You can start with Scientology on that one.

I can't even imagine what you are thinking by making a statement like that. You make some generalities that are extremely offensive.

That said, the first rule of politics is building constituencies, especially if you want to pass something that is generally not popular (at least <50% popular, in this case).

Given that your state went heavily Democratic with historic record turnout numbers, you need to look somewhere else than conservative Republicans to blame for this not passing.

I still don't believe that basic religious philosophies are the root cause of this not passing. Given the turnout, and nature of the electorate in California, there has to be more there than that.

Um ok.. so its clearly about money right ? because every discussion about this subject always starts about rights and ends up about taxes, benefits and social security payouts. So lets say prop 8 didn't pass. You still wouldn't be federally recognized anyways. Just my opinion.

P.S. I hear a lot of blaming people religion on the this and I don't see how you can really link this just on people who are religious. Same argument goes when Republicans are automatically labeled as religious nut jobs or whatever. I understand your anger but how does this help your cause ?

Thank you QUICKSILVER again for putting things so eloquently. Thanks for the wonderful links that was very unbiased IMO and educational. I do agree with your every posts in this thread.

There were many angry black folks demanding changes, now gay folks. Only history will tell if the both movements weighed the same in civil rights perspective.

Regardless how you feel about this, Californians has spoken, including myself, we do not wish to change the definition of marriage. Please do respect the outcome since people have spoken. Tapping into the state Supreme Court backdoor seems like disrespect for legislative process to me IMO.

If it weren't for the rallies by opponents of Prop. 8 in my town, I wouldn't have dragged myself to the polling place. I really felt that enough was enough.

I sincerely hope that we would have an open gay president soon as long as he or she is the best person for the job because sexuality aren't relevant for the job qualifications. I also hope that gay unions to have legal and financial ramifications, and same respect as hetero-sexual unions, as long as I don't have to call it Marriage. That's too much to swallow if you insist on shoving it down to my throat.

I think everyone needs to take a step back, this group is not going to make or break gay rights.

I for one support gay rights and gay marriage but still have understand that marriage is special and by historic definition is between a man and woman.

My question for all of you that did or would have voted against Prop. 8 if possible is why do you care enough to deny others thier desires and happiness when it has no affect on you personally? Why not just let them be?

On a side note, a child can legally divorce thier parents, but gay people who want to be together can't get married. :confused:

I personally believe that being gay is more biological than choice. Both are at play here but the biology of the brain is very complex. Human sexuality is complex as well and there are great variations in the heterosexual community as it relates to what and who we are attracted to when it comes to sex which are both biological and environmental as well. Some homosexuals are very feminine and it is obvious that they are different and some you would be shocked if you knew that they were gay or bisexual for that fact.

That said I think children should NOT be subjected to what some are pushing as education relating to homosexuality. I can see a discussion later but not at early ages. I think this was a big factor in the measure not passing. Some of the more radical faction tends to turn people off enough that they just turn away even if they support gay marriage.

There is a difference between a fundamental right and a desire.

Much of the time, whatever rights that are granted to gay marriage are then extendable to "domestic partners", same sex or not. As a business owner, I don't have to try to figure out who is sleeping with who, and if I need to provide them insurance and other benefits or not. And, I can not afford to have mutliple boyfriends, girlfriends, or others popping in and out of my company benefits plan.

I have yet to see one of these initiatives that is sufficiently narrowly defined.

Last - re-read all of the Christian-bashing in all of the previous posts, and remind me why I should support someone else's lifetsyle, which I am not required to do, who has so little disregard for my lifestyle.

They need my support, not vice-versa.

I think a lot of the animostiy is directed to Christian fanatics, not you personally. I consider myself to be Christian and I believe in God, but I don't go to church every Sunday and I don't go around telling people how they should live their lives (not saying you do either), but there are many Christian fanatics that belive the Bible literally word for word, think you have to go to church every single Sunday, think you have to pray before you eat every meal, think abortions are an outrage even in the case of incest and rape and so on. I am a Christian and those beliefs are not in-line with mine. IMO, religion is the primary cause for all war and terrorism throughout the world and I think that ALL fanatics regardless of religion are responsible. I think everyone needs to chill out to be honest with you.

I really feel that gay people are born that way and they should have the right to be married to a partner and share all of the legal benefits. If being gay is indeed something a person is born into and not a personal choice, then how can it be an abomination like many Christian fanatics say? They are human beings born into a situation that they can not control. Just like being born white, black, female, male and so on. What would happen if you had a gay son or grandson? Would you look them in the face and say you voted against their happiness and equal rights? I understand if you don't want to go out of your way to support gays and lesbians, that is your right, but why go to the polls just to deny them their happiness?

I probably wouldn't have. However, I was there anyways for a bunch of other reasons.

To each his own, I suppose.

Agreed, to each his own. All I am saying is that while you were at the polls a large group of Americans hopes were hanging on the fact that you would check a box and give them rights that would make them happy and feel equal. Their happiness was in the voters hands. They were hoping you and others would grant them this request and you chose to check the other box denying them of rights and equality. That is fine. That is your right, but I just don't understand why people would chose to deny others of happiness when it really doenst affect them personally. If I were voting in California or Florida and that question came up, I would have asked myself who am I to judge these people? Who am I to deny them their happiness? Why would I want to deny them happiness and equality?

I really think people will look back on this in a few years when gay marriage is legal and ask themselves what were we thinking? No biggie, though.