Disclaimer: I do not mean this as a personal attack to anyone or any group of people. I am just attempting to state my reasoning behind why I would vote for yes for proposition 8. Also, because I am unable to vote, I have not researched both sides throughly or searched for exact scientific articles to back up my claims. I would, however encourage others to do so and to vote according to their own reasonings and beliefs.
Proposition 8 would legally define the word marriage, so that "only a marriage between a man and a woman is legal and recognized in California."
Firstly, I believe that marriage is a sacred covenant between a man, a woman and God. I believe that the institution of Marriage was divinely inspired, and that God intended marriage to be between a man and a woman. I believe that families are central to the plan of our creator, and that they are an integral unit of society. I believe that families are the most important thing, and are a defining part of our existence.
This is my personal religious belief, and although may believe this way, I have no right to inflict this belief on anyone. This is only one of many reasons why I support proposition 8.
However, I also support propositon 8 because I believe that it does not deny rights from same-sex couples.
I believe that same sex couples should have the same legal rights that heterosexual couples have, even if they are not married. I think that under California law, you can be considered to be in a domestic partnership if you are living with the same person, and you have been for a certain number of years. Therefore, I believe that all partnerships should have the right to joint bank accounts, similar insurance benefits, as well as rights according to wills and the definition of property.
I support proposition 8 because I believe that parents have the right to determine what their children are taught in schools.
I believe that parents should choose whether or not their children are allowed to watch PG-13 or Rated R movies in the classroom, and that parents should choose whether or not they want their children to learn about puberty and sex from their teachers or from their parents. In this same way, I believe that parents should be able to choose when, where and how they tell their children about marriage, drugs, families, homosexuality, alternative lifestyles, and even religion, to some extent. I think that if proposition 8 does not pass, I have been told that laws are already set in place that would require such topics to be taught as early as elementary school. I have also heard that teachers have already taken their students to their wedding as a part of a school field trip. I would oppose this, regardless of the couple. I don't understand how going to a wedding, or any sort of ceremony ties in with a school curriculum. I did not learn extensively about other religions until I was in middle school, and even then, we were never taken on field trips to Jewish Synagogues, Catholic Cathedrals, or Islamic Mosques, athough I did learn about all of those in school.
I believe that children have a right to a mother and a father.
I believe there is something very important, though I do not understand all the scientific facts, about biological parents raising their children. I know that biologically there is something very special about the bond between siblings. Your brothers and sisters are the only people who have your exact set of DNA, and when your parents die, who will still be alive? Your siblings. When your children leave home, who will understand your struggle? Your siblings.
I know that children who are raised by their biological mothers and fathers in a loving home do not have the same struggles that children in single-parent homes, or adopted children, or foster children face. I think that the ideal situation to raise a child is with its biological mother and father. While this ideal is not always possible, and other couples can raise a child effectively, I think ithat the ideal of one father, one mother and child should be the ideal most frequently sought after.
Finally, going back to religious beliefs, I have heard that new laws may be passed, if Proposition 8 is denied, which would cause the state to intervene in religious ordinances. I do not know the extent of this, but I do feel that the government should not be involved with religion, in the same sense that religion should not be involved in government.
And I close, again reminding you to vote according to your beliefs, voting for the candidates and the parties which you feel would best represent your beliefs and ideas. However, please be an informed voter. For more information on the Yes side, feel free to visit these websites: http://preservemarriage.ca/eng/index.html or http://www.protectmarriage.com/about
You believe same sex couples in California have the same rights as married couples through civil unions? Then your belief is uninformed and wrong.
Civil unions grant couples a few of the many rights given automatically to married couples in California, but there are still about a thousand federal rights that are left out simply because it is not recognized as marriage. They're throwing us a bone, but there's no meat on it. It is a separate but not even close to equal standard.
http://www.aclu.org/getequal/rela/california.html
"Never go with a hippy to a second location."
~Jack Donaghy
http://www.progressiveu.org/blog/ediblewoman
First, let me say that you are a good writer. Your entry shows that you took the time to write out what you believe in a coherent, mature, and thoughtful manner. Cheers to that.
That said, I've got a couple points that I want to go over.
This is my personal religious belief, and although may believe this way, I have no right to inflict this belief on anyone. This is only one of many reasons why I support proposition 8.
Then why would you vote yes? By doing so, you're inflicting your belief onto others and doing so through a Constitutional amendment.
Firstly, I believe that marriage is a sacred covenant between a man, a woman and God. I believe that the institution of Marriage was divinely inspired...
(As offensive as this is probably going to inevitably end up sounding, it's not intended to be. I apologize in advance.)
Your writing makes it quite plain that you are probably a Christian (or at least a member of one of the Abrahamic religions). However, I suggest that you do a little research into the history of marriage (Googling "history of marriage" will bring up a lot of useful hits). In it, you will find that marriage predates the Abrahamic religions and for a long time (even well into the time when Christianity was prevalent) was not religiously motivated, but politically so. Marriage served the purpose of forming alliances and transferring wealth. The marriages that weren't arranged generally happened because the groom was able to give the bride's father enough money/gold/goods/land for him to allow her to marry the suitor. Women were, essentially, property to be bought and sold. There's nothing divinely inspired about that.
I support proposition 8 because I believe that parents have the right to determine what their children are taught in schools.
They do, and still will. Every parent has the right to pull their child from a class (even if only for the time of the lesson/presentation/whatever) if they do not agree with what's being taught. They also have the right to contest the decisions about curriculum. As for field trips and PG-13/R rated movies, every school I've been in has required permission slips for all field trips and at least for all movies that the students that did not meet the "age requirement" of the movies (ie - students under 13 for PG-13, and under 17 for R rated movies), if not for those movies without exception.
I have also heard that teachers have already taken their students to their wedding as a part of a school field trip.
I would recommend you make sure that you get all the facts about matters such as this. Not to mention providing a source for such claims (otherwise, it's just hearsay). Like I mentioned before, every school I've ever attended required a permission slip for every field trip. This would give the parents the opportunity to protest such actions.
I think that the ideal situation to raise a child is with its biological mother and father. While this ideal is not always possible, and other couples can raise a child effectively, I think ithat the ideal of one father, one mother and child should be the ideal most frequently sought after.
Two things.
1. Ideal is the operative word in this matter. It's certainly a goal to strive for as a society, but it's one that will never be attained without taking away the rights of every person so that they are incapable of reproducing outside of marriage and so that they don't get a divorce and leave the kids in a broken home.
2. The ideal of "all kids should grow up with their biological parents" is not nearly as black and white as you are wont to believe. Would you rather have a child live with their druggie birth parents? Or with a healthy, drug-free foster/adoptive couple? Would you rather have kids growing up with a parent that physically, emotionally, and/or sexually abuses their spouse and/or the kids? Or would you rather see them grow up with their single parent?
if Proposition 8 is denied, which would cause the state to intervene in religious ordinances. I do not know the extent of this, but I do feel that the government should not be involved with religion, in the same sense that religion should not be involved in government.
Again, I'd recommend doing some research on it to verify the facts. After that, if any such laws are in place, I can bet that they will be shot down as quickly as they were put up. Such laws are blatantly unconstitutional to the federal level.
However, I also support propositon 8 because I believe that it does not deny rights from same-sex couples.
I believe that same sex couples should have the same legal rights that heterosexual couples have, even if they are not married. I think that under California law, you can be considered to be in a domestic partnership if you are living with the same person, and you have been for a certain number of years.
I would like to note the title of the proposition: ELIMINATES RIGHT OF SAME–SEX COUPLES TO MARRY. It's blatantly denying rights to a group of people.
Also, I'd like to point out what has happened in a state that passed a very similar constitutional amendment "defining marriage as between one man and one woman." Ohio passed an amendment that not only banned gay marriage, but nullified all marriages that didn't go through the process of getting a license and so on. This not only included gay couples, but domestic partnerships and commonwealth marriages, regardless of orientation.
I am treated as evil by people who claim that they are being oppressed because they are not allowed to force me to practice what they do. ~D. Dale Gulledge