Upper West Side Prop 8 Protest Planned for Tomorrow

Did you really just compare gay marriage to pedophilia?

Society projects itself into the future thru human reproduction. All societies have special magical traditions based on fertility and regeneration. That's why they reserve the title "married" for a hetero monagamous dyad. Same sex couples of course deserve "civil" rights and privileges but they should see that the resistance to giving away that title is based on the "facts of life".

And how will gays getting married affect the ability of married, or non-married, heterosexuals from reproducing?

"Should a willing 16 / 17 year old be allowed to marry a 40 year old?"

Irrelevant. Minors can't enter into contracts.

Marriage should be an issue for each church, not a state concern. Marriage is a religious idea and should be treated as such. The state should issue civil union licenses only, and let each church sort out their own beliefs.

The basis of this country is live and let live - you do whatever you like as long as it does not infringe on my freedoms. What people do in their own private lives is their own business.

For a country that supports free speech for neo-nazis as an affirmation of the rights of every citizen, it hardly makes sense to quibble over two men being able to get a marriage license.

It feels like the state has failed to uphold its duty to uphold the rights of the minority in the face of the majority here, and I'd be shocked if the courts don't strike all these amendments down.

umm, jterry121, the age of consent is already 16 in several states, including many that ban gay marriages. it's a totally different issue.

chris lee, the definition of marriage used to include one man and several wives and used to bar marriage between people of different races. even today, religious people differ over whether it includes marriages after divorce, couples who go through sterilization or who use contraception or couples who are physically unable to engage in intercourse, yet civil marriage is open to them all.

the only people excluded are gays and lesbians.

so tell me, how does the married lesbian couple down the street hamper your ability to marry and raise a family?

"painting these "alternative relationships" with one brush"?

no friend, you are.

@Politburo - Why shouldnt Hugh Hefner be allowed to have multiple wives?

Prop 8 may have beenn a watershed moment, people.

Here in LA (where I live), there have been massive protests every single night since the election. The numbers are being vastly under-reported or unreported by the media, in many cases. You are not only seeing massive protests in LA, San Diego and San Francisco, but also every sizeable city, like Long Beach, San Jose, Sacramento -- and even small towns and cities like Salinas and Modesto. In the heart of conservative country, Orange County, there have been protests too: Huntington Beach, Laguna Beach, Irvine, Mission Viejo (!?). It has really been wide-ranging with about 5-10 cities protesting each night.

Add to that the protests in Washingston, Oregon, Utah, Massachusetts, and other states even though Prop. 8 applies only to California. This is not just a California movement. It has obviously started to become a NATIONAL movement, as the NY protest shows. We have to strike while the iron's hot and galvanize the LGBT community nationally to demand our right all together. Opportunities like this do not arise often in our lives. THIS IS OUR TIME. PLEASE DON'T LET EQUALITY SLIP AWAY. JOIN THE PROTESTS IS NEW YORK BY ANY MEANS POSSIBLE!

So much for 'Change' you can believe in.

Why were there no protests when Joe Biden stated firmly during the debate that he and Obama were AGAINST gay marriage?

Because there is not a compelling reason to legally recognize polygamy, and no one, not even people like yourself who invent silly hypothetical situations to justify your homophobia, can spell out how legal benefits would work under legal polygamy.

Need a grade-school civics lesson profmocs?

The "majority" do not get to force their will on the "minority" under our Constitution. It's not activism when judges rule on this, it's their damn job.

"The people" did not vote to approve interracial marriage, or women's equal pay laws to name but a few examples. The COURTS did.

When "the people" vote to discriminate, we do NOT say in America, "oh well, that's just what 50%+1 want."

Alright this shit is a moot point now. If you look at prop 8 and how it passed it only passed 52% to 48%. It's pretty much a razor thin margin. THe reason why Obama won the presidency even after the right wing conservancy is cause the right wing's base eroded and their children became more liberal. Now it's only a matter of time when gays get allowed to marry, I fucking guarantee it! I'm going to give it a timetable of within the next 4 years. Everybody knows this. The children who were taught by a gay ass dinosaur and gay ass teletubbies, and gay ass nsync are going to vote one day. And they are going to vote for the gays my right wing christian friend, the writing is on the wall. You know I'm right, you can't stop the hypercolor shining. The funny thing is how blacks and hispanics didn't want gays to marry. Which I have a feeling will happen in the year 2099 where the gays, who've finally won social acceptance and are allowed to marry, and straights will join together to vote yes on proposition 323 where they don't want human beings to marry aliens, pets, and household appliances. Thus is human nature. The cycle of hate will go on but I won't give a fuck cause I'm dead. If you can amend the bible to make it between 1 woman and 1 man instead of 1 dude and whole lot of ladies then you can amend the bible again.

There's no law stopping gay people from marrying someone of the opposite sex.

Those people who criticize and ostracize gays are just projecting their doubts about their own sexuality. It's all based on fear. People who are comfortable with their own sexuality couldn't care less if gays want to marry, live together, etc., etc., etc.

@ sidenote

Agree.

The gay protestors who trampled a crucifix outside a church in California are guilty of hate themselves. Hypocrites.

I read that Hitler's "SA" Stormtroopers (that he eliminated as soon as he attained power) were a gay clique and chosen for their fanaticism and mob mentality. I can see that now.

I, along with 1.5 Million other Obama Supporters did not vote No on Prop 8. WE ARE THE ONES WHO PUT PROP 8 OVER THE TOP and I am so pleased that we didnt give in to the Politically Correct Gestapo. Its not a matter of hating anyone but rather following the will of God. If the Government wants to include 'Marriage' in its civil agreements, then we will fight to preserve its integrity no matter what. Any failure and manipulation we see regarding 'Marriage' is due to the Hubris of Men, however the definition of the institution itself is crystal clear. MOrmons are being singled out because they are the easiest target. The Church did not devise Prop 8, did not run Prop 8 and did not donate one penny to Prop 8. It was their parishoners who donated. I would like to add that 70% of Blacks voted Yes, 64% of Catholics, 68% of Protestants and 55% of hispanic voters. What we are seeing now is religious bigotry against a church that only represents 2% of California's population. And I believe it will backfire miserably as more people will sympathize with the Mormons than with Gays.

Love him or hate him; we need Al Sharpton.

Ides, so you'd be okay if we banned interracial marriage again? Because black people would still have the right to marry members of their own race, just like everyone else, correct?

babyhitler - True.. I guess the fact that he repeated his idiocy should have been an obvious flag that this is just a cry for attention.

And if Gays see Gay Marriage is this God Given inalienable right, how come only 6 countries on the PLANET have legalized Gay Marriage, and before 2001, ZERO countries in the world had legalized gay marriage ???

Oh the holy rollers are out in full force with this one.
Anyone who wants to get married should be allowed to. Then they can discover the other side of marriage— lawyers, alimony, child support, divorce court. Please, be my guest. Be careful for what you wish for...

jterry,
i need to revisit that more. your arguement basically is that gay marriage should be illegal because it is not already legal. you sir, are a fucking idiot.

People have to understand that their religion is not EVERYONE'S religion and should not affect anyone else.

Grow up already. Jesus was a longhaired liberal who hated rich people and probably would not have cared if gays wanted to marry.

Petebfd- you seem to forget that its the VOTERS who decide on Gay Marriage, and that 99% of the world has voted to keep Gay Marriage ILLEGAL.

Petebfd - How would Gay Marriage benefit society?
Petebfd - How would Civil Unions be any worse for gays?

Until you can answer these two questions, Gay Marriage will be Illegal in America for another 250 Years.

Welcome to Barack HUSSEIN Obama's Ameirkka where the will of the people does not matter. If a vote doesn't go cult of Obama's way the courts will fix it until it is the way the cult wants.

Yes the rich pageant of gay heritage is evident whenever you stroll around the west village and see all the dvd and 'toy' shops.

Being gay is a biological reality just like being black, asian, or any other ethnicity. Many blacks, Mormons and other people who voted against prop 8 ARE GAY themselves. WAKE UP PEOPLE... there's a high chance that your own children will be gay!

Rather than "protecting" children from something that is a fact of nature, wouldn't it be better to educate and normalize gay marriage? That way, when a teen or young adult learns he is gay he won't have to experience the shame and depression associated with something that is just biology! If you voted for Prop. 8 you are condoning the discrimination that has led to sexual orientation based hate crimes and suicide. Congratulations.

And just to clarify, Joe525, Apple donated $100,000 to OPPOSE prop 8. And you know who else did? Google! Two of the best companies out there.

Marriage is not just a religious institution in our country, thus, we don't care whether "it is a God given right" for men to marry men. Anyways, I have a creeping suspicion that Jesus was a gay man :)

Color me there tomorrow night to protest!

L♥VE
Not H8!

A-8

"A better question would be - How would gay marriage affect you - adversely or otherwise?"

Gays dont seem to realize that in order for the public majority to support gay marriage, Gay people have to show how Gay marriage would benefit society.

You are already being given Civil Unions- so the public has more than met you halfway on this issue. Your attempt to re define marriage will continue to be met with overwhelming OPPOSITION.

Youre so focused on California & havent even addressed that Florida and Arizona voted to ban Gay Marriage as well.

If a state as Liberal as California votes against Gay marriage, 90% of America will vote against Gay marriage. The Gay minority must show America how gay marriage would benefit society & how civil Unions make gays worse off, or else gay marriage will be banned in America for another 250 years.

@jterry121

How does allowing interracial marriage benefit society?

How does allowing blacks to marry benefit society?

For that matter, how does abolishing slavery benefit society?

"Why the Church of Latter Day Saints?"

Because the Mormons are mostly white.

The American people have already spoken- California , Arizona, & Florida have all voted to ban gay Marriage. Its only a matter of time before the rest of America including New York bans gay marriage.

Civil Unions give all the legal rights of marriage without redefining marriage. Gays arent being oppressed- if You dont like it, move out of America.

Marriage has always been defined as one man & one woman marrying. Interracial marriage didnt change the definition of marriage, which is what gay marriage is trying to do.

The American people have already spoken- California , Arizona, & Florida have all voted to ban gay Marriage. Its only a matter of time before the rest of America including New York bans gay marriage. Dont like it? Move to one of the 6 countries in the world where its legal.

@jterry121:

It most definitely has not always been "one man and one woman". Marriage was traditionally "one man and one or more women" far longer than it was 1x1.

And allowing interracial marriage definitely did change the so-called "definition of marriage" insomuch as a union between a mixed-race couple was outlawed prior to the oh-so-evil Supreme Court ignoring the will of the people to overturn those laws.

ChesterKatz, I agree, and that's what I'm saying. Those who have supported the ban don't understand the separation of church & state / marriage/legal union, and therefore seek to try and uphold a religious institution through political means. This whole controversy exists because this country has long upheld religious rites through governmental institutions (i.e. we've legislated religious beliefs), and they still hold onto that. That's a problem in the present pluralistic society we live in.

Jterry....wanna bet?

African_Americans went 70-30 for Prop.8, which passed 52-48. Why don't those gay "Pink Panthers" attack a Harlem Methodist church instead? Pussies?

Politics make strange bed-fellows. Reps/social conservatives/ AAs. Obama really brought us all together.

"African_Americans went 70-30 for Prop.8, which passed 52-48. Why don't those gay "Pink Panthers" attack a Harlem Methodist church instead? Pussies?"

Maybe because California is 76% White, and only 6% black?

@ChesterKatz:The separation of church and state would actually dictate that only religious people could get married and that non-religious people could only have civil unions. The word would be a protected word and the church would have the rights to it and it would be a trade mark product.

Maybe, the Church will brand marriage with an ordained label from God, like the sign of the Cross.

It would be like the gays trying to prescribe their only meaning to Hannuka and asking the courts to support it.

For you bleeding idiots who think that Gay Marriage will become a norm in America, consider the facts.

DOMA- the Defesne of Marriage Act was passed by Congress by a vote of 85-14 in the Senate[1] and a vote of 342-67 in the House of Representatives[2], and was signed into law by President Bill Clinton on September 21, 1996. not even close.

It says No state (or other political subdivision within the United States) need treat a relationship between persons of the same sex as a marriage, even if the relationship is considered a marriage in another state.
The Federal Government may not treat same-sex relationships as marriages for any purpose, even if concluded or recognized by one of the states.

Including the results of the 2008 general elections, two states (Massachusetts and Connecticut) allow same-sex marriage, five states recognize some alternative form of same-sex union, twelve states ban any recognition of any form of same-sex unions including civil union, twenty-eight states have adopted amendments to their state constitution prohibiting same sex marriage, and another twenty states have enacted statutory DOMAs.

It says the Definition of 'marriage' and 'spouse': In determining the meaning of any Act of Congress, or of any ruling, regulation, or interpretation of the various administrative bureaus and agencies of the United States, the word ‘marriage’ means only a legal union between ONE MAN and ONE WOMAN as husband and wife, and the word ‘SPOUSE’ refers only to a person of the opposite sex who is a husband or a wife.

No on 8 constantly tries to compare gay marriage with civil rights and slavery, insisting that the will of a minority was upheld over the will of a majority. They must be referring to their racist families, because civil rights and the abolishment of slavery was not a minority decision but a majority decision.

Worldwide about 95% of the world was against slavey up to and during the Civil War. In the U.S. over 70% of America was against slavery, and the White minority group of the South opposed civil rights. The South was so over voted that they sought to count their slaves as citizens, without voting rights, so as to proxy their votes in their own interest. That is where the 3/5 person came into play,concerning Blacks.

Delegates opposed to slavery generally wished to count only the free inhabitants of each state. Delegates supportive of slavery, on the other hand, generally wanted to count slaves at their actual numbers. Since slaves could not vote, slaveholders would thus have the benefit of increased representation in the House and the Electoral College; taxation was only a secondary issue. The final compromise of counting "all other persons" as only three-fifths of their actual numbers reduced the power of the slave states relative to the original southern proposals, but is still generally credited with giving the pro-slavery forces disproportionate political power in the U.S. government from the establishment of the Constitution until the Civil War. For example, in the period prior to 1850, southerners held the Presidency for 50 of 62 years, and 18 of the 31 Supreme Court Justices were southerners despite the north having nearly twice the population by 1850.

The three-fifths compromise is found in Article 1, Section 2, Paragraph 3 of the United States Constitution:

By fauxfetus:In the case of incest, a person is not predisposed to fall in love with a relative the same way a person is predisposed to fall in love with a member of the same, or opposite, sex.

First, you are just making things up as they pop in your head. In regards, to pedophiles marrying kids. In some countries the age of consent is 12 and is Hawaii it is 14, that means that they can not marry in California even though they are predisposed to fall in love and want to marry.

In the case of incest, a person is just as predisposed to fall in love with a relative, and it has happened many times before, as a person is to fall in love with the same sex. Many psychiatrist have defined both as neither sexual or eros, but projections of disorders rooted in trauma.

Yet, I have known lesbians who were in love with a woman, but fell in love with a man and married that man. Ask Ellen Degeneres about that. I personally knew a lesbian, living with a girl, who fell in love with me, while I married to my wife.

Do your research, this matter was already addressed. It was not a revision, but an addition. If the constitution had said that marriage is between any two consenting adults, accept blood relatives and those who lack mental competence, then it would have been a revision.

It carried the same weight for approval, a all the other ballot initiatives, including the one that said that a child does not need her parents permission to have an abortion.

What homosexuals have done is what paraphiliacs do, they have attached love to an object and attached affection to that love. The father who loves his daughter,paternally is sincere in that love, when perverted it slips into eros and the sexual boundary is penetrated.

In regards to under age girls, I may look at a 15 year old girl, who is fully developed, but I have control and discipline so as not to even entertain that thought. My sister may be attractive, but all she will ever be is an attractive sister who I love as a sister.

Facts and truths lead to knowledge:
A common argument is that an inclination to homosexuality is inborn and immutable. It is widely believed that the public will become more accepting of homosexuality if they are convinced that it is inborn and immutable. For example, neuroscientist and homosexual Simon Levay stated: "...people who think that gays and lesbians are born that way are also more likely to support gay rights."[3] Research into the issue of the origins of homosexuality suggests that adoptive brothers are more likely to both be homosexuals than the biological brothers, who share half their genes which suggests that homosexuality is not genetically caused. [4][5][6] This data prompted the journal Science to report "this . . . suggests that there is no genetic component, but rather an environmental component shared in families".[7][8][9] However, in regards to psychosocial and biological theories in regards to the origin of homosexuality, Columbia University psychiatry professors Drs. William Byrne and Bruce Parsons stated in 1994: "There is no evidence that at present to substantiate a biological theory. [T]he appeal of current biological explanations for sexual orientation may derive more from dissatisfaction with the present status of psychosocial explanations than from a substantiating body of experimental data".[10] Dr. Tahir I. Jaz, M.D., Winnipeg, Canada states: "The increasing claims of being "born that way" parallels the rising political activism of homosexual organisations, who politicise the issue of homosexual origins . In the 1970s, approximately ten percent of homosexuals claimed to be "born homosexual" according to a large scale survey....However, in a survey in the 1980s, with the homosexual rights movement increasingly becoming active, thirty-five percent claimed to be born that way.[11] Roman 1:26
For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature.
27-And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another, men with men, working that which is unseemly (not good or suitable but perverted), and receiving in themselves that compense of their error was meet.
28- And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient.
29- Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness, full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity, whisperers,
30 -Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents