Separation of Church and State=Same Sex Marriage

re: Separation of Church and State=Same Sex Marriage

Shannon LC Cate — Sat, 15 Nov 2008 16:28:48 GMT

Hear Hear! Jeff. I agree with you 100% as do many leaders of many different churches who are concerned about church-state separation. Some priests in the Episcopal Church have stopped signing off on government marriage entirely, asking their congregants to go to City Hall for that and come back to the Church for religious marriage. And I have heard Baptists (one is quoted in the article I linked above) calling legal marriage granted by religious leaders an "unholy union" making pastors handmaidens of the government.

I think marriage should be purely a personal and/or religious matter. The rights marriage grants to couples now should be open to all kinds of configurations of people and a matter of contract.

I have serious doubts about the GOP going for that but it can't hurt. I'll follow your link and toss it in the suggestion box, thanks!

re: Separation of Church and State=Same Sex Marriage

Jeff — Sat, 15 Nov 2008 16:15:49 GMT

I strongly support the idea of removing the concept of marriage from government completely. Although I think it would take a lot of work to take marriage records out of the federal government and state governments hands, I think this is really the best way forward in the debate of same sex marriage. Such a direction could also garner support from Mormons or other religious groups who see it as their right and sometimes as their duty to be able to maintain more than one spouse. Where does anybody get the nerve to try to restrict other free peoples right to engage in these personal relationships.

For those who are unaware, the Republican Party has opened up a new web forum for submitting ideas to rebuild the party. I suggested such an idea as described above and it could use as much support as possible to try to get signal to the party that people want this type of sensible solution from government.

Separation of Marriage and State

ideas.rebuildtheparty.com/.../66509

re: Separation of Church and State=Same Sex Marriage

Shandra — Wed, 05 Nov 2008 02:56:50 GMT

Hey, we've had gay marriage up here in Canada for a while.

My heterosexual marriage is intact. Hurray!

The Catholic church, and others, still does not perform them! Just like the Catholic church does not marry divorced people (if they were married Catholic) years and years after divorce was legalized! Shock!

Also, not telling your kids about gay couples is sort of like not teaching them about the colour fuscia. They are going to see it because it exists.

re: Separation of Church and State=Same Sex Marriage

Christine — Tue, 04 Nov 2008 05:08:07 GMT

This is reminding me of Dan Savage's conversation with some woman who said it was his right to not teach his son about heterosexuals. It's absurd.

re: Separation of Church and State=Same Sex Marriage

Lori — Mon, 03 Nov 2008 22:01:15 GMT

moviegirl.

Churches have been refusing to marry couples for years, they will not be sued if they continue to do so.

Adoption agencies have been turning away couples that do not meet their criteria for years, they will not be sued if they continue to do so ( tho luckily more and more adoption agencies embrace open adoption and let their birth families select from a wide pool of singles and couples)

You mentioned that it is not ok to mention Gay or Lesbian to any child. This mom disagrees.

You seemed terrified of Pop 8. What is so scary about allowing two people that love each other marry each other? Why should couples be denied their civil rights because of your irrational fears???

re: Separation of Church and State=Same Sex Marriage

Alice — Mon, 03 Nov 2008 20:25:42 GMT

Most of this has already been said, but in case people don't follow the links:

"If prop 8 does not pass the only rights at stake here are mine, and this is what you want to take away."

FALSE. Nothing has changed for straight married couples in the months since gay marriage has been legal, and Prop 8 won't change anything for straight couples (except that their queer friends and family will be harmed).

State domestic partnership laws CAN NOT GRANT FEDERAL RIGHTS. There are more than 1000 federal rights associated with marriage that domestic partners can't access.

"STOP trying to force your sexual orientation on my and my children. I will leave you alone ..."

FALSE. Gay marriage has been legal for months in CA, and it's about marriage, not forcing an orientation on anyone. There have been no recruitment drives or rallies trying to convince people to become queer, and Prop 8 has nothing to do with that.

And if you really wanted to leave me and my family alone, moviegirl, you would let me get married and you'd let me visit my partner in the hospital in peace. Passing Prop 8 will mean that I can't marry, will mean that I may well not be able to go to the hospital if it's needed, and will strip away all 1000+ of those federal rights I would otherwise have.

Passing Prop 8 would take all that away from me, and from every other person connected to a queer family in CA. It doesn't give you, or anyone else, anything.

re: Separation of Church and State=Same Sex Marriage

jenn — Mon, 03 Nov 2008 20:24:41 GMT

I worked for the Baptist Joint Committee and can firmly verify that every single person who works there has a strong Christian faith and is completely dedicated to ensuring the church and state remain seperate.

re: Separation of Church and State=Same Sex Marriage

Lula — Mon, 03 Nov 2008 19:19:19 GMT

Here, Moviegirl - read this and pass it around to your Prop 8 pals. It probably won't change your vote at the polls tomorrow, but at least you'll all be a little less ignorant.

www.buddybuddy.com/mar-prim.html

Eveyone else is welcome to read too, of course. ;)

re: Separation of Church and State=Same Sex Marriage

Shannon LC Cate — Mon, 03 Nov 2008 18:26:11 GMT

hmmm.. That all sounds fine to me moviegirl. For someone who "doesn't judge" you sure are adamant about not wanting your kids to learn about "tolerance and diversity."

Listen, has it occurred to you that MY children might be sitting on the story-time rug next to your children in school?

I can't "do anything I want." I don't know about you, but sex barely comes up when one has two toddlers! Sex has NOTHING to do with my children's understanding of their family. The only thing they know is that they have two moms. Again, I can't do anything I want. I can't receive benefits through my partner's employer without paying a tax on them that married couples don't pay. I can't be at my partner's hospital bedside without special legal paperwork which is sometimes not respected by hospital staff. I can't name my partner the other parent to my children, should I give birth as a woman can do for any man she is married to regardless of whether or not he is the biological father of those children. If my partner is not the legal parent of my children--most frequently the case in same-sex headed families with children--my children cannot receive dependent benefits through her employer. My partner cannot make any decisions for the children that require a parent. I cannot inherit from my partner when she dies without paying estate taxes, which legal spouses do not have to pay.

I think what you and other Prop 8 supporters don't realize is that gay people aren't going anywhere and neither are their children. The only difference marriage makes is that existing families will receive the same protections, rights and responsibilities straight families receive now. You are trying to deny my children the same protection your children enjoy. You are trying to deny my children a sense of security and well-being in the world that you take for granted that your children should, by human right, have. And they should. So should mine.

As for teaching in the schools, did you miss the second part of that sentence about teaching respect for marriage? The part that says "and committed relationships?" Holy King-Sized Bed, Batman! The schools could ALREADY be teaching it's "OK to be gay" and that same-sex couples in committed relationships should be respected! Same-sex marriage would change ABSOLUTELY NOTHING ABOUT THE PUBLIC SCHOOL CURRICULUM OR ITS MANDATES!

It is more than obvious that you are just looking for excuses to hate on the gays. More power to you but stop pretending this has anything to do with any other agenda.

re: Separation of Church and State=Same Sex Marriage

Lexie — Mon, 03 Nov 2008 18:12:38 GMT

Wow!

That is one hell of a lot of hate that moviegirl has for her fellow human beings. What must that be like, to practice religious beliefs that condone so much hate? And to twist everything (i.e. the bully pledge) to support all that hate in her heart. If your Jesus is indeed the one that I know from the Bible, I hope he will forgive you. For you are the one whose "sinning" here as far as my religious beliefs are concerned.

And by the way, your whole thing about not mentioning Lesbianism or homosexuality to kindergarteners made me laugh outloud! Oh my god, what a closed and hateful world you must be raising your children in.

I'm straight. I didn't choose that. It is just the way I am. Like that I have brown eyes and that I'm female. I also have twin 3 year old boys. And they have several little friends whose parents are two moms/ two dads, etc. So, of course, on a three year old level, they know that families come in all shapes and forms. They know about same-sex families. They don't raise an eyebrow about it. To disallow these friendships with these other children just so I wouldn't have to explain to my kids that they have two moms or two dads? How hateful would that be? Are you saying that when you're child has a classmate with same-sex parents (and they will) that you are what? Not going to let them play with them? Lie to them about who the kid's parents are? Tell them that that child's parents could not get married even though they really want to because some hateful people out there discriminate against them? Exactly how are you not going to mention anything about same-sex couples without locking your child in your basement till they are 18? Its wonderful to know that while you condemn the state of California for its anti-bully measures, you will be teaching your own child to hate. How Christian of you.

And now I'm done. I can't "tolerate" people like moviegirl for long. Her implied lifestyle is against my religion.

re: Separation of Church and State=Same Sex Marriage

moviegirl — Mon, 03 Nov 2008 18:09:02 GMT

more facts about prop 8...yes I do my homework.

I support California 's already very expansive laws providing for domestic partnerships, which, in Family Code Section 297.5, guarantees to registered domestic partners "the same rights, protections and benefits . . . as are granted to and imposed upon spouses."

But marriage is different, and so is teaching schoolchildren.

There is no doubt, however, what the Education Code requires as to teaching about marriage and families. Here's an excerpt from the key statute, Section 51933:

(b) A school district that elects to offer comprehensive sexual health education pursuant to subdivision (a), whether taught by school district personnel or outside consultants, shall satisfy all of the following criteria:

. . .

(7) Instruction and materials shall teach respect for marriage and committed relationships.

(Emphasis added.) According to the California Department of Education's website, 96% of California school districts provide sexual health education that places them under Section 51933's requirements. Can anyone reasonably deny that if Prop 8 fails, the instruction about "marriage" this statute refers to will include same-sex marriage?

Can parents 'opt out' of their children's participation in school programs that discuss sexual orientation and gender identity?

State law explicitly provides that “instruction or materials that discuss gender, sexual orientation, or family law and do not discuss human reproductive organs or their functions” is not subject to the parental notice and opt out laws. Thus, where issues of sexual orientation or gender identity are raised in school programs other than HIV/AIDS or sexual health education, such as programs designed to encourage respect and tolerance for diversity, parents are not entitled to have notice of or the opportunity to opt their children out of such programs. California law does not support a broad parental veto regarding the contents of public school instruction.

(Emphasis added.) Translation: If you are a California parent and think you have the right to opt your second-grader out of story time because the teacher is reading the students a book about a prince who marries a prince, you should think again. As long as story time is part of a program "designed to encourage respect and tolerance for diversity," you have nothing to say about whether your child participates. You won't even hear about the book unless your child comes home and mentions it to you.

The California Safe Schools Coalition also published on its web site a "Question and Answer Guide to California 's Parental Opt-Out Laws." The Guide's goals include helping educators who are promoting "tolerance and diversity" to circumvent the opt-out laws, as evidenced by this question and answer from that guide:

Do parents have a constitutional right to prevent their children from receiving education in public schools on subjects they disapprove?

Almost never. Parents have filed a number of court cases seeking to prevent public schools from teaching their children controversial literature or subjects . . . and have lost virtually every case. Courts have held that so long as the public school curricula are secular and reasonably related to educational goals, parents do not have veto power over the content of public school instruction. . . . Schools may wish to excuse students from non-essential activities (such excusing a Jehovah's Witness student from a Valentine's Day party) but are not legally required to excuse students from curricular activities such as. . . diversity education. The interests of the school and student in education outweigh parents' interests in preventing their children from being exposed to ideas that conflict with religious traditions.

Here's the guide's concluding paragraph:

[By] carefully articulating the purpose and content of diversity education programs, schools can both fulfill their legal duty to ensure a safe and nondiscriminatory school environment for all students, and also avoid violating parents' notice and opt-out rights.

(Emphasis added.) So, you see, it's all a matter of how the schools set up their program. If they do that right, parents have no voice.

STOP trying to force your sexual orientation on my and my children. I will leave you alone, and I will teach my child why there are women and men and why we are different and I will teach them empathy for others.

I will not stand by and allow the STATE to tell me that being gay is OK. It is a choice, your choice a sexual choice. Prop 8 has nothing to do with taking away your rights, you can still do what ever you want.

If prop 8 does not pass the only rights at stake here are mine, and this is what you want to take away.

re: Separation of Church and State=Same Sex Marriage

Lula — Mon, 03 Nov 2008 16:02:50 GMT

And I agree with you on one point, which is that no one forced me to be Queer. I consider my sexual orientation a blessing, not a curse -- and lots of us believe our sexual orientations come straight from God (however we envision that). You don't own God anymore than you own love, so why should you get to own marriage?

If you don't want to live in a country that embraces religious freedom and separation of church and state, you have many options for emigration. Or you could leave the planet and start a new colony on the moon, if you've got the $$. Meanwhile, we'll stay here and fight for our civil rights, like good Americans.

re: Separation of Church and State=Same Sex Marriage

Lula — Mon, 03 Nov 2008 15:03:21 GMT

I'm glad you're not trying to convince me to change my ways, because this is one happy little Queer here at the keyboard.

You, on the other hand, sound like a very miserable fear-based individual whose heart & soul will be continue to be severely challenged by any aspect of life that does not conform to your narrow definitions of acceptability. That your religion is the primary dictator of those definitions is totally your business, and I support you in practicing the religion of your choice regardless of how hateful and twisted I think it encourages its followers to be. I'm a good American that way! God Bless Me!

But your sexuality isn't better than mine. Your love isn't better than mine. Your marriage isn't better than mine (actually your marriage is probably much the same as mine in the eyes of the state, since I'm married to a man), and your family isn't better than mine. And when same-sex couples and their families gain the ability to benefit from the legal protections of marriage the same way you and I do, I will think fondly of you as my flaming pals and I celebrate in the streets. *KISS KISS*

And I pity your children, especially any who turn out to love someone of their own sex.

Also done! Too busy being happy/gay to keep this up.

re: Separation of Church and State=Same Sex Marriage

Shannon LC Cate — Mon, 03 Nov 2008 14:22:36 GMT

"It is NOT ok to mention GAY or LESBIAN to my kindergartner. It is NOT acceptable to mention gay or lesbian to any school age child."

Good luck raising your kids in a cave, moviegirl. God Bless your poor little cramped-up, grinch-sized heart and God Bless your poor children.

My turn to be done here!

re: Separation of Church and State=Same Sex Marriage

moviegirl — Mon, 03 Nov 2008 07:25:27 GMT

I am not trying to convince you to change your ways. You live your life and I will live mine.

It is NOT ok to mention GAY or LESBIAN to my kindergartner. It is NOT acceptable to mention gay or lesbian to any school age child. Being GAY is a sexual preference and is not a conversation for a child. That is MY choice...not yours and NOT the choice of the teacher. And you know that the ballot she had them sign was not just a bully form. The teacher had an agenda and that is the fact. It was not appropriate and that is why it is on the news and why parents are upset.

Just because you think it is OK to be gay, you seem to think it is ok to push this belief on to others and then call us bigots because we don't think it is OK to be gay.

Your sexual preference is just that....a sexual preference. I don't agree with your lifestyle. You can call me a bigot if I judge you by your skin or even by your hair color. But I am not a bigot because I don't agree with your lifestyle.

What you do behind closed doors is between you and God. I won't judge you, but I will stand up for my beliefs.

And I won't let others tell me what is right and wrong and tell me what I SHOULD accept or I am a bigot. Who is the Bigot? You are the one judging me because I don't think it is Ok to be gay.

And to answer your question about adoption agency's being closed down. Not everything is black and white, there is too much grey area. Do you really think that private religious adoption agency's have a standing chance to stay open if prop 8 doesn't pass? Because adoption agency's have state government involvement this directly affects them the most.

It is really sad that a young mother who wants her unborn child to be in a family with a mother and father may not get that choice. She will loose the right to make a decision for HER baby because gays in california think it is ok to pass their sexual preference onto others.

And it is sad that many many adoption agency's might close because gays want to pass their sexual preference on others.

We are NOT dealing with black and white, every single issue I am concerned about is GREY, and I am NOT comfortable with that. You can not promise me or guarantee me that the won't happen, because there is NO law protecting me. But prop 8 does, it guarantees me that the things I am worried about most won't happen.

I don't care that you are gay, but don't try to push your lifestyle on me. Nobody forced you to be gay, you made that choice on your own.

In the state of California gay couples have every right that married couples have, this measure won't affect gays rights at all. It only takes away rights from everyone else.........

I think I am done here.

re: Separation of Church and State=Same Sex Marriage

elswhere — Mon, 03 Nov 2008 05:19:25 GMT

Moviegirl, did you READ any of the comments above your latest one? Look, obviously you oppose same-sex marriage, and no one here is going to change your mind about that. But several people (including me) went to some trouble to answer the specific concerns you raised. I'm pretty annoyed that you haven't engaged with those answers at all.

I don't think that you really care about any of that stuff you said you were concerned about; I think it's all a red herring. You don't want gay people to have the same rights as straight people, and you want that bigotry legislated into the California constitution. Fine. But call it what it is, and don't hide behind false concerns.

I think I'm done here.

re: Separation of Church and State=Same Sex Marriage

Lula — Mon, 03 Nov 2008 03:04:52 GMT

1. Since there WOULD BE no difference between same-sex marriage and hetersexual marriage in the eyes of the state if everyone could be legally married, I'm not sure why the notion of this truth being made public upsets you so much. I understand that your religious views won't accept same-sex marriage even if/when it does become legally recognized, but your religious views (and mine!) aren't meant to be taught in public schools anyway. Civics, yes. Religion, no.

2. You keep using the word "Okay". I do not think it means what you think it means... i.e. I do not think you're making the distinction between extending a civil right and enforcing societal acceptance. Legalizing same-sex marriage won't force you or anyone else like homosexuality or to believe it's a natural state of being. It will just enable same-sex couples to be married the same way opposite-sex couples can be.

3. Domestic partnerships as they currently stand do not provide all the protections of legal marriage. In particular, domestic partnerships do not establish legal next-of-kinship, which becomes a big problem when your spouse is ill, hospitalized, disabled, or dies. There are many excellent writings available online that detail the difference between domestic partnerships and legally recognized marriage. I suggest you check them out.

4. "Gays" would not be "redefining marriage" for heterosexuals if their marriages were legally recognized. Straight people's marriages would remain the same as they've always been, completely unaffected by whatever those crazy "gays" get up to with their wedded bliss. You would lose nothing but the misguided priviledge of being the only kind of couple worthy of state-sanctioned marriage.

5. Cutting & pasting from Prop 8 propaganda emails isn't making you sound any more thoughtful on this issue. We know you can read (which is great), but what do you THINK?

re: Separation of Church and State=Same Sex Marriage

moviegirl — Mon, 03 Nov 2008 02:44:49 GMT

The narrow decision of the California Supreme Court isn’t just about “live and let live.” State law may require teachers to instruct children as young as kindergarteners about marriage. (Education Code § 51890.) If the gay marriage ruling is not overturned, TEACHERS COULD BE REQUIRED to teach young children there is no difference between gay marriage and traditional marriage.

We should not accept a court decision that may result in public schools teaching our kids that gay marriage is okay. That is an issue for parents to discuss with their children according to their own values and beliefs. It shouldn’t be forced on us against our will.

Proposition 8 does not take away legal rights of gay domestic partnerships. Proposition 8 DOES NOT take away any of those rights and does not interfere with gays living the lifestyle they choose.

However, while gays have the right to their private lives, they do not have the right to redefine marriage for everyone else.

CALIFORNIANS HAVE NEVER VOTED FOR SAME-SEX MARRIAGE. If gay activists want to legalize gay marriage, they should put it on the ballot. Instead, they have gone behind the backs of voters and convinced four activist judges in San Francisco to redefine marriage for the rest of society. That is the wrong.

Voting YES on Proposition 8 RESTORES the definition of marriage that was approved by over 61% of voters. Voting YES overturns the decision of four activist judges. Voting YES protects our children.

Please vote YES on Proposition 8 to RESTORE the meaning of marriage.

re: Separation of Church and State=Same Sex Marriage

elswhere — Mon, 03 Nov 2008 01:11:10 GMT

Oh, for sure. I was trying to channel someone who believes bisexuality and transgenderism etc. are a choice and is against what God wants etc. I suppose you could still disapprove while believing that theyy're not a choice, just a terrible involuntary disability that God somehow still disapproves of, but my mind starts to boggle and I just won't go there.

moviegirl is free to go there, however, while still perhaps understanding that even without Proposition 8 the schools will not be required to teach her children about sex that she disapproves of.

re: Separation of Church and State=Same Sex Marriage

Lula — Mon, 03 Nov 2008 00:46:29 GMT

I think that's probably about as good as it's going to get for people who truly believe that homosexuality and transgenderism is against their god's plan. However, I would leave "choice" out of the discussion, since homosexuality and transgenderism are no more a choice than heterosexuality or gender-normativism. Bisexuals sort of get to choose (as much as anyone gets to choose who they fall in love with), but that's only because a partner's sex is fairly irrelevant to sexual attraction and formation of emotional bond, unlike with monosexuals of either hetero or homo inclination.

We don't recruit either, in case anyone's worried. That toaster oven thing is a big myth.

re: Separation of Church and State=Same Sex Marriage

elswhere — Sun, 02 Nov 2008 21:13:08 GMT

I Googled the issue as Moviegirl suggested, and found this link: cbs13.com/.../bay.area.school.2.851071.html . Sounds like the issue has nothing to do with Prop 8 and everthing to do with the anti-violence curriculum already in place in California.

And as for "How do you teach a 5-year-old to sign a pledge card for lesbian, gay and transgender issues without explaining what transgender and bisexual is?"

Actually, you can explain it just fine, no matter how much you disapprove. Let me give it a shot; I taught in a religous elementary school for years, and I have an 8-year-old:

"You know how I explained about what gay and lesbian is? How some girls choose to be sweeties (or special friends, or make a life like Mommy and Daddy, or however you want to put it) with girls, and boys with boys? And how they might think that's right for them but we believe that's not what God wants for us? Well, some people believe that they have the choice to be special friends (etc.) with boys OR girls. And some people believe that even though they were born a girl, they want to live like a boy, or the other way around. In our family, we believe that that's wrong, and they should try to do things in a different way."

And then: "But even though they are making a choice that's against what God wants, it is NEVER RIGHT to say mean things to those people or to hurt their bodies. We can feel bad for them, and we can pray for them and hope God will help them to change what they're doing, but it is against the school rules to call them mean names or to hurt their bodies, just like it's against school rules to call ANYONE mean names or hurt ANYONE'S bodies."

How's that?

re: Separation of Church and State=Same Sex Marriage

Lula — Sun, 02 Nov 2008 17:32:21 GMT

Moviegirl: Jesus was a big anti-violence advocate. I would expect Christians to support children in pledging not to torture other children for any reason, including their perceived or real sexual orientation and gender identity. So I don't understand your fear of the anti-bullying pledge cards. No one's asking children to pledge to engage in homosexual or gender-bending activity, just not to torment other children who are thus perceived.

Bullying is not OK in your religion. Teachers have an obligation to promote anti-bullying measures in their classrooms, and children growing up in such a virulently homophobic society as ours learn very early to hurl "faggot" and "dyke" at those they want to hurt, regardless of what any given bullied child's sexual orientation actually is. And did I mention, bullying is not OK in your religion? Whatever your church may believe about homosexuality, I doubt it advocates overt bashing. If it does, I'd suggest the entire congregation take up Shannon's challenge to read the Bible, esp. the Gospels.

re: Separation of Church and State=Same Sex Marriage

Shannon LC Cate — Sun, 02 Nov 2008 14:32:51 GMT

moviegirl,

No one gave kindergarteners "gay pledge cards." The cards were part of an anti-bullying program and asked the children not to harass other children for a variety of reasons including sexual orientation. A great idea seeing as such bullying gets kids killed:

www.rememberinglawrence.org

Anti-bullying programs have no relationship to who can get married. They have similar programs here in Chicago where my legal, Canadian marriage is not recognized.

And I'm not sure why it is so hard for you to say "well honey, I know they told you in school that a man can marry a man, but our family doesn't believe that is the way God wants families to be made."

Look! I just wrote it and I don't even agree with it.

It's called PARENTING. How could someone with such strong religious beliefs really abdicate so much parental responsibility to the school system anyway? I have to tell my children every day that what other people do is their business, but in our family we do it differently--from solving problems with violence like they do all over our culture to being biologically related, which my adopted children are not.

And you still haven't answered me. Do you or do you not advocate slavery, polygamy and concubinage as the Bible does? Are you wearing single-fiber clothes?

Or are you picking and choosing a very obscure biblical passage as an excuse to support your fear and loathing of one of God's creations (ME)?

re: Separation of Church and State=Same Sex Marriage

moviegirl — Sun, 02 Nov 2008 03:56:44 GMT

Guess what...it has already started! Did you read about the teacher in California that passed out gay pledge cards out to her Kindergarten class? Google it, it just happened. So, don't tell me it won't happen. There is proof out there already.

If there is a LAW in place that says that a marriage is between a man and a woman then this would be illegal.

I have 2 issues with this pledge card that the teacher passed out;

#1. "How do you teach a 5-year-old to sign a pledge card for lesbian, gay and transgender issues without explaining what transgender and bisexual is?"

#2. I don't want public school teachers telling MY child that this is Ok, when it is NOT Ok in our religion. I am NOT judging you, I am just teaching my child, as a parent. Just as you teach your children is it OK to be gay.

I am not taking that away from you, so why do you insist to take my rights away from me?

Even though you don't agree with me, it is my religious RIGHT to teach my child whatever I feel is correct.

re: Separation of Church and State=Same Sex Marriage

Lula — Sat, 01 Nov 2008 13:38:23 GMT

Moviegirl, I can guarantee you that ministers and churches that refuse to marry same-sex couples won't be sued. If they can't be sued for refusing to marry interfaith couples (states don't care even if faiths do), they won't be sued for refusing to marry two men or two women. Why are you clinging to this in the face of perfectly good examples cited by several posters already?

In fact, churches will also not lose the power to defrock clergy who DO perform marriage for same-sex couples if such marriages become legal in all 50 states. Individual churches will retain their ability to discriminate at will, preach prejudice and hate, refuse to rent out their campgrounds for wedding parties where same-sex and unmarried couples will be staying overnight (an incident we experienced when trying to find a place to hold our wedding in 2004), and otherwise behave badly in my sight. I believe Jesus disapproves of such BS and will hold perpetrators accountable for their lack of love, but that's an issue way apart from lawsuits and other earthy concerns.

What *will* change is that none of this church-sanctioned bad behavior can touch the right of loving couples to make each other their legal next of kin through marriage. It won't matter if the marriage is officiated by a JoP, a clergyperson, a spiritual advisor, or someone ordained on the internet -- the marriage will be legal as long as it's officiated in accordance with the laws of the state where it's performed, and will be legally recognized everywhere in the U.S. just like mine is. All that will change is that it'll be illegal for states to refuse marriage to couples based on sex, just like it's now illegal for states to refuse marriage to based on race.

If you believe that would be a bad thing, then go ahead and vote Yes on Proposition 8. But do it knowing what you're voting for, and do it because you honestly believe that continued state-sanctioned discrimination (just like we had around interracial marriage) is better for the country than extending the right of marriage to same-sex couples. Quit hiding under the false fear that churches will be persecuted the way some so freely persecute those they believe to be "sinful" - which is why separation of church and state remains so vitally necessary in this country. I'll stay out of your church, and your church will kindly stay out of other people's marriages.