Monday, October 13, 2008

My 'Hood and Building Defy Prop. 8

The two nice women who live on the top floor of my building got married this weekend, with these rose petals on our steps serving as a nice remnant of the milestone. For those not from California or not following the news, Proposition 8 is the "definition of marriage" or, more accurately, "let's make sure we continue to make same sex couples second class citizens" initiative.

I sure hope the car parked across the street is not their honeymoon vehicle. On second thought, I sort of hope that it is since it sort of screams out defiance and celebration.

Labels: , , ,

7 Comments:

At 3:47 PM, Blogger dennis said...

Dennis loves both the rose petals and the car. Long live love.

 
At 4:38 PM, Blogger Ladrón de Basura (a.k.a. Junk Thief) said...

Dennis - Love will always win, even if it takes a while.

 
At 11:43 PM, Blogger ms. lee of the lemon drops said...

Defining marriage as between one man and one woman is not taking away anyone's rights. The definition simply distinguishes a union that is biologically capable of producing its own children. Whether a married couple has children or not, I feel like this deserves a separate name--even the potential is kind of a miracle.

Actually this definition can be seen as the ultimate expression of equality our society has to offer: it takes one man and one woman. One could see a lesbian union as a marginalization of men, or a homosexual union as a marginalization of women.

Equality is especially important when it comes to raising children. Children deserve/need a father and a mother. Neither parent should be marginalized.

Yes, many children are already growing up in single-parent homes. Prop 8 should be a reminder to everyone that as a society we need to assist and strengthen families as much as possible. Really, as a society we should be most concerned with the success and health of our families.

http://emiliadelmar.blogspot.com/2008/10/legislation-and-social-issues.html

peace out

 
At 5:14 AM, Blogger Salty Miss Jill said...

My understanding of marriage is that it is a religiuos institution, and therefore definable within the particular faith's dogma. Which, in some cases, (I'm no expert on religions: I'm thinking of Christianity and Islam) is overly misogynist and homophobic.

Civil unions are what should occur outside a religious ceremony and context-for same and opposite sex couples-thereby being consistant with a secular state.

I see Prop 8 as a step in the right direction, not the ultimate answer. Let's hope so, anyhow.

Let love rule!

 
At 2:15 PM, Blogger Ladrón de Basura (a.k.a. Junk Thief) said...

Ms. Lee - I assume you came to my blog by googling this issue. Since you present your opinion with at least civility, I won't delete it and let others rebut or agree, but I can't say that the Pro-Prop 8 "in defense of the children" propaganda circling is exactly an example of promoting tolerance and respect. Further, based on the recently married women upstairs, I don't feel like a marginalized man but a man who feels that he shares in a building ownership with two women who feel more respected and connected. And having rose petals on my front steps is a nice addition.

Jill - Just for clarity, I'm not sure if you're aware that Yes on Prop. 8 means defining marriage as being only between a man and a woman and making the Supreme Court decision -- and my neighbors' marriage -- null and void. In other words, voting yes means saying no to same sex marriage. They were married in an Episcopal Church, by the way, something quite common in coastal California and causing those in the inland to pull away from the church.

 
At 7:31 AM, Blogger Salty Miss Jill said...

Thanks for the clarification-I went and did my homework.
I still think that the definition of marriage per se should be left to religious institutions, while 'civil union' is something that should occur outside of that institution granting the same rights and recognition to any couple regardless of sexual pairing.
That said, while I am adamant about securing same-sex couple rights-what I am conficted about is granting special rights to ANYONE simply because they are married/civil unionized. This discriminated against people who, by choice or chance, are not paired.

Where's the tax break and benefits for singles?

 
At 7:57 AM, Blogger Ladrón de Basura (a.k.a. Junk Thief) said...

Jill - Or people with high maintenance dogs who should be able to deduct some of their expenses.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home