Log in

No account? Create an account

Previous Entry | Next Entry

Keep it simple...

repost as much or as little (or none) of this as you like:

Are you a California voter?

3 years ago, we had a commitment ceremony. It was presided over by a minister. 3 months ago we got married. It was provided over by a minister. California Proposition 8 isn't about religious rights. This is about denying religious rights.

You can't save marriage by destroying marriages.

A vote for California Proposition 8 is a vote to destroy my marriage.

A vote for California Proposition 8 is a vote to destroy my family's life.

A vote for California Proposition 8 is a vote to destroy my friends' lives.

A vote for California Proposition 8 is a vote to ruin the lives of ordinary Californians.

And I'm going to take it personally.

What? You don't vote? It's too hard? It's too inconvenient?

I'm going to take that personally too. An abstention might as well be a vote in favor. Get your sorry ass registered and out to the polls. Read up on the other propositions too. Read up on the candidates for office. Do your fucking civil duty.


Oct. 14th, 2008 09:27 pm (UTC)
Serious question: will Prop 8 prevent an ordained minister from marrying a same-sex couple "in the eyes of God", or will it just remove "by the authority vested in me by the State of California" from the service?
Oct. 14th, 2008 10:08 pm (UTC)
Athiest here. Personally couldn't care less about "eyes of God."

What it would remove is the rights and responsibilities, the civil contract that goes along with marriage.
Oct. 15th, 2008 06:47 am (UTC)

I don't think couples should have any more rights than single people, but as long as they do, everyone who wants to should be able to join that club. I wonder how long it will take for Congress to repeal that idiotic Defense of Marriage Act?
Oct. 22nd, 2008 07:26 pm (UTC)
indulge my curiosity
Why, being so extremely athy (though others might challenge you for the title of athiest), did you have a minister preside?
Oct. 22nd, 2008 07:45 pm (UTC)
Re: indulge my curiosity
A few reasons...

Commitment ceremonies aren't something with a direct legal/civil equivalent. The minister in our commitment ceremony is a friend of ours. The religious component (which was very non-denominational pagan) satisfied some of the participants and attendants, and while I don't believe in the supernatural the basic ritual structure appeals to me.

For the marriage? While we could have had a civil officiant, we don't have a lot of friends who are legal civil officiants and getting married by a stranger is rather impersonal. We do have friends who are ministers (in this case, johnnyeponymous). The ceremony was, rather than a complex ritual, a bare-bones legal ceremony.

And, frankly, it's a poke in the eye to the folks who say that same-sex unions and marriages are an affront to religion (not just their religion, but Religion). We had two different ministers from two different churches who were perfectly happy to preside over our ceremonies.
Oct. 14th, 2008 10:09 pm (UTC)
I believe it will just remove the "by the authority vested in me by the State of California" from the service.
Oct. 14th, 2008 10:11 pm (UTC)
It will remove the license from the ceremony. That's the part I care about.
Oct. 14th, 2008 10:17 pm (UTC)
Completely understand. And I fail to see how your marriage will have any impact whatsoever on my marriage; let alone "destroy" it.

Since I work in HR and pension benefits, I'd also like to see the DOMA struck down, so that all married couples get the same tax / pension / etc benefits, not just those of us who happen to have different chromosome pairs.

Latest Month

February 2014

Page Summary

Powered by LiveJournal.com
Designed by Paulina Bozek