How important was gay marriage to you before Prop. 8?

  • sandiegovince

    Posts: 111

    Nov 14, 2008 3:17 AM GMT
    To me, it wasn't. I know all too well now that this is an issue about equality more than just the right of same-sex marriage, but before the election I frankly didn't give it a great deal of thought. I mean, I felt wonderful when my friends who were in long-term relationships decided to legally commit to each other shortly after the June ruling--more power to them--but as a single, currently unattached gay man it was an issue that personally didn't affect me. When I went to Pride in July I saw very little drum beating about the upcoming Prop. 8 at the festival. I guess celebrating was more important. When the issue appeared on the ballot, we all laughed. Who the hell would vote for such a ridiculous proposition? Little did we know. Anyway, now I see the importance. After the Election. After the fact.

    --Vince
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 14, 2008 3:23 AM GMT
    Very good question.

    It wasn't very important to me and it still isn't. But I'll fight against gay marriage bans because its unjust. And after LGBT people get their marriage rights/benefits, the last frontier will be giving the same benfits to SINGLE people.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 14, 2008 3:51 AM GMT
    Its about equal rights when we pay the same taxes and dont get them....

    I would be just fine with a Civil Union bill with the SAME rights, I am not religious so dont give a damn if some preacher is before me.

    But, I am all for the fight to make it legal, equal "marriage" or whatever it ends up being called.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 14, 2008 3:56 AM GMT
    It's about other saying what rights we can and can not have....having them define us so we are not full citizens. If they can do it for marriage, then they can do it for anything else.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 14, 2008 4:00 AM GMT
    Yea ive been confused on why they just dont give the same rights with a different name. Beats the hell out of me
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 14, 2008 4:10 AM GMT
    It wasn't and it is still not important to me, I guess it will be when I find "the one" or viceversa. Having said that, I feel that it is a right that MUST be recognized, not allowing gays to marry just sends the message that we are not humans, that we do not deserve to love and be loved and that we don't deserve to enjoy the same rights and privileges as straights.
    It is also the gateway for gays to win (or lose) other rights. If they started taking away marriage rights then they pretty much can start taking away other rights that we have gained and that must not be allowed.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 14, 2008 9:04 AM GMT
    Actually it didn't mean much to me until I celebrated Gay Pride in SF in late June. At the time, I was okay with civil unions. While I was totally impressed with the maturity of the state of CA for moving forward with gay marriages, I always felt that civil unions were sufficient. Now, the more I hear arguments against it, the more I realize that it's flat out bigotry. And I won't stand for it.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 14, 2008 9:22 AM GMT
    its not a matter of how important it is or not. It is a matter of human rights,

    if there was a world where every one was allowed to go die at the Atacama Desert but gay people cause gay guys mean a threat to the animals living in that desert, just because someone in Chile found a book under his bed that says so...every gay person would feel discriminated.

    It's not that we want to go die on a desert, its just that we cant understand what can possible make you think we are a threat to the animals living in a desert.
  • RSportsguy

    Posts: 1925

    Nov 14, 2008 10:14 AM GMT
    Marriage itself is not so important for me right now since I don't have anyone in my life that I feel that strongly about. It is the right that I can legally get married when/if that person ever comes into my life is what I was fighting for.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 14, 2008 11:17 AM GMT
    Jefferey saidYea Ive been confused on why they just don't give the same rights with a different name. Beats the hell out of me


    For some reason lots of Americans don't want a compromise. They feel Civil Union is not equal. When it's gay marriage, but not under the banner of marriage.

    To me whatever name it comes under, it's still nothing more than a peace of paper. Dose not guarantee happiness ever after or anything. I am commited to my two men. We don't need a peace of paper to do that, or put a stamp on em : Property of Pattison, DO NOT TOUCH.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 14, 2008 12:05 PM GMT
    Jefferey saidYea ive been confused on why they just dont give the same rights with a different name. Beats the hell out of me


    Yea I totally agree. And what was so wrong about having two seperate drinking fountains back in the 50's... in the South? I mean "colored people" could still get water to drink the same as whites. Ain't nothing wrong with "seperate but equal."

    Except this is something wrong with calling marriage something different for gay than for striaghts--and it is analogous to the segregation in the South. We, like African-Americans before us, could continue to be treated as a second class citizen.

    I still can't believe how many people do not realize that marriage is a civIl right and has NOTHING TO DO WITH RELIGION!

    If Marriage = "Garriage" (legally)... why not call all unions the same?

    Sperate but Equal = Segregation
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 14, 2008 12:09 PM GMT
    Pattison said
    Jefferey saidYea Ive been confused on why they just don't give the same rights with a different name. Beats the hell out of me


    For some reason lots of Americans don't want a compromise. They feel Civil Union is not equal. When it's gay marriage, but not under the banner of marriage.

    To me whatever name it comes under, it's still nothing more than a peace of paper. Dose not guarantee happiness ever after or anything. I am commited to my two men. We don't need a peace of paper to do that, or put a stamp on em : Property of Pattison, DO NOT TOUCH.


    You are right, marriage does not grant happiness. But is does grant you and your partner 1,100 legal rights and protections. Think it's just a paper that is not needed? Well if your partner is dying in the hospital-- wave "the paper that you don't have" in front of the nurse... see if she is kind enough to allow you to say goodbye to your partner-- or since you are not family.. see if she makes you wait in the other room as your partner takes his last breath.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 14, 2008 12:29 PM GMT
    I didn't really care then. I do care some now because the argument of equal rights is a clearly a valid one. I'm all for the civil union. I'm not really a fan of gay couples being married in churches. A justice of the peace works just fine. If a church's religious text denounces homosexuality then it doesn't seem right to have gay weddings in their place of worship. It would be a massive slap in the face to their god. To me freedom of religion is far more important than gay marriages. America needs to just allow civil unions and get the F over its fears of what may happen. It's not like it can be any worse than what straights have done with marriage. Look at Vegas...
  • a2507

    Posts: 152

    Nov 14, 2008 12:57 PM GMT
    The reason that civil unions and marriage are not legally equal is that the US legal system is one of accumulation of meaning and definition.

    Marriage through years of court cases has a set of rights and resposibilities which are not easily duplicated in a civil unions statute. Unions are better than nothing but they are not equal. And yes, "separate but equal" is a discredited legal theory in the US at least regarding race.

    As for freedom of religion and churches being "forced" to perform gay marriages, this has never been correct. It's one of the lies told by those who oppose us but religious ceremonies are governed by the values of that faith tradition. So Catholics, Baptists and Orthodox can refuse to marry same gender couples but Episcopalians, UCC (United Church of Christ), Unitarians, and Reform can perform such services if they wish. And same gender couples can have civil weddings performed by a judge or clerk in some cases.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 14, 2008 1:18 PM GMT
    Personally it was not important to me at all before it became legal in Canada. As long as I could leave my estate to my partner, and he and I could get covered by our insurance at work, then marriage was irrelevant. We are covered by the common-law provisions in Canada which are close to married couples.

    To be honest when marriage was made legal in Canada I felt uncomfortable. People would ask, "so when is the big day?" I felt like saying "when hell freezes over". I am not a big fan of marriage. If I was straight I would not get married.

    But since marriage is important to many gay people, then it is important to me that we receive the same rights as straights.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 14, 2008 1:22 PM GMT
    It has always been important.

    I still vividly recall partners denied hospital visiting rights, left on the street when their spouses passed away, and countless other indignities that have been and still are visited upon Gay relationships.

    The right I want is to not care about marriage - that is the right to take for granted that which any straight person simply accepts is his or her right.

    I cared before, I care now, and I imagine I will have a long time to continue caring in the future.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 15, 2008 8:32 AM GMT
    Very. That is all.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 15, 2008 8:40 AM GMT
    Like someone told me the other day...and he has no idea I am "gay"........

    ....looks like the fags lost. It seems all they care about is fucking and all the gay parties.

    I think this is what many have as a perception of gay/bi men. Not that it's all true and yes, it's judgmental, but, the entire Gay community should have gotten their shit together and fought harder. It really is to late now!!

    You will just have to accept the discriminatory passed prop and be that 2nd class citizen your supposed to be!! LOL
  • jeffper1

    Posts: 148

    Nov 15, 2008 8:54 AM GMT
    and azz.....aren't u just a little hanger on.
    i guess being second class is just as easy as being overlooked for who and what you think you are.
    work out more and come back when you are gay.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 15, 2008 9:09 AM GMT
    Well what if I'm passionately in love with two guys...why can't I get married to both of them?

    In all seriousness.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 15, 2008 9:11 AM GMT
    CitizenSol saidWell what if I'm passionately in love with two guys...why can't I get married to both of them?

    In all seriousness.


    I'm a supporter of Polyamory too. Love is love. (note: PolyAMORY, not Polygamy nor Polyandry, stress on the 'love' component not the cultural component. Polyamourous people are usually the 'traditional' ménage à trois gender triads anyway - M-F-M/F-M-F)
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 17, 2008 7:23 AM GMT
    cjcscuba1984 said
    Pattison said
    Jefferey saidYea Ive been confused on why they just don't give the same rights with a different name. Beats the hell out of me


    For some reason lots of Americans don't want a compromise. They feel Civil Union is not equal. When it's gay marriage, but not under the banner of marriage.

    To me whatever name it comes under, it's still nothing more than a peace of paper. Dose not guarantee happiness ever after or anything. I am commited to my two men. We don't need a peace of paper to do that, or put a stamp on em : Property of Pattison, DO NOT TOUCH.


    You are right, marriage does not grant happiness. But is does grant you and your partner 1,100 legal rights and protections. Think it's just a paper that is not needed? Well if your partner is dying in the hospital-- wave "the paper that you don't have" in front of the nurse... see if she is kind enough to allow you to say goodbye to your partner-- or since you are not family.. see if she makes you wait in the other room as your partner takes his last breath.


    In fact the last time I was in hospital. He was put down as my next of kin. He was not denied any rights. In fact I heard the nurse talking to him about something personal; nothing bad. A peace of paper was not required. maybe we are a bit more advanced down here in that way than America?

    Not until I can wed my two men, am I interested in marriage, and until then I will be discriminated against, even if you had the right to wed your man. I will be discriminated against for having two men who love me, and not only one.

    Man what a diverse home we would have.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 17, 2008 7:24 AM GMT
    CitizenSol saidWell what if I'm passionately in love with two guys...why can't I get married to both of them?

    In all seriousness.


    This is my life.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 17, 2008 7:56 AM GMT
    I'm a staunch believer in getting rid of marriage, making that a purely religious title, and making all current marriages into civil unions with the same right.

    Then civil unions could be defined as a legally binding contract between two consenting adults, and the people of faith can still have their precious marriage.

    Oh, I'd also like to see the right for churches to hand out 'marriage' papers be taken away. Any church, from any faith, should not be involved with anything dealing with the government.
  • CuriousJockAZ

    Posts: 19119

    Nov 17, 2008 8:00 AM GMT
    I was talking about this very subject with another gay friend of mine tonight. Neither of us really have a passion for it one way or the other. It's just not something that is important to us. We figured that might be part of the problem of why Prop 8 did pass. A lot of gay guys just don't really care about this issue, while others seem to be very invested in it.