Consider yes on Proposition 8 | Napa Valley Register

Home » Opinion » Letters To The Editor

Consider yes on Proposition 8

Monday, October 27, 2008

Comment

Dear editor,

I am a conservative-leaning person who, generally speaking, frowns on the government intruding on the everyday lives of its citizens. However, I do believe that one of the core responsibilities of the government is to establish norms in society, such that its future generations can have the best chance to enjoy a safe and productive life. An example of this is the compulsory education of children; society is better served when its citizenry is informed and can contribute to the community in adulthood.

Another norm that has traditionally been established in society is the makeup of the home and family. Study after study, not to mention anecdotal evidence, shows that the optimal conditions for raising children are in a home with a loving mother and father. Sadly, it is true that these conditions are not met all of the time but do we not consider it a tragedy when parents get divorced, or when a spouse dies unexpectedly? Children can show great resilience, and many do well even in the face of such misfortune, but does that mean that the children were better off without a mother or a father in the home? Men and women possess different qualities and complement each other in the home when raising children. Same-sex marriage denies children of even the possibility of having both a mother and a father in the home.

Throughout history, governments have sanctioned marriage between a man and a woman, not because the government has any interest in who loves whom but because a home with a mother and father is the best environment in which to raise children. By definition, this is something that a same-sex couple cannot provide. For this reason, I support Proposition 8, which affirms the role of the traditional family in society, and would encourage anyone reading this to give strong consideration to doing so as well.

Justin Swann

Napa

71 comment(s)

amigo wrote on Oct 27, 2008 12:33 AM:

" WOW !

It is such a relief to hear truth and reason portrayed so eloquently.

I will be voting yes on 8 "

4gnapan wrote on Oct 27, 2008 2:32 AM:

" What, exactly, does Same Sex Marriage have to do with raising children?

This is beside the point, which is to allow any "couple" to devote thier lives to each other with marriage vows.

Any child will get the benefit of being raised by two parents, be they male/female, male/male, female/female.. It is all about two parents being present in the affairs and growth of thier children. It has jack to do with thier sex.

Many hetero marriages lack any parental presence, just look at the juvenile records lately.

Prop 8 is not about children, it is about removing a basic privledge from a large percentage of the population of this state. It is about propagating religious hatred. It is wrong.

No on 8
No on Hate. "

funnyme wrote on Oct 27, 2008 4:41 AM:

" Divorces, second marriages, stepchildren, single parents, teen parents...what a joke

It is unbelievable to me that some adults will willingly put their own children (biological or adopted, same thing!) through the horrors of a broken or non traditional home in the name of love.
Whose love?

No. I am not anti-gay. I am pro-family. Traditional family!

For the greater good, YES on 8! "

Fire Mike wrote on Oct 27, 2008 6:35 AM:

" Mr. Swann – just a couple of points to consider: First, the idea that marriage is only about raising children is fallacious on the face of it. Marriage is a civil compact between two consenting adults, who may or may not decide to raise children. A couple’s decision the raise or not raise children cannot be used to determine who is “eligible” to marry.

Second, and more importantly – because this gets to the heart of the bigotry behind Prop 8 – is your assertion that gays are somehow less qualified to raise children than straight people. You might want to read your “studies” which show that “that the optimal conditions for raising children are in a home with a loving mother and father.” I think you might find that these conditions were “optimal” because the environment of the home was supportive, nurturing, loving and responsible, and not that the parents’ genitalia had some bearing on the outcome. Not having read the “studies,” my hunch is that the environment is the important factor, not the gender of the parents.

Finally, you say that, “men and women possess different qualities and complement each other in the home.” True. And guess what? So do gay couples. Gay couples bring the same strengths and weaknesses to their relationships as we bring to ours, and are as capable of providing everything a child needs as straight couples.

I hope that you’ll think through your argument, because it sounds like you are genuinely well-intentioned. But the fact is, arguing that gays shouldn’t be parents, or that their homes are inadequate for child-raising isn’t establishing a “norm” as you imply. It’s bigotry, plain a simple. "

verum wrote on Oct 27, 2008 7:12 AM:

" Historically, governments have sanctioned blacks and women to be precluded from freedom and voting. Education was not compulsory, but forbidden. That changed, and now we get same sex marriage, and interacial, at that! What is this world coming to? "

SFSister wrote on Oct 27, 2008 8:59 AM:

" As a resident of the beautiful city of San Francisco (and a former resident of Napa) I am surrounded by the gay community every day. I have close gay friends, gay coworkers, and gay classmates. When I went to the Gay Pride Parade this year, I saw many gay couples sporting t-shirts saying things like "Mike and Dave: together 10 years, married 7/25/08." It warmed my heart to know that these people were able to enjoy what so many of us in the heterosexual community take for granted. I have grown up knowing that if I wanted to, I could get married, no problem. What would I feel like if that were not the case? I would feel like a second class citizen.

Vote no on 8, and really, unless you're gay, what does it have to do with you anyway? "

kevin wrote on Oct 27, 2008 9:44 AM:

" Good letter, Justin! Sometimes you just have to be the parent and do what is right.

I've already voted.

Yes on Prop 8! "

steph wrote on Oct 27, 2008 9:46 AM:

" I notice at least in my circles, the most ardent supporters of Prop 8 are divorced.

At least they're better than SOME people.

Geez.

Nothing I say will change their minds. What they may find compelling some day is to know and love a homosexual person who has a loving, long-term relationship. Then maybe they'll apologize--at least internally--for being so mean-spirited and proud.

Jesus would not approve of your priorities nor the hardness of your heart.

I'm voting NO on 8 with a clear conscience. "

Common Sense wrote on Oct 27, 2008 10:49 AM:

" Just because you have the freedom to partake in individual liberties does NOT mean that society has to endorse it as a best practice.

Yes on 8. "

yamamama wrote on Oct 27, 2008 11:24 AM:

" How far should the government intrude into our personal lives?

Should heterosexual couples be forced to sign an agreement that they will produce children within a certain period of time? And if they don't, their marriage must be terminated. Sounds fair, because apparently marriage is all about procreation, according to Mr. Swann.

I suppose my brother and his wife, who are biologically capable of producing children, but have decided to not to, should be forced to have their marriage annulled, since marriage all about children.

This heterosexual mother, happily married to the same man for decades, will be voting NO on prop 8. "

Raven wrote on Oct 27, 2008 12:09 PM:

" hmmm...lets see....50% percent of first marriages, 67% of second and 74% of third marriages end in divorce, yep...traditional marriage is doing a great job "

amigo wrote on Oct 27, 2008 12:10 PM:

" HEY firemike; Is it not in the best interest on a child to have a masculine and a feminine dynamic in child rearing?

What happens when the child does recieve one dynamic but not the other? "

Keppie wrote on Oct 27, 2008 12:14 PM:

" God cares for all people. Even when we don't see truth. I am praying for many of you. God loves you and Christians have much compassion for you, however sin is sin and it's corrupting our nation. While you have the freedom to partake in these individual liberties as Common Sense stated, if we impose these sinful lifestyles on our nation such as we already have with abortion we will run a great risk of being vulnerable to God's judgement upon our country. He is long suffering to us and yet someday He will say enough! Instead I am praying for our country and speaking Truth wherever I can. We have to change. The best word is - repent- and turn from our wicked ways, before it is too late. "

Dirty Napkin wrote on Oct 27, 2008 12:17 PM:

" No on 8
Anyone know where I can get a yard sign?? "

Fire Mike wrote on Oct 27, 2008 12:24 PM:

" Kevin – I’m not sure what you mean by “Sometimes you just have to be the parent and do what is right.” Can you elaborate?

Common Sense – I think that equality IS considered “best practice.” Why do you disagree? "

amigo wrote on Oct 27, 2008 1:03 PM:

" I think that anyone who says that gay marriage has nothing to do with children are very nearsighted! "

prunepicker1960 wrote on Oct 27, 2008 1:38 PM:

" Gay marriage laws are like daylight savings, they step forward in the spring and are pushed back in the fall. This is round two ... "

steph wrote on Oct 27, 2008 1:49 PM:

" Keppie--according to your religion, you are a sinner and you, too, will be judged.

I sleep well at night.

I love my neighbor. "

pharper wrote on Oct 27, 2008 2:02 PM:

" Since when has society endorsed being gay as a "best practice?" Last I checked, it was an unchangeable sexuality, not a "practice." Allowing same sex couples to marry does not somehow mean people are telling others to "convert" to homosexuality. No one's saying that homosexuals are better than heterosexuals. It's simply this: equality is for everyone, not just white heterosexual males. So far, we've come pretty darn close on complete equality for women and African Americans (I can't say completely: white women are still paid $.75 to a man's dollar; African American women are paid $.60 and Hispanic women are paid $.55, on average). Now it's time we made it a complete reality. Our country was founded on principles of equality and freedom. Prop 8 is an insult to the framers of our country. "

napascot wrote on Oct 27, 2008 2:03 PM:

" Dirtynapkin,

just go to the noon8 website and you can order on and make a donation too

Please remember to support google, apple, comcast and many others companies out there that donated large portions of money to the no on 8 campaign

I think everyone might be getting new ipods this year for christmas..... "

Fire Mike wrote on Oct 27, 2008 2:22 PM:

" Amigo – I’m thinking that things like responsibility, honesty, integrity, empathy, compassion, curiosity, perseverance and humility (to name just a few) are way more important than what you call masculine and feminine. Gay parents can offer all these things – and more – just as well as straight parents. I support you in making your marriage whatever you want. If masculine and feminine roles are that important to you, that’s fine for you. But please don’t try to impose your “ideal” marriage on the rest of us. You may not have noticed, but men can be nurturing and empathetic (and some of us are pretty good cooks, too!), and women can be firm and protective and responsible. You see, in a healthy family, who has which kind of genitals matters much less than the values the family is built upon. "

MP wrote on Oct 27, 2008 2:28 PM:

" Be moral and treat all Americans the same -- vote no on 8 "

amigo wrote on Oct 27, 2008 3:44 PM:

" LOL FIREMIKE; Ok mike you got me there....
What was I thinking, that the maculine role of a man and the feminine role of a woman are interchangable.
What a silly goathead i am "

Dwayne wrote on Oct 27, 2008 3:46 PM:

" This is so disgusting, it shouldn't even be on the ballot AGAIN...!!!

I gotta wash my hands after I read this..... "

amigo wrote on Oct 27, 2008 3:49 PM:

" Pharper says;
It's simply this: equality is for everyone, not just white heterosexual males

Yes white males should be punish for they atrosities against mankind.
They should be required to do twice as much as anyone else... with no pay.

Wow pharper the hate is seathing from your comments "

Common Sense wrote on Oct 27, 2008 3:55 PM:

" Well, if you legalize gay marriage, you might as well legalize polygamy too. They are, after all, not treated 'equally' either.

I'm a bit disturbed that a public school 1st grade class was taken to a gay wedding a couple of weeks ago. What ever happened to reading, writing, and arithmetic?

Also, the financial cost of adding so many more people to marriage benefits payrolls could be staggering to our already devastated state economy.

People can be gay if they want to...I have no problem with that, and respect their right to live as they please. But we as a society don't have to recognize it as a 'best practice' by endorsing gay marriage. "

napatown wrote on Oct 27, 2008 4:08 PM:

" Prop 8 is not about children. It's not about Gay couples adobting children, find sperm donors or seragents for birthing children or raising children.

Prop 8 is about civil rights, human rights.
Many of you think it might be easier on a child to not grow up in a mixed race family or multi religious family. That it's not "optimal" So are we taking away those rights next?

I am a woman (married to a man), registered republican and have a daughter...and I believe that civil marriage (not religious) should be granted to any two humans who love each other.

My hope is that when my grandchildren study this in history...they look back on this time much as we look back at segregation...a time of intolerance and ignorance. It makes my stomach turn.

Make history!
NO ON 8! "

Raven wrote on Oct 27, 2008 4:14 PM:

" ahh...so they can be gay as long as you don't have to be exposed to it common sense? awfully decent of you to allow them that...

and as much as the yes on 8 people would like to link them...polygamy isn't on the ballot...

all the parents of the kids who went were okay with it......

and when you balance out the economic gains versus any costs...the state comes out ahead according to the legislative analyst "

Fire Mike wrote on Oct 27, 2008 4:43 PM:

" Common Sense –When you say, “if you legalize gay marriage, you might as well legalize polygamy too,” you’ve missed the point. Gay marriage IS legal. Prop 8 is an attempt to take us back to the days of marriage inequality.

And when is the pro-Prop 8 side going to get over the polygamy thing? If polygamists want to make a case, then let them do so. (By the way, a case for polygamy based on Biblical principle would be much stronger than the Biblical case supporting Prop 8. And while Biblical principle has no place in public policy in the 21st century, the pro-Prop 8 crew should think carefully about how they argue their position. Be careful what you wish for.) At any rate, polygamists haven’t made such a case, and I don’t anticipate them doing so in the near future. They are free to make an argument whenever they wish, but Prop 8 has nothing to do with that.

As to the financial aspect, just think about your argument. That’s the same as someone in 1920 saying, “Well, we really should let women vote. But we’ll have to print twice as many ballots, and that’s awfully expensive.” An actual remedy to the situation would be single-payer health care, but that’s a totally different subject. (And I imagine that we’d have similarly spirited discussions about that, too. Perhaps another day.)

Amigo – c’mon, my friend. You’re not a goathead (at least, I don’t think so). I’m just trying to let you know that not everyone has such clearly defined roles as you might. Heck, my wife watches the World Series, and I’ve even seen a few episodes of Desperate Housewives. "

pharper wrote on Oct 27, 2008 4:55 PM:

" I did not say that, amigo. Please do not twist my words. But I'm sure you agree that everyone deserves equal pay for doing the same jobs. I did forget to add that these are for the same jobs. For example, if a white male is working as a CEO and making some amount of money, a white woman doing the same job is paid 75% of what, an African American female makes 60%, and a Hispanic woman makes 55%. That's why I say that equality isn't total--yet. By not passing Proposition 8, we can take a step toward total equality for all law-abiding citizens of the United States.

I don't understand how you can construe my comment as hateful. I am merely stating facts. "

amigo wrote on Oct 27, 2008 5:03 PM:

" Yes mike i understand

My wife is an iron worker and i am a hair sylist.

Vote yes on 8 "

amigo wrote on Oct 27, 2008 5:09 PM:

" Pharper says;
I don't understand how you can construe my comment as hateful. I am merely stating facts. "
It's simply this: equality is for everyone, not just white heterosexual males

Are white males resonsible for the oppression of every minority pharper? "

pharper wrote on Oct 27, 2008 5:31 PM:

" I am saying that our country started out as a place where only white male landowners could vote or be considered true citizens. We've come a very long way since then--first abolishing slavery, then giving African Americans and former slaves the right to vote, then giving women the right to vote, the passage of equal rights legislation, and finally allowing gay people to marry.

I am not blaming anyone for anything. My point, though, is that if we were to remain stuck in the past, white male landowners would still be the only ones with any kinds of rights in this country. Luckily, we've progressed, and defeating Prop 8 is another step towards equality for all. "

amigo wrote on Oct 27, 2008 6:00 PM:

" This is 2008 pharper give it up.

Noboby alive today has ever been a slave "

Raven wrote on Oct 27, 2008 7:44 PM:

" amigo I am beginning to think you are a slave to this irrational fear of equal right for homosexuals "

verum wrote on Oct 27, 2008 8:52 PM:

" It is so simple: object to same sex marriage? Don't have one. "

common sense wrote on Oct 27, 2008 10:14 PM:

" Fire Mike is hilarious.

Gay marriage is only legal because the state constitution assumed traditional marriage. The gay marriage crowd then found the flaw, and capitalized on it...without the consent of the majority of the people. Prop 8 corrects this.

Trying to tie gay marriage to women's right to vote is ridiculous...gays already have the right to vote. Too bad the gay marriage crowd can't make their case on their own merits...always have to tie it something else to sneak it in.

I'm in favor of legalizing marijuana, though I've never tried it. But I would never endorse pot smoking as a 'best practice' to be rewarded by society...just as I support people's right to be gay, but would never endorse gay marriage as a 'best practice' to be rewarded by society.

So, Fire Mike, should we legalize polygamy? It is relevant, since it is the next step after gay marriage. Where should the line be drawn for who can get married and who can't?

As for the religious argument? Don't care. I'm not religious. "

opiniagirl wrote on Oct 28, 2008 1:11 AM:

" Keppie:

Be careful how you represent God's Word to relate to this matter - Each person, each evil, wicked, sinful person on this earth shall be individually judged according to the laws of our Lord. Sin resides in the heart of every man, woman and child and is meant only to be judged by our creator.

Voting Yes on this measure for purely religious reasons is wrong. We are asked to look each and every day at ourselves and our own sinfulness and bow in repentance. Where is it written that believers are to force Gods laws onto all of humanity? Are we not asked to look only at ourselves?
The passing or “unpassing” of government laws has no bearing on that process. The outcome of this proposition will not CHANGE THE HEART OF A SINGLE MAN, WOMAN OR CHILD. Except that Christians are pushing away people that we should love, as much as we love ourselves. Jesus went directly to the people with gentle, loving compassion and called them to his side to be his saved children. God is in sovereign control over all of these issues.
Jesus did not demand the governments or even the churches to conform. Do we not have faith that our teachings and his calling are not strong enough to reach the ears of our children? By biblical definition, due to the fall of man, every man, woman and child is in sin every minute of every day and EACH sin is EQUAL in the eyes of the Lord! No sinner will bring down the wrath of God more than another. To believe differently is to diminish the work of the cross and lean on our own works and understanding, which is against every teaching in the Gospel. "

opiniagirl wrote on Oct 28, 2008 1:11 AM:

" When a policy is made that is in direct conflict with the equality of all men under the government, based on religions, customs or beliefs, than we have a dictatorship no different than when China was killing off baby girls.
I have peace that God is on control of this nation, world, galaxy etc. I do not live in fear. Whatever happens is his will. But while you’re busy praying for a law to abolish same sex marriage for legal purposes, consider that time may be better spent going directly to people with gentle, loving compassion and let them know that God has called them to his side to be his saved child! "

Raven wrote on Oct 28, 2008 9:29 AM:

" common sense, there was no back door attempt to slip in this right, people did it the old-fashioned American way, the courts, to correct a wrong....and no one is saying it is a best way....just a way

woman didn't have the vote until they fought for it....African Americans didn't have the right to vote till they fought for it.....until it was fought for in the courts, interracial marriage was banned...the merits of the case are quite simple.....oll people have the right to marriage a consenting adult of their choice....and Prop 8 aims to strip that right away..

and the question is same sex marriage, not polygamy..when there is a ballot measure legalizing it we can debate the merits at that time

btw....medicinal marijuana is legal in the state "

stray wrote on Oct 29, 2008 1:43 PM:

" I don't agree on the reasoning Mr. Swann. I do however, see this as an opening to lawsuits against Churches which quite possibly will not agree to marry same sex couples. Everyone has their right to their belief as well as choices in life, and no one should be discriminated against. This being said, a Church who refuses based on their belief system might possibly be sued on the idea they are discriminating.

I think this should be a larger concern than the definition of marriage. Same-sex couples should legally have the same right's as opposite-sex couples. To impose it as the same title, which opens the door to peoples Religious Convictions, can cause an out pour of lawsuits against those point of views. Which, in our country, is our (this word is used a lot lately) fundamental right to believe what we want.

The Civil Union between same-sex couples does not give the same rights as marriage between opposite-sex couples. Something should be done, but I will vote Yes on 8 to protect everyone’s rights. Maybe I'm paranoid on this, but this is a beginning to complete dismantling of people's Belief Systems.

Also - in the long run - a loss might lead to an legal appeal to the Supreme Court. Ultimately - it would be better if it's Federally recognized rather than just by the State.

Anyway, we all will see soon enough have everything turns out. Vote no, Vote yes, don't vote at all - it's our rights, and I hope we all use it in intelligent ways. Compromise is more important than who's right or wrong. and I'm done with my speech! (: "

Explorer wrote on Oct 29, 2008 4:32 PM:

" Justin, your arguement that only heterosexual parents can be good parents is wrong.

From the American Psychological Association.

"Can lesbians and gay men be good parents?

Many lesbians and gay men are parents; others wish to be parents. In the 2000 U.S. Census, 33% of female same-sex couple households and 22% of male same-sex couple households reported at least one child under the age of 18 living in the home.

As the social visibility and legal status of lesbian and gay parents have increased, some people have raised concerns about the well-being of children in these families. Most of these questions are based on negative stereotypes about lesbians and gay men. The majority of research on this topic asks whether children raised by lesbian and gay parents are at a disadvantage when compared to children raised by heterosexual parents. The most common questions and answers to them are these:

1. Do children of lesbian and gay parents have more problems with sexual identity than do children of heterosexual parents? For instance, do these children develop problems in gender identity and/or in gender role behavior? The answer from research is clear: sexual and gender identities (including gender identity, gender-role behavior, and sexual orientation) develop in much the same way among children of lesbian mothers as they do among children of heterosexual parents. Few studies are available regarding children of gay fathers.

2. Do children raised by lesbian or gay parents have problems in personal development in areas other than sexual identity? ... Again, studies of personality, self-concept, and behavior problems show few differences between children of lesbian mothers and children of heterosexual parents. "

There is a lot more, please read it for yourself but I'll paraphrase. Gay = heterosexual parents. "

christian love wrote on Oct 29, 2008 5:30 PM:

" To those who use religion as a weapon, Obviously you have skimmed the parts of the Bible that discuss loving your neighbor as your self, leaving judgment to our Holy Father in Heaven and acting as an ambassador of his love in ALL your dealings.
As a Christian, I find myself saddened by the extreme hatred and cruelty that has been associated with my faith. I have always been taught and believed that My Lord is best served when I move in His world with the love and grace He has shown me.
While I cannot say I wish anyone to be forced INTO a gay marriage if they are opposed to it, I do not think that God, Jesus or the Christian religion should be used as a weapon. My Lord My God loves every creation He made. He has charged His faithful followers to do the same.
Christians: Join me in spreading the Love of God, not the Hate of crusades.We turn people away from God by being poor ambasadors.
Jesus is Love. "

Raven wrote on Oct 29, 2008 11:39 PM:

" <<will vote Yes on 8 to protect everyone’s rights. >>

so stripping away one groups rights is protecting everyone's rights....can you explain that one again "

omnidra wrote on Oct 30, 2008 2:26 PM:

" So what he's saying is that a same sex married couple is incapable of raising a sucsessful healthy child. What in the world dose that have to do with being married? If they are married that dosn't mean that they WILL have children, besides who is anyone to take away the right of a person to bear a child? If we say that gays shouldnt have kids for these reasons, then every family that has ever had domestic problems, financial difficulties or anything that will make that family anything less than perfect than that oh so ridiculous "Traditional Family" should be Divorced. Because we all know that a single parent raising a child by themselves, struggling to get by, is so much better than having two capable adults raise a child.

Shame on you

NO on 8 "

419molly wrote on Oct 30, 2008 6:25 PM:

" No on Hate!
No on Eight

I moved here ten years ago from West Hollywood - I went through such culture shock - did not even see a person of color for so many years. I am a straight female - geez let us get with important issues - a kid got killed for $10 and a cell phone - an elder gent just got stabbed -
shame on you, when I was reading through the posts someone was alluding tthat intracial unions are BAD - it really annoys me how many people are so backward - ick!!!! "

pianocrazee wrote on Oct 31, 2008 3:16 PM:

" i think it's ironic that the christians are so hateful toward homosexuals. Christians are known to be opposed against abortion--well who's the least likely to have an abortion? Gays! I don't know why anyone is saying that being gay would affect a child's raising. Like Fire Mike said--it's nurture, not nature; the environment has to be loving and supportive--not male and female.

No On 8. "

amigo wrote on Oct 31, 2008 5:10 PM:

" VOTE YES ON 8

Support tradiontal family
The pillar of strength of a community!

VOTE YES ON 8 "

Malcolm G wrote on Oct 31, 2008 5:55 PM:

" Whatever happened to the separation of Church and State...

I guess that doesn't apply because guys like Bill O'Reilly and Rush Limbaugh (two pillars of the US society) tell you its OK.

Lemmings, open your eyes and pull your collective heads from your behinds...

Do a little research and actually read something other than the Nat'l Review.

And since you guys made this "us" versus "them"...

I am married with three beautiful kids...I do not have an out of wedlock grandchild on the way and I am teaching my kids that "isn't the way to go". But we had names for the types of kids that did, and for the parents that raised them. You might just find that you are throwing rocks at the wrong people.

Mrs Palin (the perfect example of "America") maybe should have spent more time with her kids and less time trying to get even with an estranged family member...nice example of family values.

Wow, I guess I just passed judgement myself...it almost feels good! "

jeeper16 wrote on Nov 1, 2008 11:56 AM:

" Call it what you like, but don't call it marriage. YES ON 8!! "

Paddy wrote on Nov 2, 2008 9:48 AM:

" We've had a couple of YES on 8 votes come from our house. It would be nice for children to be able to proudly state that they come from a traditional family as 98% of the world can say.

Even if you can't fathom the social and cultural implications across the globe of having to admit your "parents" are homosexual the realities are that the individuals saddled with this stigma will come to resent their plight. The self-serving opinions of those who want to label supporters of Prop 8 as haters are only reflecting their own bias. I don't hate, I'm sympathetic to those without a voice who are being thrown under the train of liberalism. "

pharper wrote on Nov 2, 2008 2:59 PM:

" I'd advise you find someone raised by homosexual parents and ask them how much they resent it, Paddy. As long as someone was raised with love and kindness, they will not "resent" their parents for being of the same gender, and it's a ridiculous argument. Perhaps we should not allow women to wear pants, because in some parts of the world, they would be laughed at or discriminated against. Perhaps we should make it illegal for anyone to dye their hair a color other than one that is natural, on the grounds that in some places, they may be made fun of or looked at oddly.

It's really that ridiculous to deny children the right to a loving family (REGARDLESS of gender) based on the assumption that in some parts of the world, they may or may not be "saddled with a stigma." In this country, children with gay families have no stigma, unless you're referring to the one placed on them by families that look down on homosexual parents. "

Paddy wrote on Nov 2, 2008 10:42 PM:

" "Ugly Americans" have belittled and degraded cultures for generations. I'm sure you can relate pharper. Marginalizing this point and comparing it to women wearing pants and the color of one's hair is not appropriate or, in your words, "it's a ridiculous arguement."

The ongoing dialogue by the no on 8 bunch in these discussions reflects a clear disregard for most people's sensibilities. I know it's not appropriate to have beliefs and ideals that fly in your face but I do have these ideals and to turn sex into little more than a sporting event reflects the continued degradation of our society. "

Raven wrote on Nov 3, 2008 7:15 AM:

" the proponents of Prop 8, a lot of them, show a clear disregard for the rights of their neighbors, Paddy......

and there is a big difference between sex and sexual orientation, and this prop is about stripping rights from people whose sexual orientation you dislike.... "

pharper wrote on Nov 3, 2008 9:18 AM:

" I don't see how affording two loving, consenting adults the right to marriage somehow turns sex into a sporting event. Seems to me like it promotes monogamy and values. "

WHY wrote on Nov 3, 2008 9:43 AM:

" I am voting yes on 8. We do our best as a family to teach our kids that God set Adam and Eve for a reason. If you don't think this than so be it. The thing that bothers me is that every where you turn you start to see more and more of gay people kissing and such on TV. Just watch Greys anatomy and see two women kissing and then getting out of bed and talking about how great it was. Watch Sisters and Brothers guys kissing guys. This to me bothers me because this is the way that it slowly creeps in to make the younger generation beleive that this is Normal and I am sorry but it is not normal. I can't even watch shows like this cause it makes me sick to see gays kissing.

This world is changing and not for the better. "

mgreene wrote on Nov 3, 2008 10:10 AM:

" It ticks me off how even the neutral voter's guide misguides the voters. The Prop 8 summary states that it "eliminates the right for same-sex marriages" - They say this because they use the word "marriage" - that is the spin! Because if they used the term "union" (which the same-sex couples get to do today, under domestic partnership) then this would not be a problem. Prop 8 would pass just like Prop 22 passed. But the liberal media has shifted the focus from "protecting Marriage" to "discrimination" and the average voter who is swayed by the media and the next celebrity endorsement doesn't vote according to the truth.

NO RIGHTS TO HAVE A CIVIL UNION WILL BE TAKEN AWAY!! IT'S JUST NOT CALLED "MARRIAGE"!! That's all!!

GET A FRIGGIN CLUE!! "

avivaisme wrote on Nov 3, 2008 11:32 AM:

" We seem to have forgotten that Hitler started by taking away the rights of one group of people. Don't be fooled- the decision of the Supreme Court of California was to recognize that people are equal, regardless of their sexual orientation. "

mgreene wrote on Nov 3, 2008 12:06 PM:

" Please read the following and tell me where domestic partners are not allowed to have the same rights as a married couple.

You can read the whole thing at:

http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=fam&group=00001-01000&file=297-297.5

297.5. (a) Registered domestic partners shall have the same rights,
protections, and benefits, and shall be subject to the same
responsibilities, obligations, and duties under law, whether they
derive from statutes, administrative regulations, court rules,
government policies, common law, or any other provisions or sources
of law, as are granted to and imposed upon spouses.

Due to the word limit, go read the whole thing. Please copy and paste the link and read it for yourself. THEN, vote with your brain, not someone else's. "

avivaisme wrote on Nov 3, 2008 12:29 PM:

" mgreene: except that they can't be married. "

mgreene wrote on Nov 3, 2008 1:35 PM:

" People are living together and not getting married. My mom used to call it, "getting milk without buying the cow". If you're registered as domestic partners, have some cookies with your milk and enjoy the same rights. Just leave marriage alone. "

Raven wrote on Nov 3, 2008 4:55 PM:

" mgreene.....there are no rights in domestic partnership that cannot be done away by simple legislation because they are not, by definition, rights...

the right to marry is embedded in the constitution of the state and can only be taken away by a constitutional amendment like Prop 8. "

mgreene wrote on Nov 4, 2008 4:25 PM:

" I hope Prop 8 passes by 1 vote....mine.

But, if it does, it will get tied up in the courts and overturned...just like Prop 22. "

Raven wrote on Nov 5, 2008 7:33 PM:

" next time you go shopping, mgreene...take a look around you.....you just stripped rights away from at least 4 of the hundred people you see..... "

CLRAE wrote on Nov 6, 2008 9:53 AM:

" WHATEVER HAPPENED TO A GOVERNMENT OF THE PEOPLE, BY THE PEOPLE, AND FOR THE PEOPLE--CALIFORNIA VOTED--PROP 8 WAS DEFECTED BY A YES VOTE--HOW MANY TIME MUST WE VOTE?? WHY LET A HANDFUL OF SUPREME COURT JUDGES DECIDE? CITIZENS HAVE VOTED--FOR THE SECOND TIME--MARRIAGE IS FOR AND BETWEEN--A MAN AND A WOMAN--THE PEOPLE HAVE VOTED--AND THIS VOTE MUST BE ACCEPTED--NOT A HANDFUL OF PEOPLE--MAJORITY RULES--PROP 8 WAS DEFEATED BY A YES VOTE--LET IT BE--LET IT BE "

srnitnw wrote on Nov 6, 2008 11:01 AM:

" CLRAE, resign yourself to the fact that this issue is not going to go away. Gay Americans have found their voices and are building their self-esteem. If you truly want this debate to go away, let it be... let them have their equal rights and they will have no reason drag this out any longer. You all know that whether it be now, or several years from now, they are going to win right? So why are we dragging this out and letting it effect our lives when it does not have to? You are all expending much more energy meddling in their lives than it would take to just move on and live your own. "

Raven wrote on Nov 6, 2008 1:55 PM:

" two votes for discrimination to not make it right, Clare, rest assured it will be a struggle that will take a bit longer...look how long it took for women to get the right to vote.... "

John Richards wrote on Nov 6, 2008 8:09 PM:

" Raven wrote: "you just stripped rights away from at least 4 of the hundred people."

No actual "rights" (note the erroneous plural) were stripped away. The only single thing that has changed is that gays can no longer call their unions "marriage", a dubious distinction at best. And even that wouldn't have happened if the arrogant Supreme Court justices had not ignored the sensible plea to stay their decision until after November 4th. "

Raven wrote on Nov 6, 2008 10:04 PM:

" if the distinction is so dubious, JR, why not let them marry.....and yes a right was stripped away....the court said the right exist and Prop 8 stripped it from them..

and the arrogant Republican court did it job.... "

John Richards wrote on Nov 7, 2008 1:33 PM:

" Raven wrote "if the distinction is so dubious, JR, why not let them marry."

Let me turn the table on you. If the only right not granted through gay civil unions is the right to call their union 'marriage', why make such a big fuss over it? Obviously the word 'marriage' means a lot to most heterosexuals, so why not let the hets have that word? Civil rights struggles are supposed to be about real rights that have substantial and tangible value. It shouldn't be about something that has only emotional value. Sometimes I think the gays are only pursuing this matter in order to antagonize straights. "

Raven wrote on Nov 7, 2008 1:48 PM:

" the problem is JR, that you have two separate but not equal classes of people....those who can marry and those who cannot....separate is not equal and we have created a group of second class citizens now...

and do not speak for all heterosexuals, or straights, JR,...there are quite a few who aren't antagonized by the desire to marry but rather by the desire by some many to discriminate against their neighbors....no matter how you want to color it, if you voted yes on 8 you have enshrined bigotry in the state constitution. "

Join the conversation

*Member ID:
*Password:
Remember login? (requires cookies)
	Forgot Your Password?

Create an account

Comment Guidelines

The goal of the story comments section at NapaValleyRegister.com is to have an open, thought-provoking, civil community forum for all issues.

What gets your comment posted?

• Staying on topic

• Keeping your comment to 300 words or less

• Avoiding name-calling

• Addressing your comments to the message rather than the messenger

What gets your comment deleted?

• Personal attacks

• Derogatory remarks

• Name-calling of any sort

• Going off-topic

• Hate speech

• Racially-insensitive comments

• Implying guilt of a subject in a crime story before there is a court verdict

• Posting e-mail addresses

• Posting comments of a commercial nature

• POSTING WITH ALL CAPITAL LETTERS

• Linking multiple comments together with "to be continued..." to get around the 300 word limit.

The fine print

- Comments are either approved or denied. We do not edit comments.

- You are welcome to modify and resubmit a denied comment.

- Comments may take several hours to be posted.

- Comments posted are those of the writer, and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of NapaValleyRegister.com, its employees or its parent company.

- Do you have information on a story? Please go to our virtual newsroom to send us a news tip.

- If you feel a posted comment has violated our guidelines, please contact online@napanews.com or add a comment indicating you have an issue and our moderators will review the comment in question.

Search: