Page 1 of 3
Posted on December 12 at 11:36 a.m.
Do you have a problem reading? I did not say "that because Obama won, it was due to liberal voters who might vote against Prop 8."
I said November 2008 brought a record number of liberal voters to the polls specifically to vote for their hero - Obama. Even with all of those new liberal voters in the booth, and with all the momentum and excitement of electing our first African-American President, you still could not defeat Prop. 8. Why not?
I give the folks much more credit than "fear and ignorance as reasons.
They are not buying what you are selling.
Posted on December 11 at 1:53 p.m.
I never said the battle is over. Read carefully between laughs. I understand that the fight is on. I was pointing out that this issue has never had (nor will have) a better chance at passing than November 2008 in California. And you could not get it passed.
The folks are not buying your "civil rights" argument. If they were, the African-American community would have voted overwhelming against the ban. Instead, they voted overwhelming for it. Equating how you choose to have sex to civil rights is an insult to the civil rights movement. Most reasonable people see that, despite all the effort to sell it as a civil rights issue. Hence, Prop 8 passes.
I have no question about your passion in getting this done. I experienced it first hand campaigning for Prop 8. I am sure you will be back. But your best opportunity may have just been missed.
Oh and hey river is back. Way to go, river. Wrong with the facts as usual. Strictly on his voting record in the Senate, Obama was by far the most liberal senator. Many Republicans voted for him because he sold the message of a new start. I did not vote for him, but I am rooting for him, as we need a new start.
Posted on December 10 at 11:19 a.m.
Hey Empty:"the end game is going to be won"...Who is delusional? You lost in the most liberal state in the country, with turnout of the liberal base the highest in history who elected the most liberal senator we have as President, finallly broke the color barrier by electing an African-American, had the highest turnout of arguably the most"civil rights" minded folks among us (the African-Americans, God bless them), kept the liberal Democrats in power in congress and almost gave them a blank check with power (60 in the Senate) and with all that momentum you STILL could not get gay marriage passed. It has never happened in the history of our country in any state that has ever voted on it and if you could not do it in the perfect storm of November 2008 - as they say - fugetabotit, ain't gonna happen. You had your perfect chance and blew it.
Posted on December 9 at 10:08 a.m.
sa1:"Quoting the bible for civil rules":hmmm:you mean like "thou shalt not kill and thou shalt not steal". What you fail to understand is that most of our "civil rules" have their roots in the moral principals of the scriptures. "Don't legislate morality" you say:without realizing that we do that everyday in our society, with rules based on the morals of the majority. Are there "civil rules" against killing people and stealing? Of course there are and they came from the bible.
You certainly are entitled to believe that the bible is "2000 year old fables", but to the vast majority of Americans, it is God's word. Weak humans choosing to justify evil acts does not make the word less true.
Posted on December 5 at 1:38 p.m.
River says, "Jesus says he's sure Paul meant well although they never met."
Try this - King James Version: Acts Chapter 9:3 And as he journeyed, he came near Damascus: and suddenly there shined round about him a light from heaven: 4 And he afell to the earth, and heard a voice saying unto him, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me? 5 And he said, Who art thou, Lord? And the Lord said, I am Jesus whom thou persecutest.
Never met? Try again.
I'm starting to agree with Ashaw - two men choosing to have anal sex gives them a civil right? It is insulting to the civil rights movement.
Posted on December 5 at 8:24 a.m.
There he/she goes again. River keeps trying to discount the teachings of Paul on the subject of homosexuality. Because weak humans have used Paul's writings to justify bad things, does not make the writings bad. Paul condemned homosexuality and was extremely clear about it. Sorry, River, I know he makes life difficult for you but Paul is not going away, despite your best efforts.
Posted on December 4 at 3:28 p.m.
Tegrat:Here is what I don't "get". I have repeatedly, in other threads and in other responses to you specifically, pointed how "gay marriage brings harm to any one class of people". You are great at ignoring me. As far as "creating this rather arbitrary distinction called "gay" marriage" the opponents of Prop 8 are the ones who are fighting for this distinction. Those who voted yes are perfectly happy with the traditional definition. "Without evidence" are you kidding me? Either you can't read or you are badly ignoring the facts. Those that voted for 8 are not "merely appeasing their sensibilities". Thankfully, they were those who stood up for what they believed in, despite being abused by the name-calling crowds of intolerant No on 8ers. There is room in this great world for more than one opinion, unless you happen to disagree with Tegrat and his/her ilk.
Posted on December 4 at 1:36 p.m.
The footnotes do not clarify any of the incorrect data in your letter, except one - African American support for Prop. 8 was 70% according to CNN. The polling data that I saw was 77%. On all of the rest of my points, you are wrong.
Posted on December 4 at 10:21 a.m.
Despite the sour grapes tone of the article, this is a very good post-mortem on the campaign. Let's begin by at least getting the factual errors corrected. • "One particularly effective theme of the demonizing attack ads by Yes on 8 proponents was the shameless use of lies about children." I viewed every Yes on 8 ad and there were no shameless lies about children. There were suppositions about what would happen if 8 failed, but those were all based on the facts of what has happened in other states that allow gay marriage. Documented.• "The Mormon Church and its members bitch slapped the gay community, accounting for nearly $20 million:" The Mormon Church gave exactly ZERO cash to the Yes on 8 campaign. The Church did encourage their members to help Prop 8 get passed and their member responded. There is no accurate data on how much money the members gave to the campaign, because donations were not tracked by "faith". The use of the words "bitch-slapped" is offensive.• "They sponsored and ran an effective ground operation that trained members to never let on they were Mormons.". It is true that they did run a very effective ground campaign. They did not train their members to conceal the fact that they were Mormons. They were, in fact, very open about it.• "African American voters, 70% of whom ended up siding with the Mormon Church.." Actually, the number was 77%. • "The Yes on 8 proponents relied on an early gusher of funding, much of it from the Mormon Church." Not true. See above.• "We suffered an electoral gay bashing." Fifty two percent of the folks exercising their constitution right is not gay bashing. It's called voting.• "The Mormon Church has finally been publicly outed for its obsessive anti-gay electoral activities." The Mormon Church has been openly involved in preserving traditional marriage for many years, including similar activities in getting Prop 22 passed in 2000.
I respect your right to express your opinion about gay marriage. Clearly, the debate will continue with much emotion for some time. Happily, for those that feel differently, 44 states have laws on the books similar or identical to Prop 8. No state population has ever voted for gay marriage. Only two states, Massachusetts and Connecticut have laws allowing gay marriage because of one vote majorities by activist judges. We have federal law passed in 1996 identical to Prop 8. Joe Biden, Joe Lieberman, Chris Dodd, Robert Byrd all voted for it and Bill Clinton signed the Defense of Marriage Act of 1996.
You said, "Several interviews with leading black leaders supporting Prop 8 said that to them it was not a civil rights issue, but rather a moral or religious issue." For many of those large majorities, this is exactly the point. A point that you appear not to want to address in your analysis.
Posted on December 3 at 7:16 p.m.
Tegrat:You are kidding, right? You refer me to Wikipedia, which is written by and edited by the LGBT community to refute a respected scientist like David Popenoe? C'mon you can do better than that.
Second, the American Psychology Association has long been known and acknowledged as a far left organization, that has been shepherded along by the gay community. Every objective scientist takes everything they publish with a grain of salt. Me too.
I have had countless discussions with my gay friends on the subject of "nature vs. nuture" and it is about fifty-fifty. Some feel they were born that way, others clearly a choice. So, we debate it. So you don't need to lecture me on opinions and how they affect my position on Prop 8. Go back and read the first post on this thread.