For the best interest of our communities it is good the election is almost here. Most of the campaigns and causes are pretty mild but Proposition 8 has been fraying the patience of many people.
Both sides have been stealing each others' signs. I have no way of verifying or knowing which side is more likely to steal signs. A Yes on 8 supporter suggest I call the Sheriff and ask. I don't think that would prove much except people shouldn't be calling the sheriff over a stolen yard sign.
My No on 8 sign was stolen Friday night. My Mom's and her neighbor's signs were stolen WHILE I WAS THERE Saturday night. They did leave behind the Barack Obama signs though. If you are like me when you look in your front yard you are somewhat surprised your sign is still there. I am going to check on my sign now. Alright, I am back and my sign is in my lawn.
At the rallies and around town people are getting angrier and angrier at each other. It isn't normally the people waving signs, but people driving by. Here are a few examples:
1. Lots of name calling on both sides. From people trying to promote equality or promote their version of family values the language doesn't always makes sense. Besides, yelling something from a car doesn't often elicit a thoughtful response. F$#@ me? Well then F%# you!
2. A young woman I know had a bottle thrown at her for holding a No on 8 sign last week.
3. The Star reported a knife being brandished at a Thousand Oaks rally. Click here to read the story. Sidenote: If you think the comments on my blog get heated or don't make sense I urge you to go read the comments on many of the news stories. They make CAP, Flamo, and the gang here look like a poetry recital!
4. Today at the corner of Los Angeles and First street I came across a ugly scene.
I saw a young man getting pushed into the street so I pulled over. I got my camera out and starting filming.
The Yes on 8 people from Sonrise Christian Church said that the young man got out of a car and tried to take away a sign from a woman supporting proposition 8. Somehow she had trash thrown on her, they started wrestling and the young man went back to his car. By then another person had pulled over and was standing in front of the alleged attempted sign thief and was blocking his vehicle and traffic from moving. That's when I showed up.
I didn't interview the person that allegedly tried to steal the sign, as he was in his car with someone yelling at him in a threatening way to get out, but I did interview the Yes on 8 people and I did watch what happened next.
The man blocking traffic was yelling at the young man to get out of the car and the young man in the car was blowing his horn constantly. Eventually the car, that was in the turn lane left and the man that was blocking it lashed out with some R rated words including a common insult for gay people.
I did get the license plate numbers of the people involved on video.
I then interviewed the Yes on 8 people who told me their side of what happened. I waited with them for the police to show up in case they needed to see any of the video.
The police were there quickly and after talking with me and the Yes on 8 people for about 5 minutes they said there wasn't anything for them to do as the woman wasn't injured. I offered to let them see the video but they declined. I did direct them to my blog if they wanted to contact me later. I don't think they got the phone numbers or names of the Yes on 8 people that were there, although I might have missed that.
I am not posting the video at this time because it contains the license plate numbers of people from both sides that were involved. I do not want to give the information away to anyone reading my blog to go after each other. But if law enforcement or another person has a legitimate need for it, let me know. When I have the time I might get a friend to edit out some of the video for us.
It seems clear from the scene I arrived at that the Yes on 8 people were the victims of someone going after them for their political views.
I don't agree with their views, but their freedom of speech should be protected. I feel law enforcement didn't spend enough time on this situation, but I don't know what other calls they needed to respond to next. People should feel safe waving a political sign on a street corner in Simi Valley.
If you were there, add any details that I missed. There was about 5 to 6 Yes on 8 people I think.
5. To end on a more uplifting note the other day at the Corner of Sycamore and Cochran there were many No on 8 people and just a few Yes on 8 people.
A sign twirler, not a No on 8 person, started getting in a Yes on 8 person's face and trying to intimidate him. My brother, who was there waving a No on 8 sign, got between them and stopped the sign twirler from harassing the Yes on 8 supporter.
Brother, thanks for defending freedom of speech, even of those that disagree with you!
Everyone else, bring a camera with you! People tend to be on the better behavior when there is a camera pointed at them. If you go to a rally without getting someone to bring a camera, then you aren't prepared.
( A much more peaceful video from Thursday night at the corner of Sycamore and Cochran in Simi Valley.)
My husband and I attended the Yes on Prop 8 Rally yesterday and we had so many middle fingers extended towards us and cuss words shouted that it was disheartening. But there were a few friendly No-8ers protesting nearby who were very respectful. I feel that this is an important issue, and I can understand how both sides feel their civil liberties are under serious threat...it is sad when we take it out on each other, and when we forget that the ultimate goal is the spread freedom in CA- which I something I feel both sides are attempting...just from opposites sides of the coin, and where the winner takes all.
On MTV, Barack Obama tried to explain why he opposes gay marriage but also is opposed Proposition 8:
Obama told MTV he believes marriage is "between a man and a woman" and that he is "not in favor of gay marriage." At the same time, Obama reiterated his opposition to Proposition 8, the California ballot measure that would eliminate the right to same-sex marriage that the state's Supreme Court recently recognized.
"I've stated my opposition to this. I think it's unnecessary," Obama told MTV. "I believe marriage is between a man and a woman. I am not in favor of gay marriage. But when you start playing around with constitutions, just to prohibit somebody who cares about another person, it just seems to me that's not what America's about."
San Francisco Chronicle columnists Phillip Matier and Andrew Ross sum up the hopes of the pro- and anti-Prop. 8 camps this way: "The pro-same-sexers are betting on the coattails of a big sympathetic turnout generated by Barack Obama's run for the presidency. Democratic tracking polls show that 7 out of 10 Obama voters are ready to vote "no" on the proposed constitutional amendment the marriages. The anti-same-sex-marriage campaign is betting on something that may be just as powerful: a last-minute "Sunday surge" of ministers campaigning from the pulpit."
That factor appeared to play a role in 2000 when voters passed Proposition 22, which defined marriage as only between a man and a woman.
The campaign also has law enforcement busy.
-- Shelby Grad
Photo: LAT
Ya know, I’m starting to come to the conclusion that the sum intelligence on the earth is a constant, yet the population is increasing. How have we come to a point where so many people in society are denying basic common sense and intuition? Proposition 8 in California should be a slam-dunk. It shouldn’t take religious convictions to figure this out! Deep down inside, everyone knows that homosexuality is not normal, pedophilia is not normal, bestiality is not normal, incest is not normal. Nor are most of the other 20 sexual orientations recognized by the American Psychiatric Association (APA). And society should not recognize, teach, or promote these perversions as norms. Let’s have compassion on these people and help them to deal with their perverse attractions in a way that does not bring our society down to their level. The human race used to be better than that…
My windows were smashed in and my stickers were taken off this weekend on my car... The cops did nothing!
I cant wait for this election cycle to be over. It just cost me 300 dollars in window repairs
Dave Ruff,
Do you think it is possible for 2 people of the same sex to live together in the same house, love each other, have jobs, water their lawns, spend their lives together and not harm anyone else? And if they make each other happy what's the problem, how does it affect you?
Then please explain why homosexuality is not normal and while you're at explain why black and white mix marriages are not normal too because at one time that was against the law in this country.
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
I like the 1st Amendment. Every part of it seems to be related to discussion of Proposition 8.
The 1st amendment guarantees my right to an opinion. The strongest differences of opinion over issues are usually questions of deciding "greater good".
I am not lesbian nor gay, but if my opinion affects my neighbor, I should think about it seriously. After much thought, my view is most similar to the one articulated here:
http://www.marriageinstitute.ca/images/somerville.pdf
It contains non-religious(not that there's anything wrong with that) arguments written by Margaret Somerville, an ethicist who has advised The United Nations.
I will vote Yes on Proposition 8 and if you will read and think about Ms. Somerville's ideas, maybe you will too.
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
I like the 1st Amendment. Every part of it seems to be related to discussion of Proposition 8.
The 1st amendment guarantees my right to an opinion. The strongest differences of opinion over issues are usually questions of deciding "greater good".
I am not lesbian nor gay, but if my opinion affects my neighbor, I should think about it seriously. After much thought, my view is most similar to the one articulated here:
http://www.marriageinstitute.ca/images/somerville.pdf
It contains non-religious(not that there's anything wrong with that) arguments written by Margaret Somerville, an ethicist who has advised The United Nations.
I will vote Yes on Proposition 8 and if you will read and think about Ms. Somerville's ideas, maybe you will too.
I rallied against Prop. 8 here in Simi Valley yesterday afternoon. I expected and was not disappointed to be screamed at by supporters of this biased and misguided Proposition. Middle fingers were extended, epithets were hurled, a full can of soda was thrown from a car. But these incidents were FAR outnumbered by the folks that showed their support for tolerance, justice, and the freedom that Americans supposedly hold so dear. I must admit, as a lifelong resident of Simi, I was pleasantly surprised to see so many people were against codifying bigotry into California law.
Only one counter-rallier (rallyist? rallyhoo?) appeared in support of Prop. 8. Both sides were civil and friendly, and we even shared some of our lunch with our new "Yes on 8" friend.
I hope that those that promote Prop. 8 for religious reasons will bear in mind the teachings by Jesus Christ of love and tolerance when it comes time to cast their vote. For the rest of us, I hope respect for the freedoms promised by the Constitution will be enough to turn our vote in the right direction.
I've kept count of the Yes on 8 signs stolen versus the No on 8. I have put signs up on the 33 between Barbara Street and the Edison Curve in Casitas Springs. I stopped keeping track of the difference when it was 50 Yes signs stolen to 4 No, and those weren't taken until someone vandalized a local church. Lost 19 signs in the first 22 hours. Believe me, having now lost well over 70 signs in two weeks, those stealing the Yes signs far outweigh the few disappearing No signs. Twice family members have caught the perpetrators and those folks didn't care at all. And no lady, you don't own that property. I have yet to see a vandalized No sign, but the Yes on 8 large signs are repeatedly vandalized. Yes on 8, it's about more than individual desires, it's about the best possible paths for our children. Go to www.protectmarriage.com for the answers.
I've kept count of the Yes on 8 signs stolen versus the No on 8. I have put signs up on the 33 between Barbara Street and the Edison Curve in Casitas Springs. I stopped keeping track of the difference when it was 50 Yes signs stolen to 4 No, and those weren't taken until someone vandalized a local church. Lost 19 signs in the first 22 hours. Believe me, having now lost well over 70 signs in two weeks, those stealing the Yes signs far outweigh the few disappearing No signs. Twice family members have caught the perpetrators and those folks didn't care at all. And no lady, you don't own that property. I have yet to see a vandalized No sign, but the Yes on 8 large signs are repeatedly vandalized. Yes on 8, it's about more than individual desires, it's about the best possible paths for our children. Go to www.protectmarriage.com for the answers.
What is so new and compelling about Somerville's argument? She argues FOR Prop 8 based on two key issues: 1) that opposite sex marriage is a vital cultural institution that provides a continuing rationale for procreation and for the protection of children and 2) adoption of same sex marriage would not be traditional and thus interfere with the cultural institution of marriage, as we know it.
First, with a 50%+ divorce rate in America (higher amongst culturally conservative red states than elsewhere) Somerville can kiss her first issue out the door. The institution of marriage in America has evolved into a fast-moving rotating door, where divorce, troubled homes and court-sanctioned loss of children's protections are the norm and what we expected of traditional marriages are becoming more and more unique. Hers is a silly argument.
Second, I suspect Somerville would have argued against the repeal of slavery or universal suffrage if she feels that since marriage had once been a cultural tradition, we'd be harming our collective cultural psyche by allowing such a tradition to evolve. Sorry, Margaret, but as you haven't noticed marriage has changed. It's become an unreliable social institution that's increasingly the cause for more harm to women and participants abide by its contract and of the rest, many of those do so either only part time, with great hostility to their spouses and with abuse to their children.
Stop dreaming that marriage is a sacred relationship between a man and a woman that should never be challenged by a changing world. It's not. It's the result of a simple exchange of greeting card-like vows that are acknowledged by a state-issued certificate that has no power to commit anyone to a lifetime of devotion, let alone force a man and woman to take care of their children.
And yet when two people willingly and lovingly decide to attempt a lifetime of devotion, who the hell are you to tell them they can't?
Brian,
Welcome to my blog and thank you for reading. Please add an initial to your name so that we aren't confused.
Dave,
Since you brought up the APA they do not regard homosexuality as a mental illness or perversion. Make your case, but don't confuse people that the APA is on your side.
http://www.apa.org/topics/sorientation.html
FD,
I have thought of the same issues with different forms of the word rally.
Thanks to all for reading and commenting.
Geez Brian, you beat me to it. I was planning to comment on the APA statement. Basically, the latest DSM (DSM IV) does not recognize homosexuality as a mental illness and psychologists/psychiatrists do not consider it to be a deviant lifestyle.
The reasoning is very simple. Homosexuality is, in itself, a mutation, which is a genetic development that takes place during pregnancy. Gays are born gay and have no control over their sexual orientation. Sometimes, mutations become the norm and what was once normal becomes the mutation if it ever occurs again. However, homosexuality can never become the norm by its very nature.
So, let's examine this from a "rights" perspective. To allow gays to marry will allow them the same benefits heterosexuals enjoy, including tax, health, and insurance benefits, along with the same pursuit of happiness we heterosexuals enjoy everyday. If we deny them this right, what's next? Shall we also deny those with Blue Skin Syndrome the right to marry? How about people born with six fingers on one or both hands? Prop 8 denys the right to the pursuit of happiness based on something a gay individual never had control of, something that is completely harmless to us heterosexuals, and something that has been documented occurring in almost every mammal species on earth (and some avian species). Basically, it is based on the fear and anger of something its supporters do not understand - homosexuality.
Geez Brian, you beat me to it. I was planning to comment on the APA statement. Basically, the latest DSM (DSM IV) does not recognize homosexuality as a mental illness and psychologists/psychiatrists do not consider it to be a deviant lifestyle.
The reasoning is very simple. Homosexuality is, in itself, a mutation, which is a genetic development that takes place during pregnancy. Gays are born gay and have no control over their sexual orientation. Sometimes, mutations become the norm and what was once normal becomes the mutation if it ever occurs again. However, homosexuality can never become the norm by its very nature.
So, let's examine this from a "rights" perspective. To allow gays to marry will allow them the same benefits heterosexuals enjoy, including tax, health, and insurance benefits, along with the same pursuit of happiness we heterosexuals enjoy everyday. If we deny them this right, what's next? Shall we also deny those with Blue Skin Syndrome the right to marry? How about people born with six fingers on one or both hands? Prop 8 denys the right to the pursuit of happiness based on something a gay individual never had control of, something that is completely harmless to us heterosexuals, and something that has been documented occurring in almost every mammal species on earth (and some avian species). Basically, it is based on the fear and anger of something its supporters do not understand - homosexuality.
I chased one of those rat bastard "No on 8" creeps down the street after I caught the punk defacing my "Yes on 8" yard sign. It was particularly gratifying when a cop came spinning around the corner just as I was closing in on this kid and we both cornered him in the shopping center parking lot.
I filed a written complaint right there on the spot and the kid was taken into custody for petty vandalism and defacing private property.
Yes, even if the Proposition loses (which it won't) this was a stellar moment for me.