Dear Californians, (my views on prop. 8 in letter form)

[Amy]

On Tuesday, November 4th, we, as both a nation and a state, will have the choice to change the environment in which we live. We can vote for an African-America to be president. We can vote for a woman to be vice-president. We can vote for better treatment of the animals we, in turn, eat. We can vote for equality in marriage. We can vote for women's rights. We can even vote for high-speed transportation.

Out of everything on the 2008 American and Californian ballot, there is the one proposition that I oppose the most. It is Proposition 8.

"Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California." ~ Proposition 8

This proposition has nothing to do with voting for same-sex marriage, it has to do with preserving the civil rights promised in our constitution. If passed, Proposition 8 would write discrimination into our constitution. Our constitution states that all people are treated equally under the law.

No one is asking you to vote yes on a proposition that would allow same-sex marriage; we are asking you to vote no on a proposition that would deny people their civil rights.

Many people have used the argument of religion, stating that Proposition 8 would protect religious freedom. It does not. Proposition 8 destroys freedom of religion. Yes, many Christians support Proposition 8 stating that it is their religious beliefs that cause their support. It is my Christian beliefs that cause my opposition.

Christianity is not the only religion in our country. There are many religions that support same-sex marriage as their teachings include equality. Unitarian Universalism is based off of the core principals of Christianity and Judaism, yet they oppose Proposition 8 to the point of many churches giving out No On 8 signs after services. Passing Proposition 8 would only allow full religious freedom to the few.

Family Code §297.5 states that "domestic partnerships shall have the same rights, protections and benefits" as married couples. Domestic partnerships are available to both same and opposite sex couples. If Proposition 8 is passed then marriage would become a special right to opposite-sex couples.

I am attending my fourth school and have never been told anything about marriage besides that it is something to be taught in your own home. When I attended Trinity Baptist, I asked my teacher what would happen if two brides or two grooms got married. She said that we would learn about all marriage at home. I would consider that a rather direct question about same-sex marriage, yet I was told that I would be taught about marriage by my parents. I later attended Leo Croce Elementary School and Our Saviour Lutheran School and am now attending Livermore High School as a sophomore. I have never been taught about marriage of any sort at any school.

This proposition is not about education. No child in the state of California can be taught anything without the consent of their gaurdian(s).

The Yes on 8 Campaign states that "Proposition 8 protects individual expression." It does not. This proposition is about marriage, nothing else. If Proposition 8 fails to pass, nobody will loose their rights. If it does pass, seventeen percent of the population will loose a civil right and their individual expression.

In 1954 there was an infamous trial. It was Brown vs. Board of Education. This was not about marriage; it was about segregation in schools. The popular opinion was in favour of the Board of Education as African-Americans were supposedly inferior to Caucasians. The arguments in favour of segregation in schools are ridiculously similar to those in favour of Proposition 8; both using the Christian Bible, freedom of expression and education as arguments. Today, we know educational segregation to not only be unfair, but to be complete and utter denial of the civil rights promised in the Constitution of the United States of America.

You may have heard this from me before, and I am going to say it again. Put aside education, put aside your own religious views, put aside anything you have heard from anyone, and ask yourself if you really want to deny rights to seventeen percent of Californians because of whom they love.

Sincerely,
Amy Leona ******
Livermore High School Interact Club Co-Historian
Livermore High School Gay Straight Alliance Vice President
Livermore High School Jefferson Award Committee Chairwoman


-----------------------------------


yomp

thoughts?

[kh23172]

I think it is great. We have something similar in florida, called Amendement 2 or something.. I don't remember exactly. I've paid more attention to Proposition 8 to be honest, although I can't even vote anyways. I agree, it's wrong to pass these bills because they take away universal rights to a lot of people.. it's ridiculous.

[beckyg]

Yeah Amy! That was great!

Amy, that rocked ^_^

[Amy]

thank you!s to all!!!

im thinking of printing it off and giving them to /certain/ people on my street.

[Amy]

the comments on my note (facebook) are getting a bit ridiculous.

really. its sad.

That's awesome!

[Amy]

i really could make the fundamentalist christians who commented cry for their mothers (thank you lutheran school), but i didnt. proud?

[Amy]

Ladies and gentlemen, procrastination at it's finest. Here are some of the highlights of the comments. A month after the last comment was posted.

As of now, if a gay couple came to my church to be married, and we refused to marry them on religious grounds, they could sue us for a hate crime. Worse, we would be fined. And taxed. This is unconstitutional according to the REAL meaning of separation of church and state--the government shall not interfere in matters of the church. We who support Prop 8 could care less if homosexuals want rights, we're protecting our OWN freedoms. Don't peg false intentions on us. Please.

What false intentions do you think we are trying to peg? All we are trying to do is get equal rights. Nothing more, and nothing less.

If a church refused to marry a biracial or inter-faith couple, the church could be sued. Are you going to try and take away those peoples' rights too?

If you try and impose Christian laws on the sate or nation, you would have to take no cruel or unusual punishment out of the Bill of Rights as any son who disobeys his parents would be taken into the yard and stoned to death.

The false intentions are that we are trying to take away rights. We are not. Clear?

You are confusing state laws with church laws again. Under the laws of the land, I have the right to have sex with someone to whom I am not married. Under the church, I do not. However, I have the CHOICE to be under church law or not. In the same way, homosexuals can go to the City Halll and get married. They have that right. In the church, we have our own rules, but only if you choose to subscribe to those rules. In the Bible, the definition of marraige is when a man "joins with his wife and the two become one flesh." If you do not wish to subscribe to these rules, then you should not as the church to condone your actions.

We, as the church, do not reject gay people from coming to our churches. We love it when they come. We love sharing our lives with them. However, we do not help people sin. That means we do not sell drugs, we do not show pornography, we do not teach swear words, and we do not marry people to the same gender. Under the Consitution, that is our right. In the state of California, it is not.

[someone opposing Propp. 8]

I only wish to protect MY rights.

There have been no reports of churches being shut down for refusal of gay marriage. Mostly it's a misconception. The churches that were shut down were shut down for poor management.

Also this is just an issue of equality.

Freedom of Religion does not stand above a persons inalienable rights.

We're the United States of America, not the United States of Christ. Sorry.

People keep talking about taking away rights, as if Prop 8 is some bigoted law made specifically to deny basic constitutional rights. It's not. Noone would be complaining at all on the yes side if the domestic partnership laws were changed however they need to be to allow for the exact same rights. As I've heard, domestic partnership laws already allow for 99.99% of the same rights, so I don't think anyone would care if marriage and domestic partnership were to be made equal under law. The problem is that marriage already has a definition. A lot of people I know, myself included, totally support equal rights. We just think that you don't have to change the definition of the word to get that done.



Honestly, the most respectful and democratic solution to this issue would be to alter the domestic partnership laws so as to ensure that the rights are absolutely equal, and leave the word marriage alone.



Also, I keep hearing this comparison to segregation floating around, and come one guys, you've got to be freaking kidding me. You're comparing the situation of economically and politically oppressed people who were not allowed to be paired up AT ALL or do much else together to a group of people who can have 99% of the same rights and aren't being economically or politically oppressed? That's a rude and disrespectful comparison which demeans the struggles of African Americans to gain the most basic rights afforded by our country. Theirs wasn't a situation over the definition of the word marriage, it was much much more than that.

I support prop 8 because gay "marriage" is not marriage, plain and simple. NOT because homosexual couples are inferior, or because America should be ruled by biblical laws, because none of that is true. Rather, marriage is the union between a man and a woman, and always has been for countless cultures throughout the centuries. An apple is not an orange, just as two men marrying each other is clearly not the same as a woman marrying a man. It’s a question of preserving culture on the side for prop 8, and a question of gaining acceptance on the side against prop 8 (NOT that I’m saying gay people shouldn’t gain acceptance! I believe they can do so without prop 8, see first paragraph). It is simply unfair to claim that prop 8 takes away people’s rights, because A) it doesn’t and B) this claim automatically and wrongly implies that proponents of prop 8 are narrow-minded and backwards, therefore prematurely dismissing any of their reasoning or arguments.

The proposition does take away rights, and it takes them away based upon religious principle; something that is illegal under the 1st amendment. ...There is nothing legal about denying rights to people for religious reasons and there never should be.

Nobody is going to take rights away from the church if it fails to pass, as I hope it does, and those who claim to are guilty of being liars or have been deceived by those who lie.

D****, there is a very strong parallel to this issue and the struggle for civil rights of ALL minorities; We're claiming that we should be entitled to things they are not because it's what we believe is right. To ever think that anyone claims any right that others cannot is not what this country was founded on, the 1st amendment protects the non-religious too.

D**** and K***,
i completely respect your point of view, but i don't agree. although prop 8 is not of the same magnitude of segregation, it is similar. black people were made to feel inferior to white people for no logical reason just as gay people are being made inferior to straight people for again, no reason.
k*** mentioned that she disagreed with some parts of prop 8 [i'm too lazy to copy/paste], but agrees with some. if you disagree with any part of prop 8, you should oppose it until properly worded. if prop 8 was only about keeping marriage between a man and a woman and having a seperate name for homosexuals and not about denying gay people the same rights as straight people, then i would have no problem with it. personally, i think marriage is just a word, and the love between two people is what really matters.

Shelby, all prop 8 says is "marriage is between a man and a woman". Should it pass, no rights will be taken away. Nothing changes whatsoever. If it fails to pass, the only thing that changes is now churches can be sued for having their own individual beliefs about marriage.



Made to feel inferior? Yes on prop eight people are made to feel inferior when people call the proposition hateful and bigoted. All it does is protect the many-millenia old definition of marriage without denying anyone any rights. It's a part of their culture. Honestly, protecting the definition of marriage doesn't hurt anyone. All it does is keep the meaning the same. The couples will have the same rights under law. If there's any discrepancy, why not just change the civil union laws? Why do we have to completely alter a definition.



In a discussion yesterday we spoke about how all couples have civil unions. Marriage is real just a subcategory. Like, apples and oranges are fruits, but an apple is not an orange. A gay couple and straight couple are not the same. If they were, I wouldn't have had to use the words gay and straight to let you know what I'm talking about. Marriage is just the specific word for a straight, committed couple. They just need to come up with a new word for gay, committed couples.

What right is being taken away? The right to use the word marriage? What I'm saying is a gay couple saying they're married is like me calling myself black. It's simply not true. I could try really hard to make myself believe I am and say "We should be allowed to be whoever we want to be!" and argue about equality. The fact is, I'm never going to be black. All prop eight does is limit the use of the word marriage. There's nothing in there that says "gay people are not allowed to exist or to adopt children or to see each other in the hospital or to leave their belongings to each other."

I think that if they're going to ban gay people from getting "traditionally married" then they should ban everyone else who doesn't believe in God from getting married too.
I think that the churches are just picking on the gays because "God says it's wrong to sodomize"

This is so ridiculous, marriage is just a term that everyone, even atheists, use to describe their "life long" partnership. I think that everyone needs to suck it up and accept everyone as an equal, because no matter what genitals I like to tickle, I'm still just as good as everyone else.

Don't worry, prop 8 opponents. It's only a matter of time before this amendment is repealed/undone. But I'm okay with that, because we live in a democracy, and we have the power to vote. Once Californians want to make marriage open to gay couples, then that should be what happens. People have the power in a democracy, and I'll defend that to the death.

S*****, I didn't say that I disagreed with parts of prop 8. As D**** said, prop 8 merely defines marriage as a union between a man and a woman. What I DO STRONGLY disagree with are some of the ridiculous reasons people would support prop 8.

How does gay marriage "undo" a culture?

There is no logical basis for that argument; I don't see how what two adults do with their private lives is anyones business, let alone the governments business to regulate it. Also, prominent psychological researches and the American Psychological Association have endorsed a resolution stating that there is no evidence to show that having two heterosexual parents is superior to having two homosexual parents.

------------------

I though you would enjoy reading some of them. Discuss if you wish.

O, and the last comments include taking marriage out of government completely and the origin of marriage.

[Nixon]

at least in 1978 they voted down prop 6

Teachers rejoice