JD wrote on Oct 21, 2008 9:01 PM:Oh good! I was hoping I'd have a chance to join my fellow bigots! Nothing better than mass discrimination, right everybody?

Whee!

Oh Please wrote on Oct 21, 2008 9:56 PM:We need to save families, blah, blah, blah! My family is going to be threatened if gays can marry. Lets see, it's been about 5 months since they were aloud to marry, and I'm still married, my child hasn't learned about gay sex in her preschool, and nothing has happened to any of my other married friends or family. NO ON PROP 8!

wow wrote on Oct 21, 2008 10:11 PM:nothing but a bunch of igornant prejudice haters
protect marriage? the divorce rate is already 50 percent!! obviously marriage is not taken seriously, maybe if gays can get married they can bring back the trend of actually staying married
NO ON PROP 8!!!

Jim wrote on Oct 21, 2008 10:52 PM:Thanks to all the commenters above for saying what I was thinking!

Family Man wrote on Oct 21, 2008 11:04 PM:I give Blood at that community center out of nonjudgmental love for my fellow beings. My brother was gay. I loved him and he did not threaten my heterosexual marriage. It is disheartening to see the Temecula recreation center being used to promote intolerance.

Im Gay wrote on Oct 21, 2008 11:16 PM:Today I took part in the No On 8 Rally on the corner of Murrieta Hot Springs and Margarita and the support we got was overwhelming. I respect people who want to protect marriage, I really do. But gays aren't the people to blame for marital problems (although it is easier to blame us). Instead we should focus more on commitment and the idea that marriage IS important and shouldn't be taken lightly. We had gay residents, straight soccer moms, older straight couples, students at Calvary who all supported us. We're not out to hurt you or your children. We're just trying to accomplish our Dreams of becoming parents and having our own families. Somewhere along the way certain people came under the impression that in America "all men are created equal" except for. . .

wheres the balance wrote on Oct 22, 2008 2:53 AM:Since when did the "righteous" groups get free press. Where's the No on 8 speech being held?

Prediction wrote on Oct 22, 2008 5:31 AM:I'm not in favor of this meeting or proposition, but I'll stay home and let it happen peacefully and allow them to exercise their right to free speech. I predict the anti-Prop 8'ers will be out in full force to disrupt the gathering. When (not if) that happens, everyone will see who the real haters are.

God created wrote on Oct 22, 2008 7:28 AM:Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve. God doesn't hate the sinner, He hates the sin.

YES on 8 wrote on Oct 22, 2008 7:30 AM:Marriage between a man and a woman is the bedrock of our society. Let others choose their different lifestyles, but let's not redefine marriage after thousands of years. How about promoting in law the family situation that is most likely to result in healthy reproducing, married parents?

Yes on 8 wrote on Oct 22, 2008 7:38 AM:Where in the Bible does it say marriage is between a man & a man or a woman & a woman? It does'nt. If that was God's intention it would have been Adam & Steve not Adam & Eve. Vote Yes on 8.

Not Surprising wrote on Oct 22, 2008 7:45 AM:The City of Temecula makes it easy for people who think like they do... This proposition will go down like a lead balloon. Vote NO on 8.

God wrote on Oct 22, 2008 7:53 AM:isn't the governor of California and doesn't run your life, but allows you to make choices. And since Adam and Steve are alive today, it would appear that God DID create them...

Mark wrote on Oct 22, 2008 7:59 AM:How is it that Republicans can drape themselves in the flag and extol the virtues of individual rights and at the same time be against two people of the same gender getting married? What does it matter to those who are heterosexual?

Temite wrote on Oct 22, 2008 8:23 AM:Let me just say my marriage is not threatened by gay marriages nor do I feel intimidated by gays and I do not have a problem with gays doing their thing as long as I do not have to be subjected to it. What I do have a problem with is that I am being told I have to accept it when I feel it is wrong. Men are not supposed to be with men and women are not supposed to be with women if this was the case then the human race would have been extinct many years ago and it is that simple no matter if you are religious or not.

YES on 8 wrote on Oct 22, 2008 8:38 AM:Unbelievable. I am just going to say flat out that supporters in opposition to 8 are repulsive. What happened to the core values of yesteryear????? This really makes me sad.

One step at a time wrote on Oct 22, 2008 8:49 AM:I can only imagine that if Prop 8 is defeated, that the Adam and Steve supporters will start promoting the North American Man/Boy Love Association. How far will this go?

temec_laurie wrote on Oct 22, 2008 8:56 AM:To Im Gay,
Thank you for such a great non-hateful response! Gay or straight, everyone deserves the same opportunities for love and respect.

Molly wrote on Oct 22, 2008 9:08 AM:Why are so many people afraid of gays getting married...i just don't get it?!?!? Is there a rally for NO on 8 being held anywhere? freaking temecula...geez...

California Code wrote on Oct 22, 2008 9:19 AM:Voting Yes on Prop 8 does not mean you oppose gay marriage. It only means you oppose the State of California re defining the definition of the word "marriage" to mean something other than man/woman. Right now, civil unions between homosexuals have the same rights&benefits (insurance, hospital visitation, property ownership) as heterosexuals. Re defining the word "marriage" opens up a whole new can of legal worms. Would the word 'husband' be re defined as the "male-counterpart' or will legal documents be re written as, "I leave my house to my male wife"? It would be very confusing and I think logicially it makes sense to keep the definition of MARRIAGE as a union between a man/woman. It's not up to lawmakers to give new meanings to words.

NO on 8 wrote on Oct 22, 2008 9:25 AM:I totally agree with the statement "nothing but a bunch of igornant prejudice haters" Prop 8 will only let them marry. I don't have a problem with that. I have a problem with prejudice! I have a problem with outsiders coming into my state and telling me what good for my state and my life. It about equal rights!

Guess what, gay couples will have that marriage tax just like every other married couple. Hey, the state will collect more taxes! It about equal rights!
The lies about teaching/pushing gay marriage in schools were put out there to scare parents who are stupid enough to believe those LIES. You can not make a person gay by telling them about the alternative lifestyle. It's nature not nurture!! It about equal rights!
Our country was founded based on equality for all not just for who you want to give it to.
It about equal rights!
Please! Please! Vote NO on Prop 8

tk wrote on Oct 22, 2008 9:28 AM:Using the "God said" argument... if it is God's will, let Him judge those who disobey it. It isn't for us to decide what is right or wrong.

And regarding the "In Massachusetts they were forced to teach about gay marriage" argument... that is just wrong. I know a few teachers in MA, and none of them, and no one they know was forced to teach about gay marriage. That argument is not just a distortion of facts, it is an outright lie.

Sandy wrote on Oct 22, 2008 9:28 AM:It's unfortunate people bring emotions into issues...love, respect, tolerance, diversity. Bigotry, disrcrimination, hate, sin. Prop 8 wants to legally re define a word. I think "marriage" is between a man/woman and I think "gay marriage" is between man/man or woman/woman. What's so difficult about that? You folks need to really read the Proposition and figure out if you want all legal docs, all future court rulings, school curriculum, state job applications and state tax forms to make this change. I think it would be very expensive for the taxpayer.

Simple wrote on Oct 22, 2008 9:43 AM:Pretty soon the word marriage will have no meaning and we'll all just be morphed together by the person we are sharing a bed with, like Brangelina (Brad Pitt*Angie Jolie).
So Paul Newman and Joanne Woodward, married for 50 yrs, would be reduced to PaulJo.

JD wrote on Oct 22, 2008 10:01 AM:@ Yes on 8: I know! Where did those core values go? Why doesn't anybody want to discriminate againt minorities anymore? Where do you think we live? AMERICA? Bah.

Come on everybody, vote Yes on 8. Discrimination is God's will! He doesn't preach loving everybody equally and not passing judgment, so why I should we?

I see no reason to oppose prop 8 at all! After all, we still don't allow women to vote, or blacks to own property, or anything like that. It's all about what the majority wants - at the expense of the minority!

Whee! Come discriminate with meeeeeeee!

JD wrote on Oct 22, 2008 10:06 AM:@ Prediction: I know! I don't want any anti-prop 8ers out there! They're so hateful! I just want to deny rights to people in peace... why won't they respect my right to deny others theirs? It just doesn't make sense.

Satan is against prop 8. That's why. Stupid Satan.

O I C wrote on Oct 22, 2008 11:32 AM:what side the nctimes is on. I posted a scripture on how God views homosexuality and they won't post it. That's okay most are offended by the Truth. God said you are either for me or against. Life is all about choices.

History wrote on Oct 22, 2008 11:47 AM:Just study history to see what has happened to every society which has embraced gays.
Those who don't learn from history are destined to repeat it!

To Molly wrote on Oct 22, 2008 11:49 AM:Because we understand the consequences and escalations associated with such an action.

Vote wrote on Oct 22, 2008 12:46 PM:When did we start letting gay people vote?
The majority will FIX the constitution and we'll be done listening to your crying. BYE!

YES on 8 wrote on Oct 22, 2008 1:15 PM:This isn't about discrimination. This is about morality. This is akin to adults having relations with minors. Do you find that to be discrimination or a moral issue? Geez, society is going to h-e-double hockey sticks in a hand basket!

Daniel wrote on Oct 22, 2008 1:20 PM:People are really amazing. Amazing in all their ugliness. If gays get married it isn't going to affect me. If my kids get taught about gay marriage then fine, the only problem with that is that I should be the one who takes the responsibility to talk to them about it, not the school. There is no sanctity in marriage anymore, the heterosexuals destroyed it. If two responsible adults love each other and want to get married then who am I to tell them they can't. I can look to my bible and tell them that they are living in sin but I have to remember that this is a land of freedom and a land governed with different beliefs and ideologies.
A yes on 8 vote isn't just a vote in support of prejudice and intolerance but it is also a vote of selfishness and vanity.

Public Private wrote on Oct 22, 2008 1:28 PM:Marriage is a civil union and the state constitution does not discriminate marriage between two consenting adults. Prop 8 will add that discrimination to our constitution. A marital choice is personal business, just like religious freedom. Temecula is wrong to provide a public building to preach intolerance unless organizers are paying the going rate to use it. Maybe the Klan can hold a rally there too? NO ON 8.

to History wrote on Oct 22, 2008 1:36 PM:Lets look at history shall we. Look at all the empires that have fallen after embracing Christianity. Starting with Rome. After Constantine forced Christianity on the majority Pagans (thats right Christianity wasn't accepted by most Roman citizens it was forced down their throats)the Empire fell. Now think of all the Christian Empires since then...none remain. Maybe you should look for other causes of the decline of a countrys power besides acceptance of gays.

Prediction wrote on Oct 22, 2008 1:38 PM:OK, JD, I'm trying to wade through the babbling, but I think you said anti-8'ers have the right to deny pro-8'ers rights for denying anti-8'ers rights.

You're losing it, pal.

c wrote on Oct 22, 2008 1:40 PM:In our world today this is such a meaningless issue. People we have much bigger problems to resolve as a state and a nation. It is really sad the relevant issues don’t attract this much attention.

Final Word--Its Wrong wrote on Oct 22, 2008 2:49 PM:Folks, we all know someone who is gay, whether they are that "weird" uncle or a very good friend of ours. I say that with some humor. I have a very good friend who is gay. He's never shown any interest in me, nor have I ever exhibited any homophobic behavior toward him. As a Christian, I love this friend of mine. He and I have shared our thoughts on Prop 8 and, like some have said here, I do support gay couples enjoying every single right and privilege that I enjoy with my wife; and that should include tax benefits for their union, hospital visitation--all of them. However, I cannot, in my "way out of touch Christian view point" share the idea that a marriage between two men or two women shares the legitimacy of the marriage before God that I cherish with my wife. I won't apologize for my feelings. As a Christian, I'll say it again, I love my gay friend. However, I oppose, based solely on my Christian belief, the State of California promoting same sex marriage and the judges to, at least in some sense, "impose" this on those who disagree with it. I support, then, Prop 8 for the State of California to define marriage as that union between a man and a woman. And, for the lady who mentioned it above, the marriage certificates of those married here, do NOT say "Gay Marriage" or "Heterosexual Marriage". Come on. We CAN share in intelligent discourse on this subject and none of us, nor our ideas, are either all correct or all wrong. If you are truly a Christian, you know where you will vote on this Prop.

Resident wrote on Oct 22, 2008 3:19 PM:Thanks to everyone for all the support for voting NO on 8. It's not about morality, its about being equal. If you vote yes on this, I wouldn't be surprised if you look back and one day think "Man, we really screwed up."
Thanks, God Bless

everafter wrote on Oct 22, 2008 3:27 PM:I'm a happily married christian father of four wonderful children. I don't have any close gay friends or family members. However, I do have empathy for a segment of our society that is being labeled as outcasts. We're a nation of misfits and none of us should cast judgment and we should all be treated equally. America has bigger things to fear (economy, war, enviroment, etc). As a Christian you don't always have to agree with interpretations of mans written scripture. God gave us all free will and we should allow everyone to only be judged by Him. Is everyone that is Yes on 8 also strictly pro-life? You should be if you consider yourself a Christian. Yeah...

Mind your own business wrote on Oct 22, 2008 3:33 PM:How does everyone know what is/isn't an important issue to me? Here is what I'm sick of; people telling ME that this won't affect me. Do you know me? Then how do you know this doesn't affect me?

Here's an idea; you vote your way and I'll vote mine. Since the MAJORITY of Californians voted to define marriage as a man & woman (not dog and lama, not woman & lamp, not man & fencepost); I'm going to bet the MAJORITY will pass Prop 8. (do I still have to listen to dim-wits tell me their rights are being trampled on?)

God forbid... wrote on Oct 22, 2008 3:43 PM:Gays are allowed to marry

A choice to have an abortion

We have a black President

Yes On 8 wrote on Oct 22, 2008 4:16 PM:I agree with California Code....
"Voting Yes on Prop 8 does not mean you oppose gay marriage. It only means you oppose the State of California re defining the definition of the word "marriage" to mean something other than man/woman."
Read that post again. What are the gays fighting for? They are already recognized by the state. Why do they need to re-define it? Why do they want to be called married when its totally against their sexuality?

If no on 8 passes wrote on Oct 22, 2008 4:35 PM:what next? Then people will say I have a right to marry my dog or 2 men and 1 woman will say we have the right to marry. Where will it stop?

The Top Ten Reasons Why Gay Marriage is Wrong wrote on Oct 22, 2008 4:53 PM:1. Homosexuality is not natural. Real people always reject unnatural things like eyeglasses, polyester, and air conditioning.

2. Gay marriage will encourage people to be gay, in the same way that hanging around tall people will make you tall.

3. Legalizing gay marriage will open the door to all kinds of crazy behavior. People may even wish to marry their pets because a dog has legal standing and can sign a marriage contract.

4. Heterosexual marriage has been around a long time and hasn’t changed at all; women are still property, blacks still aren’t supposed to marry whites.

5. Straight marriage will be less meaningful if homosexual marriage were allowed; the sanctity of Brittany Spears’ 55-hour just-for-fun marriage would be destroyed.

6. Heterosexual marriages are valid because they produce children. Homosexual couples, infertile couples, and old people shouldn’t be allowed to marry because our orphanages aren’t full yet, and the world needs more children.

7. Obviously gay parents will raise gay children, since straight parents only raise straight children.

8. Gay marriage is not supported by religion. In a theocracy like ours, the values of one religion are imposed on the entire country. That’s why we have only one religion in North America.

9. Children can never succeed without a male and a female role model at home. That’s why we as a society expressly forbid single parents to raise children.

10. Gay marriage will change the foundation of society; we could never adapt to new social norms. Just like we haven’t adapted to cars, the service-sector economy, or longer life spans.

JD wrote on Oct 22, 2008 7:04 PM:@ Prediction: Ok, in all seriousness now. What I was saying was that for anybody to label anti-prop 8ers as the "real haters" as you did is really ignorant. Those of us who oppose prop 8 don't have the right to deny the rights of those who do support it. But we're not trying to do that - we're trying to make sure everybody has the same rights. And that, my friend, is the exact opposite of hate.

To God Forbid wrote on Oct 22, 2008 7:09 PM:Thank you for stating those three key items. Sincerely, a redneck, right-wing, ultraconservative Republican bigot (and darn proud of it).

Alex wrote on Oct 22, 2008 7:30 PM:Why can't we do what makes us happy? My dog Fifi is very dedicated to me and I just adore her. Why can't we get married? Equality for all!

Murrieta Mom wrote on Oct 22, 2008 7:46 PM:Is the NCT reviewer serious about posts 3:43 and 7:09 This is not freedom of speech,these posts should not be tolerated by a civil society or passed on by a reputable News Agency. If you worked for me,tomorrow,you would not work for me.Terrible judgment!

If you all think wrote on Oct 22, 2008 8:18 PM:that prop 8 doesn't involve our children then your heads are in the sand. The lifestyles of the homosexuals will be brought into our schools. OUr churches can and will be sued if they deny a gay couple a right to marry. It's already happening in Mass. it will happen here in a state that is already sue happy.

OUr state consitution needs to be changes to read marriage in between a man and a woman. It's been like that since the beginning of time.

all I can say, is if this is brought into our schools then religion should be brough back in as well.

YES ON 8 -

Yes on prop 8 wrote on Oct 22, 2008 8:47 PM:There was a case where a doctor didn't wish to arrange for a lesbian couple to have a child through artificial insemination because of his personal beliefs, he instead recommended colleagues who would have performed the operation. The doctor was sued for not performing an act that would have went against his personal convictions, and the lesbian couple won. It's not going to stop with marriage. With some religions not accepting homosexual members, will the next step be to sue religions, which do not embrace homosexuality, and force them to? That was the case with the Boy scouts, which was attacked for not accepting gay members. Since the Bible condemns homosexuality, will we see this book banned as a document embracing “hate speech”? The guarantees of the First amendment regarding freedom of religion could be undermined as Freedom from offense becomes increasingly regarded as more important then freedom of religion.

To HistoryHistory wrote on Oct 22, 2008 8:48 PM:Glad to see you got my point. When people impose their twisted beliefs on societies those societies end up crumbling...always starting with the embrace of homosexuality. In the case of the US the embrace of homosexuality it will be followed by the Muslim religion being forced down our throats.

Jack wrote on Oct 22, 2008 10:02 PM:LETS KEEP MARRIAGE THE WAY IT SHOULD BE!!!!!!!!
YES ON 8!!!!!!!!!

Im Gay wrote on Oct 23, 2008 12:15 AM:I think it's important for both sides to stop for a moment. Close your eyes, dig deep into your hearts and realize something: "We're talking about People here"
To my No on 8's: When someone brings up their faith to explain to you their beliefs don't jump on them accusing them of being zealots. They're not zealots nor are they out to physically hurt us. And above all don't try to 'trash their faith', their ability to freely express their minds and heart is the exact thing we're trying to keep in all this.
To the Yes on 8's: When someone explains to you their desire to someday get married, don't disregard their dream just because it would be a type of wedding you have never been to. And don't trash on people's 'liberal/gay agendas' just because half of the country is in a progressive mindset, trying to catch-up with the rest of the world. The only agenda we have out there is to allow our nation to be Whole again.

Sara wrote on Oct 23, 2008 3:07 AM:Temecula Valley Christians: Churches set up in strip malls to "network"rather than worship: These are some of the most exclusionary,:
"clubbish", snobby, cold ,fake "houses of worship" I have been to in the world. Now, with the economy in a downward spiral, watch the flocks flee as they have no one to talk business with. As for the"Yes on 8 "folks-- Really? Remember Jesus was most accepting, inclusive,loving man. How easy it is for all of you to judge. It is probably easier for a gay man to pass through the eye of a needle than you "Yes on 8" sky is falling , fear mongers.

Five Yes Votes wrote on Oct 23, 2008 3:07 AM:My family has already mailed our ballots.

Rasta Man wrote on Oct 23, 2008 5:07 AM:Some of you folks really need to stop polishing your guns and go pick up your Meds.

Lady wrote on Oct 23, 2008 5:16 AM:People,people,people READ the Prop.... Gays can still HAVE their ceremonies. WHY do they have to change LAWS. HEY let's ALL change a law we don't like!!! Because IT'S not fair. OMG.. I am not going to have this taught to my grandkids PLAN and simple. AND it is being brought into our schools already S.F.,Mass. READ the papers YES on 8!!!

Yes on Prop 8 wrote on Oct 23, 2008 7:13 AM:Jerry Brown, in order to fire up the gay community, had it placed on the ballot as a measure to ban gay marriages. The proponents never wanted it listed that way, because it was never about banning gay marriage, just that the sate isn’t forced to recognize gay marriages as a legal union. If this were about "banning" gay marriage, there would be penalties for participants in a gay marriage. Some Churches already accept gay marriage, there are no current laws against being gay, and if Proposition 8 passes there will be no legal action against those gay couples who claim to be married. This is more about forcing acceptance of homosexuals, who are exhibiting a greater amount of intolerance and hostility against those who aren't accepting their choices, and unless you want to argue that homosexuality is biological, it is indeed a choice.

Craig wrote on Oct 23, 2008 8:04 AM:to: wheres the balance- Yesterday's paper had an article about a woman on a corner in Escondido promoting no on prop 8. Where was the balance yesterday? How come you weren't complaining then?

Cardiffian wrote on Oct 23, 2008 8:28 AM:Render unto Ceasar what is Ceasar's - render unto god what is god's

No on 8!

call me Johnson wrote on Oct 23, 2008 8:31 AM:My heterosexual spouse and I are voting NO ON 8. Reading the arguments on these blogs over the past week has solidified our position and there’s nothing that can be said that hasn’t already been said on both sides. It’s a matter of belief. The no on 8’ers believes in equality for all. The yes on 8’ers believe it is God’s will to keep marriage between a man and a woman, and that it’s their duty to promote his will. There is absolutely nothing else that can be done for now except voting your heart. My heart backed by my beliefs in God is strongly opposed to this measure and I’m voting no and there’s nothing any of you people voting yes can say to change my mind. I’m sure the feeling is mutual.

fedup wrote on Oct 23, 2008 8:36 AM:unfair?.........maybe, but very legal!remember, there is no "right" to drive

TH wrote on Oct 23, 2008 9:11 AM:I'm a Christian, but if this is a religious issue for some maybe they should remember that we have freedom of religion in this country. Not everyone has to think or believe exactly the same way. Gay should have the right to marry and know one has the right to discriminate against anyone else. Don't the ignorant or biggoted Yes on 8 people realize its gay marriage is leagal right now? How is the marriage of two loving people, you dont even know affecting you today? It's not. Other peoples marriage has nothing to do with your own.

No on Ha8 wrote on Oct 23, 2008 9:53 AM:My husband and I just returned from a wedding last weekend between his old college roommate, Jim, and Jim's 17-year partner. Along with family and friends, interestingly, both men's entire group of college roommates from almost 30 years ago and their wives and children. Jim and Mike have given much to our society and the fact that people who have known them throughout their lives love and respect them enough to travel from far away to support them in what may be their only chance to marry speaks louder than all the angry rhetoric from bigots who never stood in their shoes, and don't understand that a deep abiding love knows no political or ideological boundaries. Look at your motives. Are you trying to prove your own superiority by making others less deserving of societal rights than you? What do you gain from hating? How is Jim and Mike hurting your marriage? They feel pain, sorrow, hope, joy and, yes, love just as thoroughly as you do. They are your brothers, sisters your aunts and uncles, and, yes, your sons and daughters. Love them, they need you no less because they are gay, they need your understanding even more.

Look Forward to wrote on Oct 23, 2008 9:56 AM:Regardless of the outcome of this initiative, we will be hearing from both sides for a long time. Settle in, it's going to be a long one.

to Cardiffian wrote on Oct 23, 2008 11:41 AM:WHAT?

Prediction wrote on Oct 23, 2008 12:23 PM:Fair enough, JD, and I'm sure you can appreciate the negative stigma being propagated with the widespread vandalism of pro-8'ers campaign signs. If this isn't hate, then what is it?

We'll all be back here Monday morning commenting on Sunday's event and what kind of excitement or protest it generated, if any.

To Cardiffian wrote on Oct 23, 2008 12:40 PM:Stay in Cardiffia-

Cardiffian wrote on Oct 23, 2008 12:43 PM:Render unto Tarzan what is Tarzan's.
Render unto Jar-Jar Binks what is Jar-Jar Binks.
Render unto Capone what is Capone's.
Render pork to make great Carnitas!

Quote some random line (that you obviously don't understand) and hope people think I'm smart!

The Devil wrote on Oct 23, 2008 2:09 PM:is clever and very deceptive.

Einstein wrote on Oct 23, 2008 3:10 PM:-Gay marriage has nothing to do with your marriage or life.
-Letting people drive without a license has nothing to do with your life.
-Letting kids use drugs has nothing to do with your life.
-Teaching children about gay marriage has nothing to do with your life.
-Requiring people to have a license for a gun is taking away my rights and has nothing to do with your life.
-Screening airplane passengers is racist/bigotry and steals their rights and has nothing to do with your life.
-What the Commander in Chief does with the armed forces has nothing to do with your life.
-Where we build roads and whatever wetlands we ruin tramples on contractors rights and has nothing to do with your rights.

JD wrote on Oct 23, 2008 3:41 PM:The thing that really cracks me up is all the people saying gays are "pushing their agenda" on California. You do realized that the only people pushing ANY kind of agenda are those trying to pass a proposition.

If we all vote no on 8, guess what changes from how things are now. If you guessed nothing, you win. The only way we're going to vote any changes to how things are currently run in California is by voting yes. And in this case, the changes we'd be bringing about are ones of discrimination.

Even if you personally don't support gay marriage, you should still vote no. Voting yes means we are taking a step to limit rights of a group of people on a statewide level. And that is not ok. I don't care if "civil unions" provide all the same benefits; separate is inherently unequal.

JD wrote on Oct 23, 2008 3:45 PM:And to Prediction, I understand what you're saying. I'm not suggesting it's ok for the NO camp to perform acts of "hate" against the YES camp. But to me, I do see one difference: the NO camp hates the prop; the YES camp hates the people. I think it's easier to see the lesser of two evils in that case.

But let it be known that one of my neighbors has a YES on 8 sign in their yard. And I left it alone. It was on their property, and I won't infringe on their rights of free speech. But in a public forum, the rules change, and I have just as much right to show up and protest as they do to show up and support. Sadly, I'm at UCLA, and won't be traveling back home this weekend, so I won't be at the event.

JD wrote on Oct 23, 2008 3:58 PM:@ Murrieta Mom: As much as I disagree with those two comments, and as much as they disgust me, they are fully allowable under the NCTimes comment policies, and under the Freedom of Speech laws. They weren't attacking anybody, not libelous or slanderous, nor were they profane. In fact, as much as I disagree with what they did, it's not actually hurting anybody.

They may be, in my opinion, ignorant, but I'm glad to see that even tasteless comments are allowed - I'm all for equality, after all. I would never want to push my views onto others, and ban ignorant comments from the NCTimes. I just choose to ignore them.

Sometimes, I feel others could learn from the above example...

Yes on Prop 8 wrote on Oct 23, 2008 6:06 PM:Probably the most compelling reason to vote for Proposition 8, is the hatred and bigotry coming from those against it. From this blog alone, we have the following characterizations of those who don’t share their point of view…..Nothing better than mass discrimination, bigots igornant prejudice haters! promote intolerance nothing but a bunch of igornant prejudice haters. Temecula makes it easy for people who think like they do... parents who are stupid enough to believe those LIES. That argument is not just a distortion of facts, it is an outright lie. A yes on 8 vote isn't just a vote in support of prejudice and intolerance but it is also a vote of selfishness and vanity. Temecula is wrong to provide a public building to preach intolerance unless organizers are paying the going rate to use it. Maybe the Klan can hold a rally there too? fear mongers. Are you trying to prove your own superiority by making others less deserving of societal rights than you? the YES camp hates the people…..Sadly, we live in an age where it’s all to common for those whose political leanings are toward the left to use the term “hate” to describe a differing point of view. If 8 don’t past, the real winners won’t be those gays who wish to have their marriage validated by the state. After all, they are already receiving all the benefits of a marriage through a civil union. The real winners will be the lawyers who will be suing anyone who has a moral or ethical opposition to such a union.

Prediction wrote on Oct 23, 2008 6:29 PM:Good comments & good points, JD. You started out a little shaky, but finished strong. I hope we can all respect diverse opinions and rise above intolerance.

To Yes on Prop 8 wrote on Oct 23, 2008 11:38 PM:The glaring flaw in your argument is that you call a proposition that would deny a group of people the right to marry, a "point of view." But it isn't just a "differing point of view" because you aim to force it on everyone else! No one is taking any rights away from you, yet you want to take rights away from others—THAT is intolerance. Yet ironically, you try to spin opposition to your position as intolerance!! Wishing to strip from an entire group of people the right to marry who they choose, purely because of who they are, THAT is intolerance and distain for a group of people who offend you. Your position is not a harmless innocent little ol' difference of opinion. Examine that, and you will see hate born of fear of people who are different from you.

Yes on Prop 8 wrote on Oct 24, 2008 1:16 PM:We’ll the glaring flaw in your argument, is that this is simply about two people following their hearts. Hate speech legislation now punishes people for thinking “bad thoughts” about a group, and religious prohibitions against gay behavior and marriage will have mainstream Christians, Jews, and Moslems. being forced to choose between their faith and the law of the land. It was once criminal to be gay, it may come to pass that those not accepting gays may become the criminals.

Temecula is what Temecula is wrote on Oct 24, 2008 1:21 PM:To much right wing religious influence. To much petty bigotry. To much knee jerk rection. To much fear of anything that's different. My marrage, hetrosexual, is not in danger if Prop 8 fails, but my basic freedoms are if prop 8 wins. People can believe whatever they want,but stop shoving those beliefs down other folks throats.

Not a Lawyer wrote on Oct 24, 2008 7:05 PM:This might be one of those props. that gets over turned by the courts for discrimination?

Just say NO wrote on Oct 24, 2008 11:22 PM:JD, totally agree with you.

For those of you keeping score...
add one more for NO on 8!!!

Proud heterosexual mother of two, teaching tolerance, love and respect.

To Yes on Prop 8 wrote on Oct 24, 2008 11:51 PM:You say ". . . Hate speech legislation now punishes people for thinking “bad thoughts” about a group, . . . "

NOT TRUE! No one is punished for thoughts.

" . . . and religious prohibitions against gay behavior and marriage will have mainstream Christians, Jews, and Moslems. being forced to choose between their faith and the law of the land."

WRONG! The U.S. Constitution never has required laws to adjust to be in line with religious beliefs. In America we have a separation of church and state.

. . . "It was once criminal to be gay, it may come to pass that those not accepting gays may become the criminals."

IF "NOT ACCEPTING" is your euphemism for discriminating against, then YES, discriminating against people just because you don't like them isn't okay in America. Gays don't hurt anyone. They aren't breaking laws. They are Americans, just as you are, with the same rights and protections under the law as you have.

Maybe you just don't like America, or living in a free society governed by laws and a system of justice rather than religion! Maybe you prefer religious states where those who don't conform to strict religious beliefs are considered infidels. Maybe you'd be happier in places like Iran, Iraq, and Kuwait where it's okay to punish gays for being gay.

Yes on Prop 8 wrote on Oct 25, 2008 4:02 PM:The intent of the constitution was never freedom from religion, it was freedom for all religions. The founding fathers did not want a church of the United States. The courts twisted that to allow atheists, who should have the freedom not to pray, to prevent any religious expression in the public square, because they were offended. The courts can make the law mean anything they want.

Read the Constitution wrote on Oct 26, 2008 1:15 AM:You are terribly misinformed if you think that the founding fathers (who were of a variety of beliefs—including a diest—and atheists) believed that laws should IN ANY WAY be about religion. They wanted people to be free to practice their religion without interference from the government, AND AS WELL, laws and government to be arrived at by a democratic process, by the people, whoever they were and whatever their decisions were without interference from a church or other overlord. You speak as if religion has some prerogative in the rule of law. It does not, never did in America. You may not like the decisions of our judicial branch of the government, but that is an equal voice in our three branched system, and if you don't like it you are free to vote for officials who will appoint you brand of justices. They didn't "twist" anything. They made laws, just as they are charged to do. Have you ever read the Constitution? Nowhere does it say religious expression must be in the "public square". That is YOUR opinion, not written in our Constitution. Go to church, practice your religious beliefs in your own way, but don't presume those beliefs have any weight in forming the law of the land.

I have read the constit wrote on Oct 26, 2008 4:02 PM:They wanted people to be free to practice their religion without interference from the government,...So that's why students were prohibited fro praying in school? Seems telling people they can't have any religous references on public land is a restriction on religous freedom. The problem was the founding fathers should have prohibited the courts from passing laws. The courts were never intended to be a legislative body, and ever since Supreme Cort Justice Marshall discovered "Judicial Review" The courts have been passing more and more laws.

Freedom of Religion wrote on Oct 26, 2008 11:32 PM:The courts actually never pass any laws. They only interpret the law. They have the power to interpret local, state and federal laws and the Constitution. I disagree that the founding fathers were wrong to give the judicial branch that power. They knew that as times changed, justices would need to make difficult decisions to as society evolved.

Think about what you are asking of our government agencies when you demand organized prayer sessions in school, or religious references in government offices (what you really mean when you use the term "public"). You are deliberately pushing the boundary to force religion within the walls of government. This is a clear blurring of our line of separation of church and state. Precisely what our founding fathers worked so hard to prevent. You are wrong to suggest this is a restriction on religous freedom. You confuse rights with freedoms. People have the freedom to practice their religion, but they do not have the right to do so anywhere they wish, if by doing so they break a law, or violate the Constitution. Someone can't break into your home to pray, that would be violating the law. People can't hold religious services at schools, that is violating the Constitution. The founding fathers never said we were entitled to practice our religion with absolutely no restrictions whatsoever! Requiring people to observe the law of the land while exercising their right to practice religion isn't an unreasonable limitation. And besides, if you truly wished to pray, the Bible teaches us to pray in solitude, for to seek public approval of our reverence is false piety. Or do you have a different purpose than piety in your prayer in schools agenda?

amy wrote on Oct 29, 2008 4:38 PM:"Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve. God doesn't hate the sinner, He hates the sin."

Amen!

Melissa wrote on Oct 29, 2008 5:39 PM:NO on 8!!! It promotes discrimination and the bible also says something about God punishing those in the wrong and that they will be judged on Judgement day so what are you all so scared of? Having an opinion is one thing but you have no right to tell someone that they can't marry whom they choose!

tolerence wrote on Nov 1, 2008 9:45 PM:No on 8. This prop would change the Cal. constitution. This is wrong to impose your right wing politics on people.To bad you all were not so passionate about the criminals in the white house now. What will you do if your child is gay? will you dis own them? It does not matter if you bring your child up with your views or religious beliefs they will seek there own feelings. Ii hope for them and others this right wing agenda does not pass. do you all recall the hate crimes against all that have different views on life. Spend your time and effort on things that are important to us all and will make a difference in peoples life for the better and this prop is not one them.Oh ya doesn't Cheney have a gay daughter! I'm sure you support those criminals. Prop 8 is just wrong!