Comments on: Report from California: Dialing for gay marriage

By: rick

rick — Wed, 05 Nov 2008 05:11:35 +0000

Those fucking religious assholes have won 100% against us . my partner and i are not celebrating Obama s victory-it is a sad day in the U.S.A. for all gay people !!!!!!!!!!!!!

By: Paul

Paul — Sun, 02 Nov 2008 08:49:12 +0000

Very interesting article, thanks!

I live in South Africa, where gay marriage is legal. In fact I got married a year ago to my husband, and it feels so right and good. If only everyone had the choice to marry, irrespective of their sexual preference.

Keep up the fight and good luck!

By: JohnM

JohnM — Sun, 02 Nov 2008 05:23:02 +0000

This just in from the No on 8 campaign, their new commerical will feature both Obama’s and Gov Arnold’s opposition to Prop 8.

This quote is from their latest e-mail:

“In response, we have been up all night crafting two strategies to set the record straight:

1) A new TV and radio ad highlighting Senator Obama’s firm opposition to Prop 8. It also echoes the chorus of opposition from California’s leaders — Governor Schwarzenegger, the California Teachers Association, Senator Feinstein and more.

2) Targeted automated calls to millions of voters from NBA legend Earvin “Magic” Johnson asking them to join him and Barack Obama in opposing Prop 8.”

By: lee

lee — Sun, 02 Nov 2008 02:38:56 +0000

Churches already limit who they marry without effecting tax status. Eg, to be marrid in a Catholic Church, most church’s will require prove that at least one party is catholic (via baptism certificate etc). Similiarly you can’t marry in a Catholic Church if you’ve already been married there once as they don’t recognise divorce. I don’t see how particular churches not conducting gay marriages would be any different.

By: DJinCan

DJinCan — Sat, 01 Nov 2008 06:51:38 +0000

Awesome article.
I work in a calling center and I can really relate to the warmhearted feelings after a good call. Doing it voluntarily though? Wow! You guys are amazing.
Good luck on NO on 8!

By: Pete

Pete — Fri, 31 Oct 2008 18:43:57 +0000

The high point of my three phone banking days in Sacramento was 75 year old Patricia who had cared for her elderly uncle for 15 years. He couldn’t afford the Power of Attorney for Health, so she had lots to tell me about being denied hospital visitation rights and being unable to discuss her uncle’s care with medical professionals. Her enthusiastic support of marriage for everyone was a great boost that still inspires my hope that Californians will deny Prop 8.

By: Todd

Todd — Fri, 31 Oct 2008 12:37:34 +0000

“What other argument could you possibly offer now?”

The same one because what you presented is not a solution but an alternative – but there are already alternatives, the problem I mentioned before is still there.

Also, that chosen person (if you can find one) is being appointed by the government as a deputized commissioner and is “[Family Code 401 (b)]..under the direction of the commissioner of civil marriages (county clerk) and shall perform other duties directed by the commissioner.” – in the example you gave for a fee.

Meanwhile, Family Code 402:
“In addition to the persons permitted to solemnize marriages under Section 400, a county may license officials of a nonprofit religious institution, whose articles of incorporation are registered
with the Secretary of State, to solemnize the marriages of persons
who are affiliated with or are members of the religious institution.
The licensee shall possess the degree of doctor of philosophy and must perform religious services or rites for the institution on a regular basis. The marriages shall be performed without fee to the parties.”

Part of Family Code 400:
“Marriage may be solemnized by any of the following who is of the age of 18 years or older:
(a) A priest, minister, rabbi, or authorized person of any religious denomination.”
(the rest stated in 400 are government related people like judges and such)

See how religion is being mixed in with a state matter? Why should religious officials and followers get specific treatment by the state? They should be treated like anyone else and if a marrying couple doesn’t want to use an official of the state to solemnize their marriage but some religious figure, then that religious figure should have to apply for a temp deputized commissioner status just like anyone else would have too do in their place not affiliated with any recognized nonprofit religious institution.

By: Jo

Jo — Fri, 31 Oct 2008 06:47:39 +0000

A very enjoyable read. Thank you for being an awesome volunteer.

For my part, I’ve supported the local No on 8 campaign, and I and several friends have hung “Yes on 8 = Yes on Hate” banners on the rear windshields of our cars.

By: Don

Don — Fri, 31 Oct 2008 06:25:11 +0000

A genuinely fantastic article. Two points. One, thank you to ALL the volunteers who have given their time, which is often more valuable than money. And, two, scandalized by the outright lies of the opposition, I want to thank you for yor integrity, Ms Davis. ( It was particularly horrific to hear that they try to manipulate a ‘yes’ vote as a ‘no’! ) I’m proud to know their are people like you whom are unwilling to deceive anyone for political gain. That is the America I know and in which I belive!

By: Todd

Todd — Fri, 31 Oct 2008 02:41:00 +0000

Even if Prop. 8 passes with voter approval the courts can still weigh in after on it’s constitutionality. That was proposed to the supreme court earlier but they declined to take it up before the election which they don’t usually do.