MetaChat - "This is not about taking away rights from anyone,"

SCODY SMASH!!!!!!!!!!
JOIN MUDPUPPIE SMASH SMASH!!!!!!!!!

posted by scody 22 October | 14:14

You know [okay, deep breaths here, calm down], I'd actually have some respect for them, and for their position, if they'd just be honest. Say it -- what it's about is squeamishness. It's about the whole, "Well, if two men can get married, who's the wife?" thing. It's about that.

It's not about an out-of-line judiciary. It's not about education. (The ads that they've been running lately say nothing about the evils of gay marriage. They just say that if the measure passes, schools will be "required to teach gay marriage" to kindergarteners.)

Just fucking own up to it already, and stop using all the smokescreens. It's about fear, and about not wanting to give the ultimate validation to a "lifestyle" that they've successfully kept marginalized. Just say it: "We like things the way they are, and we'd rather they didn't change." Just fucking say it.

posted by mudpuppie 22 October | 14:22

Schubert sweetness, you are perfectly free not to have a gay marriage if you don't want one.

posted by brujita 22 October | 14:42

Exactly, pupps. The fact they won't own up to their motivations is one of the (many) infuriating things about this whole issue.

Schubert sweetness, you are perfectly free not to have a gay marriage if you don't want one.

Wanda Sykes agrees, brujita.

posted by BoringPostcards 22 October | 14:44

Well, in their defense, what kind of world would we live in where people could partner with someone out of LOVE and not an obligation to reproduce? As we all know, the point of marriage is to make babies. Lots and lots of babies. Because the world doesn't have enough babies. And babies are awesome. Until they need food, clothes,shelter and education. Then they're a drain on the system. But,anyway, that's why it should be one man and one woman (or, sometimes, several underage women). And in a marriage between two women, how do you figure out which one "submits" and which one goes to the Promise Keepers meetings? It would just make things too confusing.

Plus, having to teach homosexuality to kindergartners might result in unsavory pop-up books! Will someone please think of the children!

posted by jrossi4r 22 October | 14:45

It's standing up for the right to deny rights to other people.

posted by jason's_planet 22 October | 14:51

Grrr.

So far I have not seen a single Yes on 8 in my neighborhood. SPECIAL-K SMASH!

posted by special-k 22 October | 14:51

These are the same people who destroy library copies of Heather has Two Mommies.

posted by brujita 22 October | 14:53

I've enjoyed The Sound of Young America's Jesse Thorn's twitter comments on Prop 8. Such as:

If Prop 8 doesn't pass, the pope will have to marry A SECOND POPE WHO IS ALSO A DUDE.

How about "Prop 8: Protect assholes from gays in love."

Sorry I have clouded things with layers of humor and irony. Here is my real opinion: gays should be legally compelled to marry dogs.

(To clarify: gays should be forced to OFFICIATE WEDDINGS BETWEEN DOGS. BETWEEN DOGS AND CATS, THAT IS.)

The recent rash of unborn children marrying plants and whatnot ANNULS my marriage. That's my gut feeling, and I votes with my gut.

I think I just frenched my dog. WELL IF GAYS CAN GET MARRIED, AM I RIGHT?! GAYS! MARRIED! DOGS! IT JUST DON'T FEEL RIGHT.

If you support marriage equality, consider donating to the no on prop 8 campaign: http://www.noonprop8.com/ it's too close for comfort.

posted by mullacc 22 October | 14:56

This is seriously keeping me up at night, bunnies. I mean my fretting and hand-wringing about disenfranchised voters is helping my insomnia, but the whole "Yes on Prop. 8" gaining in the polls is really, really bothering me. I mean, I'm not ready to do this yet, but I understand the frustration of the couple who parked their SUV in front of that family's house. Hope me bunnies, I'm living on antacids and not enough sleep.

posted by Luminous Phenomena 22 October | 15:06

PROTECT MARRIAGE BY INVALIDATING THOUSANDS OF THEM!

Just a thought here. It was so long since I got my marriage ~~sentence~~ license, I've forgotten. Are you required in the paperwork to specify which of the two parties is male and which is female? If not, how can you tell that ANY marriage is between a man and a woman? This has the potential to INVALIDATE EVERY MARRIAGE IN ANY CALIFORNIA JURISDICTION THAT DOESN'T SPECIFY!

Or at least, ALL marriages in those jurisdictions that stopped specifying after the Supreme Court ruling came through.

And think about it: Even if it says "Bride" and "Groom", that is NOT necessarily the same as saying "Woman" and "Man".

Have I got a Proposition killer here? Or just a wacky pipe dream?

posted by wendell 22 October | 15:07

They still seem to believe this, in a non-ironic way. (Crimony, that Onion link is 10 years old!)

The upcoming movie about Harvey Milk, in which White asks him about reproduction, and Milk goes, "no, but god knows we keep trying." I am to the point of rubbing it all in their faces, and actually do with a lot of my conservative co-workers. . .

posted by danf 22 October | 15:13

I mean, I'm not ready to do this yet...

Yeah, I was actually musing about having bumper stickers printed that said "Homophobic and proud!" Thought they'd make a nice companion to the few Yes on 8 stickers I've seen around. In the end, I couldn't do it. Sure wanted to, though.

posted by mudpuppie 22 October | 15:15

This is seriously keeping me up at night, bunnies.

You and me, both. I'm also starting to get frustrated with the daily emails I'm getting from the No on 8 Campaign and the Human Rights Campaign that are basically "please donate AGAIN, if we Prop 8, you are going to wake up on the morning of Nov. 5 and FEEL TERRIBLE because YOU didn't donate enough."

Okay, fuck that. I have been donating to the NO campaign out of every single paycheck since this summer. Where are the TV ads with Feinstein and Schwarzenegger and Villaraigosa and all the other CA politicians who said they were against Prop 8? Why aren't THEY on TV hammering the bullshit lies the Yes campaign is trotting out?

Where are the gay and lesbian couples on their ads? Where are the pictures of Del and Phyllis? Where are the stories of people who've been together for decades, contributed to their communities, held down their jobs, paid their taxes, who just want to marry the person they love? Go for the heartstrings, or go for the righteousness, but for god's sake, go for the jugular!

posted by scody 22 October | 15:39

grr, that should be "if we LOSE on Prop 8..." in the first paragraph.

posted by scody 22 October | 15:41

Hell, I don't even live in California and I donated to the No on 8 campaign. It's just so hateful.

posted by crush-onastick 22 October | 15:46

All this hate makes me feel sick to my stomach.

posted by special-k 22 October | 15:53

Oh, mudpuppie. That'd be quite easy to get away with, and quite cheap (a few sheets of sticker paper). I'd be sorely tempted, too.

posted by goo 22 October | 16:13

Where are the TV ads with Feinstein and Schwarzenegger and Villaraigosa and all the other CA politicians who said they were against Prop 8? Why aren't THEY on TV hammering the bullshit lies the Yes campaign is trotting out?

Scody, have you contacted their offices asking this?

I got in touch with Howard Berman after Newtie shut down the government (which includes presidential libraries) 13 years ago and got a response.

posted by brujita 22 October | 16:19

This is my new favorite "No On Prop 8" blog, y'all.

wendell - in California, before the ruling earlier this year, Bride and Groom did legally mean "woman" and "man". I'm not a lawyer, but it has something to do with something or other.

If this amendment passes, it's doubtful that any previous marriage licenses will be revoked. It might take a court ruling, but the general legal consensus seems to be that they'll be grandfathered in. It's going to be a weird thing, where some gay couples have legally recognized marriages and some don't.

If this amendment passes, I hope that the California Supreme Court then rules that California cannot legally certify ANY weddings, since weddings would be discriminatory by constitutional definition.

posted by muddgirl 22 October | 16:51

Also, No on Prop. 2 in Florida, as well.

posted by muddgirl 22 October | 16:54

I have a big gay Mormon friend who keeps posting No on 8 stuff on his facebook and he has lost half his friends. Evidently the LDS church is levying each family like fucking $1000!

posted by By the Grace of God 22 October | 17:06

Evidently the LDS church is levying each family like fucking $1000!

qua?

posted by lysdexic 22 October | 18:25

Ugh. I hate that this sort of thing is even an *issue*.

posted by Stewriffic 22 October | 19:44

Oh, come on, everybody, we all know why they want to keep gay marriage off the books, and they're completely justified. If just anyone is allowed to marry, marriage's perceived exclusivity goes WAY down, and you won't be able to sell your used marriage for anything like what you could in the past.

posted by deadcowdan 22 October | 19:59

I voted no on 2, of course. The only amendment I voted yes to was 3.

You know what this election is doing to me? It's making me hate people. I size up people I don't even know. I'm majorly annoyed with rebel flag bumper stickers and such things. I'm asking my husband questions like, "In your opinion, what percentage of your male peers don't take women seriously?" I'm on edge. I'm slightly bitter. It's nuts. It's no way to live. I am actually starting to calm down a bit. It's useful to get some perspective and understanding of human behavior.

posted by LoriFLA 22 October | 20:23

I know what you mean about being on edge, LoriFLA. Whenever I despair of current affairs, I go back and read history. Today's history is just yesterday's politics.

I wish I still had the commemorative Time Magazine Constitution edition. 1987, I think. They did a whole issue of what the news of the day was 200 years before. It was pretty cool.

posted by lysdexic 22 October | 20:29

I saw a "Yes on 2" sticker in the parking lot today. She was double-parked and getting out of her car and had the most smug nasty look on her face.

2 isn't getting nearly the attention it needs to here, and I think it could be even worse than 8 in that it invalidates civil unions - including between one woman and one man - as well. MARRIAGE OR NOTHING.

Ew.

posted by casarkos 22 October | 20:29

Hey! There it is!

posted by lysdexic 22 October | 20:33

I'm really really worried about 8. I've given way way more money than I can afford ($400). I'm not thrilled with the "No on 8" campaign, though I'm not in that line of work so who knows. I can't believe we've lost so much ground. I tried to phone bank last night and I felt sick to my stomach the whole time.

What am I going to say to all of my friends if it passes? (I'm straight, well, if I had a life that might be more obvious, but I live in a pretty gay world.) Eighty percent of my social world is lesbian/gay couples. Shit. If it passes, my friends will be near devastated. And I don't know what else to do.

posted by Claudia_SF 22 October | 21:00

Okay, sorry, I'm panicking, not helpful.

posted by Claudia_SF 22 October | 21:01

I'm also freaking out about Prop 4 -- kids are so vulnerable and clueless, they can barely pick their noses on a deadline. Put a bureaucratic obstacle in front of a kid, on a tough topic, they'll put it off, one week becomes three months in an instant, and that's the end of choice. The kids that can maneuver a judicial bypass are extraordinary kids, and lucky, kids who find advocate-lawyers to help them. Most kids are not extraordinary or lucky.

posted by Claudia_SF 22 October | 21:05

Have some history?

I'd send you chocolate cake if I could.

posted by lysdexic 22 October | 21:13

You know what this election is doing to me? It's making me hate people. I size up people I don't even know.

Yeah, that's pretty much it. I think that's why the left has such a visceral reaction to the right these days. If I see an old W sticker on a car (I'd just like to say I have yet to see a single McCain sticker other than the moveon parody one) I don't assume they're a fiscal conservative. My instant reaction is "oh look, a homophobe."

posted by kellydamnit 22 October | 22:02

22 October 2008