It used to be that gays were in the closet. Now it seems that people who voted yes on California Proposition 8 are the ones in the closet. If you admit that you voted yes on 8 to define marriage as heterosexual only, then you are labeled a bigot and a hater. So you can’t tell your friends you voted yes on 8 because they won’t talk to you anymore. And there’s no having a civil conversation with gay marriage supporters to address legitimate reasons why someone might vote yes on 8.
For Kindle and with free ePub version. Only $9.49 Great reading.
Here is what Gary Shapiro CEO of the Consumer Electronics Association (CEA) said: Dvorak's writing sings with insight and clarity. Whether or not you agree with John's views, he will get you thinking and is never boring. These essays are worth the read!
Subscribe to Main Blog feed here:
Subscribe to Comments too (below):
Bad Behavior has blocked 4660 access attempts in the last 7 days.
“legitimate reason why someone might vote yes on 8”
such as what?
Is there a legitimate reason why someone would vote yes on prop 8?
Being against all marriage. Ignoring the fact the marriage comes from evolution – reproducing couples. Ignoring reproduction on marriage is like ignoring that eating has anything to do with nutrition. Imposing a set of laws geared towards 17th century heterosexual families on the 21st century gay community. That equality can be had by removing marriage from non-reproducing str8 people.
If someone believes marriage (government marriage) sucks then why would someone want to vote for something that sucks to be expanded to gays?
There are a lot of reasons that have nothing to do with hate an bigotry. But the gay community seems to be oblivious to the legitimate concerns the the reality based difference that there is a gender component to marriage and that gender does make a reality based difference.
There is also an argument that a “one size fits all” marriage is a really bad idea because there are structural differences and that these relationships are not the same. But you can not have a reasonable conversation about this with the No on 8 supporters. All they can do is yell bigot at you without considering the fact that there are differences between males and females.
You also have to consider that the California divorce rate is 60% and that the #1 cause of divorce is marriage.
Voters voting for Prop 8 are guilty of not wanting to redefine marrige as those on the left would like. The redefinition issue is an uphill fight with the energy being expended better coming up witha suitable legal frame work for domestic partners. It is unfortunate that those who have supported Prop 8 are now being verbally abused as the opponents having little more than name calling in left their playbook.
Although not a citizen of California I would have voted for Prop 8 and will not hide from that position.
the most intolerant hate filled types are those who are for gay marriages and against prop 8. All you have to do is see how they act towards those who voted for it.
I found the best reason to give those mean spirited hate filled gay marriage bigots as to why I voted for prop 8 is to, “protect gays from the horrors of divorce. I am sparing gays from the disappointment that marriage brings.” Many on the left always rip marriage because of the high divorce rates thus it’s my duty to make sure they are protected.
I accept that someone who is very anti-marriage may vote for any proposition restricting people’s right to be married without caring who those people are. So that is indeed a non-bias based reason.
The rest of the reasons you cite – “the gender component to marriage” – is no different than people claiming biological differences between black and white people as the basis for segregation. There may be no hate involved – a lot of people honestly believed African Americans are better off segregated – but there sure is prejudice.
I accept that a lot of people who voted for proposition 8 now feel uncomfortable, because they do not hate homosexuals and do not feel they should be labelled as bigots. But the truth is, whether or not someone is a bigot doesn’t depend on whether they themselves would agree to that label. If a lot of people are pointing at someone and saying “bigot”, maybe they need to come to terms with the fact that that is what they are, hate or not.
So which of these “legitimate” arguments has fuck-all to do with a non-intrusive intent? I mean, I’m pretty sure I could make better decisions for everyone else’s life than they do, so why don’t I get to legislate what they do…I mean…they are wrong, right? I get to decide.
Ooops, I mean, yeah, it isn’t bigotry, THEY were mean. That is pretty much the best argument I’ve ever heard. In fact, let’s put that standard up for ANY bigotry. If there are those who are “reverse” hateful, then all arguments for keeping government out of legislating people’s personal business are off…
“spare them from divorce”…nice. I think we should make jobs illegal to spare people from unemployment….or getting fired/laid off if you prefer your parallel structures…
Why is everyone so wound up that we want do define marriage as between man and wife. civil unions still have the rights afforded them, were not pushing to take those away. We just want the word “marriage” and the institution it has stood for all these centuries to stay defined as man and woman. Get off your bigot-calling horses and have some respect for those that want marriage to stay the way it has been. Christians like myself are not called to hate gays but rather the actions that is homosexuality. We dont hate gays just like I would hope you dont hate christians. We dont call you bigots whne you take away our holidays of Easter and Christmas, so show the same respect please.
[Comment deleted – Violation of Posting Guidelines. – ed.]
#8 “We dont call you bigots whne you take away our holidays of Easter and Christmas…”
Huh?
#3 – M Perkel
>>If someone believes marriage (government
>>marriage) sucks then why would someone want to
>>vote for something that sucks to be expanded
>>to gays?
Uh, because many of them want it? And it’s the right thing to do?
#8 – ray
>>civil unions still have the rights afforded
>>them, were not pushing to take those away.
Yeah, civil unions have the rights afforded to civil unions, but not the rights afforded to marriages.
Get it?
#8 – ray
>>Christians like myself are not called to hate
>>gays but rather the actions that is
>>homosexuality.
Well, this being a free country and all, you are free not to engage in those hateful actions known as homosexuality. Never! Not even once!
Not everyone (not even all Christians) feel that way.
Why not just adopt the “live and let live” position on things that have absolutely no impact on how you live your life?
#9 – Warden
>>I found the best reason to give those mean
>>spirited hate filled gay marriage bigots as to
>>why I voted for prop 8 is to, “protect gays
>>from the horrors of divorce. I am sparing gays
>>from the disappointment that marriage brings.”
Gee, that’s mighty white of you, Warden.
[Comment deleted – Violation of Posting Guidelines. – ed.]
#8 – Ray
>>We dont call you bigots whne you take away our
>>holidays of Easter and Christmas
Sure you do.
And the holidays aren’t even being “taken away”. As a card-carrying Christian myself, I can say I have not trouble at all celebrating Christmas or Easter.
If your “celebration” involves using taxpayer money (from Jews, Muslims, Atheists, etc.) to underwrite some kind of public gala, or including Christmas/ Easter indoctrination in public school classrooms, well, that’s a whole different kettle of fish. Christian kids and taxpayers aren’t forced to support Ramadan or Chanukah, and nobody’s crying “bigot” about that.
Defining marriage as the union of a man and a woman. Sounds like common sense. Next they should amend the Constitution to define north.
#17 MikeN
Nicely put
[Comment deleted – Violation of Posting Guidelines. – ed.]
#17 – Lyin’ Mike
>>Defining marriage as the union of a man and a
>>woman. Sounds like common sense. Next they
>>should amend the Constitution to define north.
Ah, you homophobes. So easily confused. You are congenitally unable to distinguish between a physical law of nature and a made-up societal construct that has been in flux ever since it was “defined”.
Tsk.
When you’re on the same side as people who are openly bigoted, you gotta wonder if you’re on the right side.
#6:
“The rest of the reasons you cite – “the gender component to marriage” – is no different than people claiming biological differences between black and white people as the basis for segregation.”
Not really, since there really are biological differences between men and women. There is the idea that marriage is allowable when there is an intent to produce children. I don’t necessarily agree with this, but it’s not illogical.
I voted to allow gay marriage. Just call it a ‘civil union’ for everyone, straight and gay, and get it done with.
Conrack
Keep in in your home and place of worship. That stuff has no place at the ballot box. You’ve heard of “separation of church and state”, I assume?
“Ignoring the fact the marriage comes from evolution – reproducing couples. Ignoring reproduction on marriage is like ignoring that eating has anything to do with nutrition”
Another example. Which one of these things is different from the others:
reproduction, marriage, eating, nutrition.
There is No separation of church and state, the state is merely prohibited from establishing a national religion. There is no such restriction on the people, or enforcing their collective will, everything available to the people expressing their collective will is free game.
Mustard for brains
Homophobes. What a pussy label. I have no fear of the homos. Homophobe doesn’t even come close to describing what I feel for the homos. It’s more like homo disgust, homo contempt, homo revulsion, homo abhorrence. You live in a christian nation, if you don’t like it then move to Lesbos, or France.
#15
Gods kingdom sounds like one boring dull place. Yet it’s called it heaven?
#19: That’s Paul’s opinions, not that of some deity. Paul is such a bigot (remember he was persecuting Samaritans when you first hear of him), that he’s a lousy interpreter of what Jesus was trying to get into people’s minds.
If God was against gays, why did he make them gay? It’s apparently genetic, you know.
By the way, I’m straight but have a sister that’s a lesbian.
#26 Conrack
I just have to ask. Would you make sodomy illegal?