For the record, I think that Prop 8 sets California back at least a hundred years in recognizing the human rights of all members of society.
HOWEVER, having said that, the voters of California HAVE, in fact, spoken. I do not support activist courts overturning democratic initiatives.
I guessed wrong.....
and I still don't get it. Marriage is a social contract, and if 2 gay people agree to such a contract, and document its particulars, how is that any different from what heterosexuals do?If it is just the terminology, or the word marriage, who can stop them from using the word once a "civil union" contract is in force?
Certainly a common law marriage is legal in many states and those unions have no documentation to describe the particulars.
And I don't see how the state should have any say in the matter, or is there a compelling state interest that I am missing? Don't we already have the right to assign our assets to anyone we choose upon death?
Oracle of Utah
Truth rings hollow in empty heads.
So, while I agree that gay marriage should be legal, I think that attempts to force this before the nation is ready to accept it actually do more harm than good. I look at the views of myself and my children, and can see that this is a trend that will ultimately and inevitably resolve itself in favor of equal rights for gay couples.