Yesterday I drive around Simi Valley doing errands. As I went from one part of town to the other I noticed on several street corners folks holding signs in support and opposition to Prop. 8, the ballot measure to ban same sex marriage. In total, it seemed, citywide, to have an even number of people in opposition and support of Prop. 8.
There were possibly over 100 people, on both sides, telling the voters of Simi Valley where they stood on this issue important to our child and to society.
But I did find some interesting differences between the two sides. (disclosure: I support Prop. 8 and even stood for a half hour with a sign in favor of the measure at Tapo Canyon and Cochran)
The differences: Those supporting Prop. 8 were very serious people. Mostly families, husbands and wives, boyfriends and girl friends--several of the parents had their children with them. They seemed to take the assignment of holding a sign on a street corner, waving and giving the thumbs up sign to many of the drivers going by as a civic duty.
Those opposing Prop. 8 had a different approach, like it was a party. I listened in on conversations of those who opposed, to get a feel of their views and values. At Tapo Canyon a couple of those present were seriously discussing why they opposed Prop. 8 with those supporting it. Solid discussions, heart felt and very sincere. But a few seem to be present to see where the "party" was that evening. They saw this as a social event more than political.
The group at Sycamore had lots of young people, kids under 18. There the discussion ran in the direction of comparing notes, especially for those around 15 years old--girls--about hooking up and their social life. Some of the conversation revolved around "smoking weed" and being "party animals"--and these were the young girls--not all of them, some were there to make a social and political point.
Looking at the two sides, it was looking at two side of society. One side was serious about the course of society. The other side really seemed interested in having a good time, parties and letting people do "their thing". It is my observation that the Yes on Prop. 8 side believes in personal responsibility and trying not to have government involved in their lives.
On the NO side of 8, those on the streets seemed OK with high taxes and government involvement, "isn't that what government is about?" The few adults that I saw, folks older than 30 years, have been supporters of radical politics for many years. For the young people, this seemed to be the first year they took to political action.
The adults on the YES side, this seemed to be the first time in their life they took a public political stand.
When Prop. 8 is long gone, this will be an experience none of them will forget. Can't wait till next weekend. Were I in charge of either side, I would have a nominal number of sign holders on street corners and a maximum number of people walking door to door, talker directly to voters.
The coalition on 8 does have door-to-door activities, and calling during the week. Find out how to be involved at www.protectmarriage.com
Daniel
Pretty judgmental on the part of the author. In my opinion it is wrong to "rubber stamp" an entire group of supporters (on either side of the issue) based on a small number of people observed in a short period of time. I am opposed to Prop. 8 and am neither a "weed smoker", a "radical" OR a "party animal". I am a 52 year old teacher who feels that the constitution should not be amended. I also believe that all people should have the right to make a commitment to the person they choose regardless of race, creed or gender.
And by the way, in my 24 years of teaching in the public school system I have NEVER ONCE encountered ONE SINGLE THING in my curriculum that required me to teach anything about marriage NOR was I instructed on this subject while attending public school. On the other hand my husband (who attended Catholic school) WAS taught about marriage in High School. The commercials claiming that children in public schools will be subject to instruction on marriage seems to me an alarmist tactic using false information.
Pretty judgmental on the part of the author. In my opinion it is wrong to "rubber stamp" an entire group of supporters (on either side of the issue) based on a small number of people observed in a short period of time. I am opposed to Prop. 8 and am neither a "weed smoker", a "radical" OR a "party animal". I am a 52 year old teacher who feels that the constitution should not be amended. I also believe that all people should have the right to make a commitment to the person they choose regardless of race, creed or gender.
And by the way, in my 24 years of teaching in the public school system I have NEVER ONCE encountered ONE SINGLE THING in my curriculum that required me to teach anything about marriage NOR was I instructed on this subject while attending public school. On the other hand my husband (who attended Catholic school) WAS taught about marriage in High School. The commercials claiming that children in public schools will be subject to instruction on marriage seems to me an alarmist tactic using false information.
I had the great satisfaction today of kicking some trespassing Yes on 8 idiots off of my property.
Jennifer is spot on,Mr.Frank is making very broad judgments on what he may have observed.Many NO on Prop 8 advocates are professional and well educated individuals who believe civil marriage is guaranteed to gay couples under the CA constitution;the CA Supreme Court reached the same conclusion.Prop 8 is about denying same gender couples equal standing in law and in society.Discrimination is wrong and I trust my fellow Californians will join me in voting NO on Prop 8!
I've seen a somewhat similar dichotomy online as well. In general, the pro-Prop 8 people post their opinions in a courteous and thoughtful manner. In contrast, the vast majority of anti-prop 8 replies to our posts are littered with obscenities, insults, and hateful language. That's rather ironic considering they claim we are the ones to be full of hate.
"I wish to say that our opposition to attempts to legalize same-sex marriage should never be interpreted as justification for hatred, intolerance, or abuse of those who profess homosexual tendencies, either individually or as a group. As I said from this pulpit one year ago, our hearts reach out to those who refer to themselves as gays and lesbians. We love and honor them as sons and daughters of God."
(Gordon B. Hinckley)
There won't be any hate in my heart when I vote YES on Prop 8.
More Yes on Prop 8 Quotes
.
There were a lot of serious people at the rallies of the Third Reich. There were lots of studious faces at the protests to deny Civil Rights to African Americans. The perpetrators of evil throughout history have always used their ability to focus and concentrate their hate very effectively.
Conversely, the crowds that protested America's involvement in the Vietnam war which killed 50, 000 soldiers surely had their "party" moments as they drew the young, idealistic, and free spirited in the defense of peace.
I'm an over 40 who was at the Sycamore rally yesterday for four hours. I saw young, middle aged and older folks celebrating freedom, equality, and fairness. One guy was supporting his sister. Another girl her rooommate. A woman was cheering on her daughter etc. All were there because their world will be adversely impacted by the passage of Proposition 8.
I could mention the Yes on 8 people who threw water at us, who flipped us off, who yelled "fags," who played loud music describing sex with dogs etc. But I would like to believe that those people were the exception on the Yes on 8 side. I surely could have written a whole blog entry on them as Mr Frank has done, but I know that you see what you want to see at these rallies and what I saw was absolutely beautiful.
On the 40th anniversary of the ruling in Loving v Virginia, Mildred Loving released a public statement that really must be read. Americans need to read this statement and see how far we’ve come and how far we still have to go to protect liberty and equality in this country.
Loving for All
By Mildred Loving*
Prepared for Delivery on June 12, 2007,
The 40th Anniversary of the Loving vs. Virginia Announcement
When my late husband, Richard, and I got married in Washington, DC in 1958, it wasn’t to make a political statement or start a fight. We were in love, and we wanted to be married.
We didn’t get married in Washington because we wanted to marry there. We did it there because the government wouldn’t allow us to marry back home in Virginia where we grew up, where we met, where we fell in love, and where we wanted to be together and build our family. You see, I am a woman of color and Richard was white, and at that time people believed it was okay to keep us from marrying because of their ideas of who should marry whom.
When Richard and I came back to our home in Virginia, happily married, we had no intention of battling over the law. We made a commitment to each other in our love and lives, and now had the legal commitment, called marriage, to match. Isn’t that what marriage is?
Not long after our wedding, we were awakened in the middle of the night in our own bedroom by deputy sheriffs and actually arrested for the “crime� of marrying the wrong kind of person. Our marriage certificate was hanging on the wall above the bed. The state prosecuted Richard and me, and after we were found guilty, the judge declared: “Almighty God created the races white, black, yellow, malay and red, and he placed them on separate continents. And but for the interference with his arrangement there would be no cause for such marriages. The fact that he separated the races shows that he did not intend for the races to mix.� He sentenced us to a year in prison, but offered to suspend the sentence if we left our home in Virginia for 25 years exile.
We left, and got a lawyer. Richard and I had to fight, but still were not fighting for a cause. We were fighting for our love.
Though it turned out we had to fight, happily Richard and I didn’t have to fight alone. Thanks to groups like the ACLU and the NAACP Legal Defense & Education Fund, and so many good people around the country willing to speak up, we took our case for the freedom to marry all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court. And on June 12, 1967, the Supreme Court ruled unanimously that, “The freedom to marry has long been recognized as one of the vital personal rights essential to the orderly pursuit of happiness by free men,� a “basic civil right.�
My generation was bitterly divided over something that should have been so clear and right. The majority believed that what the judge said, that it was God’s plan to keep people apart, and that government should discriminate against people in love. But I have lived long enough now to see big changes. The older generation’s fears and prejudices have given way, and today’s young people realize that if someone loves someone they have a right to marry.
Surrounded as I am now by wonderful children and grandchildren, not a day goes by that I don’t think of Richard and our love, our right to marry, and how much it meant to me to have that freedom to marry the person precious to me, even if others thought he was the “wrong kind of person� for me to marry. I believe all Americans, no matter their race, no matter their sex, no matter their sexual orientation, should have that same freedom to marry. Government has no business imposing some people’s religious beliefs over others. Especially if it denies people’s civil rights.
I am still not a political person, but I am proud that Richard’s and my name is on a court case that can help reinforce the love, the commitment, the fairness, and the family that so many people, black or white, young or old, gay or straight seek in life. I support the freedom to marry for all. That’s what Loving, and loving, are all about.
Here is an example of right wing fringe wingnuts purging honest eligible voters from the eligibility list. Those turds should be thrown in jail for that.
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/26/voter.suppression/index.html
We and all of our friends will be voting Yes on Prop 8.
I walked with my young baby in her stroller for both the anti- and pro-abortion rallies almost 20 years ago in Washington. I wanted my daughter to have the right to chose one way or another, despite my own feelings on the subject, when it came to her time to make these decisions about her options and choices.
The one thing I love most about our system is the right to chose when it affects you - and do this in a private fashion. My neighbors don't need to know how I feel on any one issue --- for your beliefs change people's perspectives about you... usually incorrectly as well! Don't ask me how many people here in California have inquired if my family had slaves once they found I was born and raised in the Deep South!
What I dislike the MOST about our system is the littering of my mailbox with massive amounts of brochures and mailers, the inaccurate 'massaging' of data and facts, distorting issues in the hopes some uninformed voter will be convinced to vote 'yes' or 'no' on some issue. The ONLY political piece I've read is the one sent out on recycled paper which listed all the candidates and propositions - everything else goes right into the gray recycling bin on the way in from the mailbox at the curb! I then headed to the Internet to research any issue I wasn't sure of immediately inside my heart... none of these mailers nor the protestors on the corners affected how I felt about the issues.
I strongly believe in the right for everyone to voice their opinions and/or protest for or against issues they find dear to their heart, but what happens AFTER the elections to these issues and all this community involvement?
Once the election frenzy is over and done with, people don't commonly practice these principles in all their affairs... it's like some time-honored custom to get 'all political' before an election and then to retreat into apathy for another four years. I'd like to see how many of these protestors (both for and against) are out and about in our community doing volunteer efforts for the much needed things in Simi Valley. It's very easy to stand on a street corner and be 'involved', but it is much harder to be 'involved' in your own community during those years between elections!... JMHO
Jennifer hit it on the spot, you cannot judge how serious someone is by a small group of people.
And AlexT how can anyone voting yes on prop 8 not be actively participating in hate and in equal rights? I am straight male but I support people being able to marry who they want regardless of sex.
How does two people of the same sex harm anyone, its about love not hate. Teaching marriage in schools? Yeah I went to public school and was never taught anything about Marriage, I had sex ed but not marriage. The only schools that would teach marriage would be religious schools.
SO what it comes down to is peoples disapproval and opinions and them being grossed out and ostracizing someone because they are different? Where is the equality in that? How would you feel if you fell in love with someone and were told you cant get married because you are different. You might as well put a law on the books preventing people of different races from being able to get married.
I already sent in my ballot and voted NO on prop 8.
Prop 8 is all about supporting intolerance, hate and discrimination.
I support equal rights, love and compassion.
I am not against inter-race marriages. As long as its a male and female..
My parents are from the South also. I have no clue if my relatives from way back in the days had slaves. And I really do not want to know.
But I can tell you my Grandmother is white and was best friends with a black woman down the road, in which she named my Mother after. I do not believe race is an issue here, its a matter of marriage between a man and woman.
Yes on 8 !
Congrats anna, you have a grandma that was FRIENDS with a african american. Kinda like your statement has no validity because you arent associating yourself with any inter racial marriages.
I also went to public schools and was never taught about marriage. A poor attempt at sex education, yes. The biggest fighting point for pro 8 is that it is going to ruin marriage. Well in case anyone hasn't noticed the majority of male-female marriages are FAILING! Over 50 percent national average and over 60 percent in California FAIL!
Our history has shown that we have evolved from what was previously thought of as "wrong". Why do people feel it is okay to discriminate about what someone's sexual preference is. Does it make them any less of a good employee? Why should they not get the same rights as anyone else.
Stephen,
It's your blog. You're entitled to your opinion. You had the decency to add the disclaimer of your support of Prop. 8, which at least tells us how far to trust your observations.
Here's an observation of my own: Prop. 8 supporters make dumb mistakes when rushing to communicate their half-baked theories. "Yesterday I drive around..." and "...important to our child and to society" are evidence to your utter lack of attention to details. Thanks for 'researching' your preconceived notions about Prop. 8 opponents.
Please use your next post to actually explain how gay marriage in any way hurts you or anyone else, other than being a bruise to your inflated sense of morality. I look forward to hearing about all the "pot-smoking party-animals" who are "OK with high taxes and government involvement." It should be good for a laugh.
Annawhat race isnt the issue but
annawhat can you tell me what the difference between racial and sexual discrimination is? There is none, Racial discrimination is based on race, sexual discrimination is based on a persons sex. They are one and the same.
You might as well be against a white person marrying a person of another race be it black, Asian, middle eastern, or insert race here.
Discriminating against a person based on their sexual orientation is just the same as discriminating against interracial marriage.
I don’t get how people can have such blindfolds over their eyes.
Prop 8 is all about sexual discrimination, supporters of prop 8 might as well vote for an amendment to our constitution outlawing interracial marriage, the core of the issue is the same.
As always, Frank goes over the top to lie in order to make his points. I'm married and raised children to be fine adults in the medical and legal professions. My wife and I stood on street corners over the weekend with the No on 8 people. Most of the people with us turned out to be from a church in Thousand Oaks. But I suppose Frank thought that they too were only there to smoke weed and party. What a sick, psychotic, individual this man continues to be.
Frank's Nonsense,
It seems you're the one filled with empty-headed nonsense. All you can offer is some hateful, vitriolic garbage to slam someone you probably don't even know. Give it a rest and speak to the issues, if you can, that is!
Notice in his writing he never directly said he was there at Sycamore and Cochran in Simi Valley? I was there and I didn't see him.
Way to make up rumors about children. There are always wild people at a protest. A person making proper observations either ignores them or reports on the nuts from both sides.
This was already decided by the supreme court. Why on earth are we going through this? If you have a child that is gay would you still feel so strongly for prop 8? With the divorce rate so high these days this isn't about marriage it's civil rights discrimination.
It was also already decided in 2000 (by 61% of the electorate of this State) via Proposition 22 that marriage should only be between a man and a woman. The reason we have Proposition 8 is because we had four activist judges in the State Supreme Court (not 61% of the electorate) overturn the will of the people of this State.
What about that don't you understand, Deborah?!!!
Stevarino,
By your own words:
"At Tapo Canyon a couple of those present were seriously discussing why they opposed Prop. 8 with those supporting it. Solid discussions, heart felt and very sincere. But a few seem to be present to see where the "party" was that evening."
Let's put emphasis on your reference to the "few".
To be fair, I'm sure that there are always those that view political action as another form of social interaction...and I'm not sure that's a bad thing really. It's just how people are.
It just seems to conflict with another statement that you made: "Those opposing Prop. 8 had a different approach, like it was a party."
Ok...were there a "few" party animals...or were they all "party" animals? On one hand you'd seem to indicate not, despite your assertion that they were.
I don't doubt that the motivations for folks for or against Prop 8 have many reasons and political angles. I just think it is unfair, and rather partisan of you, to categorize the group you oppose in the way you do.
However that may be...your commentary is at cross purposes.
There have been teenagers posted near Moorpark College for several days, holding signs for No on 8 and Stop the Hate. However, anyone who disagreed with them was met with shouts of vitriol anger and ugly comebacks. Someone must have had a little chat with them, as today they were all smiles and pleasantries even when I told them I was voting Yes on 8. No confrontation . . just people with differing views. What a nice change.
In Thousand Oaks there have been YES on 8 supporters then when you drive by and give them a thumbs down they flipped you off and yelled F... You. Also there was a young man holding a NO sign in Simi last weekend and a YES supoorter with his 2 kids standing with him threw his cigarette at the young man and burned his arm.
There have been things on both sides that are horrible. The bottom line no matter how I feel about the issue we all have a right to make our voice be heard as long as it is in a constructive way. I also don't like signs on either side being taken down and destroyed. That is what makes this country great is our ability to take a stand for what we believe in.
NO ON PROP 8 - Stop the discrimination and inequality. It is unfair and unjust. Also, BOYCOTT Lassen's Health Food store they donated $30,000 to the YES on 8 campaign. I was very disappointed to hear about this because I loved shopping there and really didn't want to know their stance on political issues.
Rob Cohn
Wow. I live in Simi Valley and i've noticed something similar. But i have a different outlook. I agree that all of the Yes on 8 people that i've seen on the corners have been older people. And true enough that most of the No on 8 people that i've seen have been younger people.
And i take that to mean out with the old and in with the new. The older people are out of touch with reality. Stuck in a deep set belief that's been fostered by 50 plus years living in a society where homosexuality was shunned. It's not about acceptance or tolerance. it's about bigotry.
It wasn't so long ago that the religious conservatives were opposing women's rights, or african american rights. so i find it no surprise that the majority of prop 8 supporters are older religious white people.
The youth of California overwhelmingly oppose Prop 8. And as time goes by, this bigotry will cease. As those stuck in their narrow mindsets die off.
I had two "no on prop 8 signs" on my lawn when i left my house tonight. They were both gone when i got home. That's sad. When you fear someone else's opinion so much that you must take their speech from them. Perhaps you're worried that the ground you're standing on isn't so strong after all.
When I walked for Prop. 22 there were gay couples in my city who signed in support of it. They didn't want "marriage", but wanted something unique that would identify them differently from heterosexual relationships.
Imagine if you are one of these couples if you speak out in favor of Prop 8.....These couples have to stay silent, except in the ballot box, because other gays will attack them more harshly than others who support Prop 8.
Very insightful. Many of us have made similar observations -- the world is choosing sides, and this in preparation. Thank you for your courage. We stand with you, and against the deceptive accusations thrown at you in the name of "tolerance".