(no subject)
For those of you with ANY wavering on Proposition 8, I leave you with the following.
The Proposition language states: "Changes the California Constitution to eliminate the right of same-sex couples to marry in California. Provides that only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California. Fiscal Impact: Over next few years, potential revenue loss, mainly sales taxes, totaling in the several tens of millions of dollars, to state and local governments. In the long run, likely little fiscal impact on state and local governments"
Now, what if the language was changed to reflect a different demographic?
Changes the California Constitution to eliminate the right of same-sex African American or Hispanic couples to marry in California. Provides that only marriage between a (white) man and a (white) woman is valid or recognized in California. Fiscal Impact: Over next few years, potential revenue loss, mainly sales taxes, totaling in the several tens of millions of dollars, to state and local governments. In the long run, likely little fiscal impact on state and local governments
Does that strike you as discriminatory at all? I've been told, "But but thats different!" WHY is that different? You are choosing one specific group of citizens and limiting or eliminating their rights based on their membership to that specific group. Almost alll Californians would be outraged if the proposition contained the language I present here. There is absolutely no difference, except the religious think homosexuality is "icky" and somehow misinterpreted the bible to command we hate them for it.
I leave you with this, one of my favorite clips from The West Wing:
I think we set a dangerous precedent if we allow religion into our legislation like this, and I have yet to find or be told ONE SINGLE REASON for this measure, that isn't religious.
Please, VOTE tomorrow, and please vote NO on (h)8.
The Proposition language states: "Changes the California Constitution to eliminate the right of same-sex couples to marry in California. Provides that only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California. Fiscal Impact: Over next few years, potential revenue loss, mainly sales taxes, totaling in the several tens of millions of dollars, to state and local governments. In the long run, likely little fiscal impact on state and local governments"
Now, what if the language was changed to reflect a different demographic?
Changes the California Constitution to eliminate the right of same-sex African American or Hispanic couples to marry in California. Provides that only marriage between a (white) man and a (white) woman is valid or recognized in California. Fiscal Impact: Over next few years, potential revenue loss, mainly sales taxes, totaling in the several tens of millions of dollars, to state and local governments. In the long run, likely little fiscal impact on state and local governments
Does that strike you as discriminatory at all? I've been told, "But but thats different!" WHY is that different? You are choosing one specific group of citizens and limiting or eliminating their rights based on their membership to that specific group. Almost alll Californians would be outraged if the proposition contained the language I present here. There is absolutely no difference, except the religious think homosexuality is "icky" and somehow misinterpreted the bible to command we hate them for it.
I leave you with this, one of my favorite clips from The West Wing:
Click to viewI think we set a dangerous precedent if we allow religion into our legislation like this, and I have yet to find or be told ONE SINGLE REASON for this measure, that isn't religious.
Please, VOTE tomorrow, and please vote NO on (h)8.