Post-Prop 8

Some thoughts about the passage of Proposition 8 in California, which constitutionally defines marriage as heterosexual. These are directed at the No on 8 supporters for the most part.

First off, the law is not retroactive. Those homosexual couples who were married in the last few months have not had their marriages invalidated; they’re still legally married. If you’re gay and married in California, Prop 8 did not destroy your marriage. If you’re gay and not married yet, well, you missed your chance. Sorry. But maybe you’ll have another chance in the future.

Secondly, the hate-filled protests at Mormon temples is utterly despicable and needs to end now. That ad that showed the Mormons tearing apart a lesbian couples’ house and tearing up their marriage certificate was disgusting enough (and also promoted the false assumption that gay marriages would be invalidated), and to see the anti-LDS rhetoric continue after the vote is deplorable and should stop for your guys’ own good. For one, the LDS was hardly the only religious institution pulling for Prop 8’s passage; to protest them but not also the Catholics and orthodox Jews looks like bullying, picking on arguably the smallest of the pack. Also, for those who preached that “8 is Hate” and love and equality and all that, these kind of hate-filled protests are clearly hypocritical, and are not helping the gay marriage proponents’ image in the public eye at all. Compare these with Anonymous’ protests of Scientology; the level of vitriol is not even comparable.

Gay marriage opponents used not hate and riots, but society’s laws to achieve what they wanted. California’s next general election is in 2010. Folks, you’ve got two years together to get your own measure on the ballot which will strike out 8. That’s the right way to go about this; don’t use the scummy courts and skeezy lawyers. Let the people use their voices and their votes. That way, there can be no doubt.

Does homosexual marriage threaten the sanctity of marriage or does it threaten the power of those who continually use religion/ faith to oppress and control?

Neither, in my opinion - though that second question’s a bit of a trick one, and it’s not solely a religious issue, especially here in California.

I think that the government should get out of the marriage business and recognize only civil unions. Let the churches sort out what constitutes a marriage and who qualifies.

Syndicate content