Fresno Bee editorial totally destroys arguments for Prop. 8 (same-sex marriage ban)

[Newsjock]

http://www.fresnobee.com/opinion/story/950392.html

Proposition 8, which would define marriage in California as only between a man and a woman, raises a number of issues. But one question stands out: Should we use the state constitution to take the right to marry from a particular group of people? We believe that notion is wrong, and recommend a "no" vote on Proposition 8.

... Proponents of Proposition 8 have offered several arguments for their position.

They complain that "activist judges" overturned the will of the majority. But that's what judges are supposed to do when the majority seeks to deny the rights of a minority.

The notion that same-sex marriages somehow threaten the sanctity and strength of heterosexual marriages is simply absurd. Those who worry about the health of heterosexual marriages should focus their attention on divorce, which is the real threat to marriage.

... The claim that schools will be forced by the state to teach "gay marriage," featured in TV ads flooding the airwaves, is a flat lie. Local school districts control such curriculum, and state law permits parents to withdraw their children from lessons they find objectionable.

Proposition 8 proponents claim that same-sex partners can enjoy the same legal rights and benefits as married couples. That's another falsehood. Domestic partners don't share Social Security benefits, health insurance or pensions, for instance. They don't get family leave and cannot file joint tax returns, nor do they share rights to retirement benefits.

[msongs]

1. its all about the religion - adultery loving xtians = vote for McCain & for Prop 8 - hypocrites nt

[begin_within]

2. That's amazing, because Fresno is "freeper central"

The central valley of California has long been a deep red area, and Fresno is where FreeRepublic is based. I'm surprised to see their biggest newspaper come out against Prop 8. But glad too of course. The biggest newspaper in San Diego, the Union-Tribuen, also came out against it even though it is a hard-core Republican newspaper (of course they are endorsing McCain).

[nichomachus]

7. The only way your can defend Proposition Hate is with right-wing intolerant religious beliefs

Even the newspaper can see that.

[begin_within]

11. 'Proposition Hate' - great great line. Thanks

[MarkInCA]

10. The Fresno Bee leans left

even though you are correct, this area is very repuke infested.

The local talk radio is worse than Limpballs sometimes.

At least the majority of the state is not so stupid.

[begin_within]

12. oh - didn't know. Thanks

[MarkInCA]

13. I thought their Obama endorsement was on also

Fresno Bee, 10/12/08:

The litany of serious problems facing this country is as long as it has been in 70 years: the collapse of financial institutions, spiraling national debt, rising unemployment, a dysfunctional health care system, crumbling infrastructure, a failed energy policy and porous borders. And we're fighting two wars.

What we've been doing isn't working. America needs a powerful dose of change, and The Bee believes that Barack Obama is the presidential candidate who can deliver it.

Obama is better equipped than John McCain to deal with the massive collapse of the nation's financial institutions. Less than a month ago, McCain was telling the American people that "the fundamentals of our economy are strong." That wasn't true then, and things are worse now...

http://www.fresnobee.com/274/story/930147.html

[Ian David]

3. California needs help. I already donated. Anyone who can donate, should donate.

There is a real chance this thing could pass, thanks largely to the 43% of donors who are out-of-state Mormons.

https://secure.ga4.org/01/unfair

[haele]

4. The Pro-Prop8 people think marriage is just about the sex.

Otherwise, why should they care if two consenting adults of any gender wants to be life partners?
If diluting the reason to marry down to a juvenile attitude of "what type of sex lifestyle two people have" doesn't threaten the sanctity and "strength" of the institution of marriage, I don't know what does. It's not even about procreation - unless they're also requiring a fertility standard before a "man and a woman" can get married. It's certainly not about a safe, loving family, because obviously they don't think that as role models, men should be allowed to be "gentle, empathic, and loving home-makers" (feminine) or women are capable of being "strong, pragmatic, hard-working heads of families"(masculine).

It is as if to the Prop-8 supporters, marriage isn't about mutual comfort, care, or respect for life and it's certainly not about the vows and contracts that we make when we stand before a minister or a justice of the peace, it's about whether or not any old guy and girl with the hots for each other do the missionary after they listen to a lecture and then stand up in front of a congregation promising to be true to each other and some cargo-cult belief system made up by a charlatan calling him or her-self a minister, in the business to enjoy the power of "leading an army of true believers of the one true Apocalyptic Ghod of Prosperity".
Gay marriage is just another bogeyman to keep the sheeple in line. Prop 8 is just a way to whip the church-goers in line and keep the barrier strong between reality and what might have started out as a halfway decent belief system. And they're using the fear and shame of sex as an anchor stone for their barriers. Oh, and to get more money from already cash-strapped parishioners for their own lifestyle.

As has been asked before, where's the proposition outlawing "no fault" divorce, hmmm? That's far more dangerous to marriage than two guys or two gals making a life commitment - which, as in some "straight" life commitments, may not even have sex as a major consideration in the partnership.
Marriage - isn't it about the mutual comfort, care - sickness and health - and respect for your partner? Isn't it the only way that two people can legally have a family relationship without having a blood relationship?

Just my two cents.

Haele

[Kerrytravelers]

5. I commented. Let's hope it gets published.

Funny, but all the comments in favor of passing Prop 8 don't address the very basic facts as listed in the Bee editorial.

In addition, SB 71 of the School Code clearly states that all parents have the right to have their children withdrawn from all discussions of health/sex education in school, which includes discussions of birth control, the functions of sex, etc. So, parents who don't want their children to hear the words "gay marriage" can completely opt out, as they have always been able to.

No church has to marry anyone. Most churches have rules about who can get married in their parishes. For example, the Catholic church my husband and I were married in required the bride and groom both to be members in good standing of the parish. They can certainly say no to a gay couple, and there will be no legal ramifications. Anyone who has actually read the wording of the court would understand this.

In the end, ask yourself this: Marriage Equality has been in place since roughly June. Has the world changed? Does the sun still rise? Is the Earth still spinning on it's axis? Everyone is fine. No marriage is now put in jeopardy because others have equality.

In essence, making seperate rules for various people amounts to Separate, But Equal. And that has worked out so well in the past. Perhaps we should also have separate drinking fountains and restaurants, too? Perhaps we should all wait in separate waiting rooms?

And, if we takes rights away from one group, who is next? All those who claim Christianity as their reason for supporting this proposition, ask yourself this: What rights of yours could be up for elimination?

I think it's time we move past these silly social wedge issues.

And, it shouldn't matter, but for the record, I'm a female married to a male. And our marriage is great!!!!!

[flvegan]

6. Kick!

[AntiFascist]

8. K&R, Prop 8 may actually endanger everyone's marriage rights....

in California. The CA Supreme Court discussed the fact that when one class is denied the rights of another class then the only alternatives are to grant the denied class those rights, or else deny those rights to everyone. The only alternative for the Religulous Right would then be to take away the Equality Clause in the state constitution!

[truedelphi]

9. My least favorite commercial right now is the one that is being run 24/7

With a ltitle girl telling her mummy that at school she is being taught that a prince can marry a prince and a princess can marry a princess.

When I was seven, I told every nun that would listen how me and my BFF were gonna be married.
She and I shared the same first name, and we only decided we would marry when we found out that we wouldn't last too long as nuns (The nuns didn't get to have steak as often as we liked.)


Children of the same sex wanting to marry one another has been perfectly normal behavior! Even the usually religiously scrupulous tolerate it.