It's not fair...a gay life style is a choice to be sexual with the same sex and have romance at the sametime. To make it legal to marry into same sex relationships as normal; the same as man and woman, children, teens, etc. will think it is okay to be sexually, emotionally, or romantically attracted to the same sex.

It will have an effect in schools because making it legal is the first step. It should stop here and stay as a civil union.

Gays have a civil union and the same legal rights as a man and woman married couples. Now they want to redefine marriage too and say that my lifestyle is like theirs, and it is not. I am straight and not sexually attracted to a woman. My concern is for children and teens; the next step is gay marriage being exposed into schools because examples of man and woman couples are, so gay couples will be next. Children and teen should not be exposed to same sex relationships as another choice. Let them find out on their rather than it being exposed to them in schools because that's what's next.

Marrigage should not be redefined but kept between man and woman.

No matter how far we have fallen from the tree, was the US not founded to be that 'place on the hill?' Were any of the founding fathers publicly gay? In a country that has its history inextricably tangled with Christianity, is it any suprise that there is opposition to public recognition of such a union? And how does a religious adherent claim moral high ground when he or she more or less sanctions a union that could never be for procreation, but rather is representative of a union merely for sex? What people really mean when they say they don't support the use of the word 'marriage' is that they would rather not have society's stamp of approval on that which is scarcely in keeping with the puritanic streak that ran in the pioneers. I for one, I am in that last camp.

In that case I might be tempted say that the people of California didn't reach the level of education and information to qualify them as mature voters.
Considering democracy and elections don't work that simple however, it might once again just be a matter of not enough and/or the wrong individuals giving their vote.
So, – most of all, people should give their vote and make the only smart decision, which is equal rights, no matter the sexual orientation. The churches may well have their own interpretation of human rights, includig their approach towards marriage, but as long as marriage also is a matter of legal rights, those have to be indivisible by any means.

Good point. I would be pretty annoyed if the residents of my state were voting on the legitimacy of my relationship; whom I marry is my own business. As a straight woman, I take this fundamental right for granted. It is not right that other people must have their personal lives scrutinized and legally unvalidated by the religious right.

It strikes me as odd that prop 8 proponents believe that they cannot be supporters of traditional marriage AND same-sex marriage. As if one negates the other. Marriage between two consenting, loving, and committed people is good for children, families, and the economy.

I wish I were a resident in California so I could no on prop 8!

Who are you to judge who gets to marry and who doesn't? Are you God? By supporting Prop. 8, it would be taking away the rights of all Americans in California who want to be treated equally. That also includes the freedom to marry whoever they wish no matter if they are gay or straight. Like Hilary was saying above, it would be just like the "separate but equal" doctrine where race was the center of political and personal strife in 50's and 60's for minorities. You would be subjecting the same discrimination on gays and lesbians who want to have the same rights as straight people. It's about time this law came to pass here in California because out of all the states we have the largest gay and lesbian population and they've been working towards this moment for the longest time and they deserve that right.
I'm a Christian like most people are but, unlike those who exhibit intolerant behavior towards diversity, I accept and respect these people to love as they see fit as I know Jesus would. This election represents change and overcoming barriers that have stood in the way of diversity and progress. We cannot afford to go back to the old way of thinking. We're at a difficult time in our nation's history and we need something different from the last few decades. Intolerance, divisiveness, and hatred for people different from you will set this country back. This is the total opposite from Jesus' message and mission on earth. So-called Christians, conservatives, and Republicans need to remember who Jesus was and what He stood for because they have strayed so far from Him it's tragic!

Dallas, TX

Your time will come too.

The problem in America today with most Christian Fundamentalists (certainly those that would deny people the right to marry the one they love) is that they have not actually internalized the fundamental teaching to "love one another" and instead have embraced the right-wing political teachings of the modern Pharisees. Other political opportunists have made wedges of these hypocrisies to divide us and our country, and sow the seeds of hate, distrust, and violence. It's quite likely that the very issue of same-sex marriage handed Bush a second term in spite of the reservations of more moderate voters.

If you carefully study the position of both sides of Prop. 8 in California, what you find is that the proponents have consistently lied or distorted facts in their attempt to scare people into voting yes. The opponents of 8 have consistently told the truth, never wavered in that, and have only ever attempted in their message to set the record straight.

It appalls me and should outrage any American that the proponents of Prop 8 believe its passage to be so important that the ends justify any means to achieve their political goal including behavior completely counter to their own professed morals. That kind of hypocrisy would never be rewarded by a God I would choose to believe in.

Clearly, thinking Californians should vote No on Proposition 8, and similar proposals in other states should be voted down as well.

You might feel that way, so why not leave it up for god to judge, not the state. Be careful what precedent you set when giving the state authority to take away people's rights. You might just end up on the wrong end of the stick.

America = equality and Freedom for ALL., with separation of church and state. Please remember this when you vote.

Tim

#2) This country was also founded on the idea that people have a right to practice what they believe as long as it's not doing anyone irreparable harm.

#3) Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness – it's in the Declaration of Independance.

#4) Separation of Church and State. That's in the constitution. So no matter what, how, or why people feel they way they do about 'religious preference' in matters of civil rights, the constitution already thought of this about 200+ years ago. Sorry folks, you're a bit behind the power curve on this one. Can you say 'Church of England' circa 1700 A.D.?