classifications must stand on their own justification, as measures designed to maintain White Supremacy.

Despite this Supreme Court ruling, such laws remained on the books, although unenforced, in several states until 2000, when Alabama became the last state to repeal its law against mixed-race marriage.

Thus, I conclude the majority of the balck vote for Prop. 8 in California is rank hypocrisy and those voters ought to read a history book and be ashamed of themselves rather than hide their prejudice behind some pathetic faux religious reason they do not have the conviction to apply to themselves.

[BTFLCHLD]

Let's take a look at the numbers.


California Proposition 8:
Yes 5,979,087 52%
No 5,457,949 48%
100% of precincts reporting


Arizona Proposition 102:
Yes 1,157,979 56%
No 900,185 44%
100% of precincts reporting


Florida Amendment 2:
Yes 4,755,789 62%
No 2,913,740 38%
100% of precincts reporting

[StandbackStevie]

In connecticut now we are the second state to legalize gay marriage in the nation the other state i believe is Massachuesetts. It was passed here in october sometime and then they had a question when we voted on Nov. 4th it was Question #1 it was if you voted no your for it if yes you were against it and The No won so as of today it is official to be married in Connecticut if you gay I am gay and partnered and so excited and hopefully down the road my partner and I will do the same one of these days but he doesn't want to get married or civil union right now I hope sometime in the future we will.

here is the results that of the question #1 related to gay marriage in connecticut


2008 General Election - Nov. 4, 2008#1 - Constitutional Convention
Statewide Question
Yes 546,660 41% if yes passed it would mean here that if they did pass gay marriage church's and other organizations have a right to appeal that decision and fight for it not to pass.
No 799,107 59% wins and passes as of today 11-12-08 gay marriage is officially legal here in connecticut



here is the actual quiestion # 1 below




This November, voters will be asked: "Shall there be a Constitutional Convention to amend or revise the Constitution of the state?"


Holding a convention in Hartford isn’t change, it’s politics as usual. State legislators decide who goes to the convention, not the taxpayers. It will be a convention of lobbyists, politicians and special interests.

The public has no say on what the lobbyists propose to do to the constitution. The political group pushing for the convention will use it to ban marriage for gay people, outlaw abortion and take away people’s rights. Big businesses will use it to give themselves special tax breaks, overturn environmental laws and take away workers’ rights and benefits.

So vote no on the Lobbyist Convention – and vote for leaders who will bring us real change.

[BTFLCHLD]

I find curious that states voted to allow the marriage only to lateron vote against the marriage...really sux.

[DavidMn]

Originally Posted by StandbackStevie

In connecticut now we are the second state to legalize gay marriage in the nation the other state i believe is Massachuesetts. It was passed here in october sometime and then they had a question when we voted on Nov. 4th it was Question #1 it was if you voted no your for it if yes you were against it and The No won so as of today it is official to be married in Connecticut if you gay I am gay and partnered and so excited and hopefully down the road my partner and I will do the same one of these days but he doesn't want to get married or civil union right now I hope sometime in the future we will.

here is the results that of the question #1 related to gay marriage in connecticut


2008 General Election - Nov. 4, 2008#1 - Constitutional Convention
Statewide Question
Yes 546,660 41% if yes passed it would mean here that if they did pass gay marriage church's and other organizations have a right to appeal that decision and fight for it not to pass.
No 799,107 59% wins and passes as of today 11-12-08 gay marriage is officially legal here in connecticut



here is the actual quiestion # 1 below




This November, voters will be asked: "Shall there be a Constitutional Convention to amend or revise the Constitution of the state?"


Holding a convention in Hartford isn’t change, it’s politics as usual. State legislators decide who goes to the convention, not the taxpayers. It will be a convention of lobbyists, politicians and special interests.

The public has no say on what the lobbyists propose to do to the constitution. The political group pushing for the convention will use it to ban marriage for gay people, outlaw abortion and take away people’s rights. Big businesses will use it to give themselves special tax breaks, overturn environmental laws and take away workers’ rights and benefits.

So vote no on the Lobbyist Convention – and vote for leaders who will bring us real change.

Well, there's hope yet. Thank you for this good news.