Saturday, October 25, 2008

I have been remiss

This is an issue that's important to me and I realize I haven't blogged a thing about it.

None of my gay friends are *legally* married, but they were among the first to start families together, buy houses, move halfway around the world to be with each other. In short, to demonstrate the kind of commitment that I've only recently become comfortable with.

Why the f*ck shouldn't they have the same right to make it legal?

Vote NO on Prop 8.

(Image by phlora)


  1. Hooray for voting no on prop 8. Consider going to the no on prop 8 website and getting a graphic for your blog that people can use to vow to vote no on prop 8 or to make a very necessary donation. Thanks, love reading the blog!

  2. i'm not getting married to anyone anytime soon. but it is possible it could maybe be another lady one day. thanks for covering this crucial issue. loves. ps, have you ever heard a compelling (or interesting) argument against gay marriage?

  3. I can not believe prop 8, it's just ridiculous. I've always thought of Scotland as a fairly homophobic country but dear god I feel grateful for how sane we are when I read about right wing America's attitude to gay marriage.

    Here's hoping that the vote goes the right way.

  4. Amen. And done. I voted this weekend.

  5. Right on! And if you're in Florida please vote no on Amendment 2. Florida already does not let gay couples marry or adopt children. # 2 proposes to continue to take away rights by refusing hospital visitation and health care benefits to gay and cohabiting couples. WTF? It's being called the Amendment for strengthening marriage. Does it really make my marriage stronger that another couple going through a horrible tragedy can't visit each other in the hospital? Seriously. Oh yeah, and excuse my crazy ranting, but Floridians remember to vote no on 2!

  6. Chris and I have had this discussion... he opposes gay "marriage" in the sense that it's called "marriage" (he's very conservative, which can be interesting at times). He's all for civil unions, though.
    I, on the other hand, am a firm believer that the ol' "Separate but equal" is just as wrong now as it was back in the civil rights movement. There is no separate but equal - it's a misnomer.
    He looks at "marriage" as being religious. I look at it as a term - whatever your religion (or not).
    When I brought up that two heterosexual people can get "married" without any religous element, be pagans, and/or not be religious in any sense of the word - which like homosexuality is a sin in the eyes of the "church" - he just grumbled and rolled over (yes, it was a nightime discussion).
    I can't change his mind. It's something we agree to disagree on.

    But I really think this is important and agree with you and all the others.

  7. thanks for addressing this--it's not too late!

  8. I will definitely be voting no on 8.