It seems to me that if we have true separation between church and state, there would not be a ban on gay marriage. I know many claim to want to keep traditional marriage intact, but is that not up to the church. Each religion has the control and I don't believe it should be up to the state.

I didn't follow the results. I take it that the initiatives may have institutionalized same sex unions in one or more areas. No big deal. "Gay marriage" is yet another inroad into the trivialization of the institution of marriage. I also know several gays who have been upset about this issue as well. They side with the values of a traditional marriage. Go figure.

You bet I am. Especially in California, where gay marriage was already legal. So in that case, homosexuals were not only denied rights, they had them stripped away. That's American how, exactly? Stay classy, CA/FL/AZ. And then people hide behind the guise of Christianity. Well, you know what? Gambling is a sin, too, and lotteries seem to pass by wide margins the last time I checked. Denying rights to your neighbor doesn't seem very Christ-like to me.

Yes. I think it's a fundamental right to pair up with whomever you please and have the same rights that are afforded to the religiously backed male-female relationships. It's actually one of the most significant reasons I voted as I did.

I'm upset. However the vote was much closer than the prop 8 people wanted. It's only a matter of time before people stand up and realise that by denying marriage to one group you trivialize the exact same marriage you're trying to protect. The battle is lost but the war continues.

I don't necessarily agree it should be a constitutional amendment, but the result is correct. My issue with gay marriage has nothing to do with religion. In fact, I think marriage should have never become a legal word. Instead, I thing all couples should have to apply for a domestic partnership license, and whether or not you get "married" is up to your religion. However, the problem with retroactively applying marriage law to gay couples is that much of marriage law does not apply to a gay couple. This is, perhaps, best explained with an analogy. In the 1970’s a law was passed that paid reparations to Japanese Americans who were held in American internment camps. The last of these reparations were paid in the mid 90’s. Is it discrimination if I applied for the reparation, and was denied, based on the fact that I am not Japanese American? According to your logic it is. Of course, the reality is that the law was passed for a specific reason, which simply does not apply to me. But you want to ignore this. Marriage law is the same. Marriage law developed over hundreds of years, and much of it was passed for the sole purpose of facilitating child birth and child rearing. Thus, until a gay couple can birth a child, much of marriage law does not apply to you. That is not to say that other rights that we vest in marriage should not apply to gay couples. However, you cannot take centuries of laws, much of which only apply to the relationship between a man and a woman, and instantly apply it to a group of people who do not fit within the purpose of the law. Of course, this is not discrimination. A gay person has every right to marry someone of the opposite sex. Imagine for a moment that the goal of marriage law was reversed. For example, imagine if we were in overpopulated China, and our government decided to give away free birth control to couples in order to discourage child birth. If we only gave the birth control to heterosexual couples, would that be discrimination? The answer is no. The government is giving away birth control for a purpose that does not apply to a same sex couples. Thus, even if you are gay, you only fit within the purpose of the law if you are with someone of the opposite sex.

I'm pissed off about it. The way I see it is as long as I'm getting what makes me happy in life, what do I care what another person does to make them happy unless it effects me in a negative way. I think there were too many selfish christians who were more concerned about pleasing their God for the personal gain of heavenly brownie points, than they were about supporting other people's pursuit of happiness. Freaking christians are selfish and they don't even see it. I'd like to see them all adopt orphans to make up for their ill votes.

I'm pissed off that the government has taken it upon itself to legislate morality or, rather, pseudo-morality

I didn't get to follow it. I hope it passed though

I'm livid. This is a clear case of the legislation of morality.

Hell yes I am. Proposition 8 is morally wrong and I'm very disappointed that it passed. Stripping people of their rights is not American. Come on over to Massachusetts, Cali couples. The weather's not as nice, but we recognize marriages equally.

One step froward, one step back. I hope to live to see gay marriage legalized everywhere. I didn't think I'd live to see a black president. Maybe next time we can tackle that issue.

im canadian. it makes me cry. if you re gay and u want to be married, come to canada. we will recognize you, even if your own sad country can't.

I am pissed and heartbroken. I don't understand how on the same day we elected the first African America to be president we voted to discriminate against a different group of citizens. I don't understand how we can ever hope to enforce hate based crimes if we're passing hate based laws. As a straight married woman I can not for the life of me figure out how my bestfriend marrying his boyfriend would in any way take away from or negate my own marriage. Nor can I seem to get anyone on the other side to give me a straight answer on that. They go into this whole moraly wrong speech but never really say- "it will take away from a straight marriage because..."

if you love each other you shud be allowed to get married

Yes marrages should only be between a man and a woman. When God made the first 2 people he made a man and a woman. He did NOT make a man and a man nor a woman and a woman> He made a man Adam and a woman Eve. Not Adam and Steve or Eve and Anna.

i know i am...dumb florida....ughh!

I'd say prop 8 is a minor setback. It never should have been proposed as it violates the rights of a minority group. It got through a loophole to get made and there's no way its going to progress. Shame on those who proposed this and MORE shame on those who voted for it. People's fears were played on for this, as they are for most evil propositions. This won't be the last of this issue, or this kind of opposion - but it will NEVER prevail!

The people have spoken. Democracy works when the people reach the outcome you like, otherwise, the majority oppresses the minority.

I'm more embarassed that the chief proponents & sponsors (Knights of Columbus, Mormon Church, Cal Conference of Catholic Bishops, etc.) could run a campaign based on fear and ignorance. Every single person that I've talked to who voted YES on Prop 8 did so because they were "afraid their kids were going to be taught about gay marriage in school." That's what the proponents focused on. Scaring voters with children's education. Not the real issue of everyday people being discriminated against by their own State government just for their sexual orientation. Though I'm totally straight, I liken this to any other civil rights movement. There is no reason why our government should be able to differentiate people by their sexual orientation, race, religious beliefs or any other grouping. People are people and they should be protected as tax-paying citizens under their State's laws and ledgers. Chalk one up for the church-goers and homophobes, but a bigger deal needs to be made of this. People should not be discriminated against in the United States. PERIOD.

I'm never happy about freedoms being denied. I don't get why someone would object to another's desire to wed. I don't get why people think (I've heard this one a lot in Arizona) that gay marriage will screw up the economy. What the heck does that even mean? If two people are married, how does that affect anyone else? Oh yeah, it makes the religious right miserable, so I say please gays, go for it!!!!

If you're not trying to force your views on others, then why would you care? Why are you "pissed"? I've never understood this. Muslims want everyone to be Muslim. Christians want everyone to be Christian. Each group wants to force its biblical views on everybody else. Why not leave us hell-bent non-believers alone? Or move to a country where you can make the laws and force everyone to share your one, true religion? America is not suitable for you. I recommend Texas. You can rename it to "Little USA," and extend your southern border fence to surround the entire state/country. You can create your own Constitution and write it with only one amendment--but call it the Second Amendment. You can require everyone over 8 y/o to carry a sidearm, cocked and loaded, whenever they leave the house. Teach them how to identify liberals, commies, queers, atheists, and hippies, and shoot them on sight. Lord knows, they're guilty. You can require everyone to attend authorized churches from an approved list. You can save money on textbooks in schools. The only book you need is The Official Bible of Little USA. Optional: require citizens to carry little prayer rugs, and call them to prayer at specific times each day. Kneel on the rug and face Bethlehem. Think about it. An all-Christian nation, with firearms. What could be more perfect?

edit

damn, edited again

Very. I'm angry, sad, and many other unhappy emotions right now because of the fact that CA passed prop 8.