This to me is a non-issue. If you don't agree with marriage equality, don't marry someone of the same sex! As a school teacher, I don't ever recall reading/citing the words..."with liberty and justice for ALL" and seeing the word, "except". Separate but equal does not, has not and should not work. We can not "eenie meenie miney moe" through our neighborhoods and point to who is allowed marriage or not. As a christian and American, I am for equality, love, and acceptance to all human life. God bless, Stephanie

I'm going to bet that Prop 8 will pass by a wider margin than the polls can account for. I still remember that happening with Prop 22, and I think 8 will fly for the same reasons. Deep down, a lot of people don't like gay people. (I'm AGAINST 8, by the way). Gay people make them feel "uncomfortable." They know (again, deep down) that voting to curtail gay people's rights is mean, and don't want people (even a pollster) to think that they're mean, so they'll tell people they will vote against 8 when they have every intention of voting FOR 8.
It's sad, but it has happened before, here in California - and I really don't think we've advanced THAT much.

I really don't understand how gay marriage is a threat to any marriage anyway. I have been happily married for nearly 18 years and never felt threatened by anyone else. Our vows are the only ones we need to live by. We Let everyone else take care of their own.
Maybe it's just me but I don't think "Jack & John" or "Jill & Jane" getting married will take away from the love and honor my husband and I feel for each other.

In regards to prop 8, Wanda Sykes said it best:
Gay people don't threaten marriage, divorce threatens marriage!!!!!!!!

Marriage should ONLY be between a man and a woman. When we destroy the fundamental unit of society we will fall apart as a nation. We need to protect the family. Vote YES on Proposition 8!

Same-sex unions are entitled to the same rights under domestic partnership statute. Marriage is inherently between a man and woman, by any other definition it would fail to be such. Furthermore, this is not about "second-class" citizenship or discrimination, or "separate but equal" clauses--the homosexual lifestyle is a choice; in contrast, a black man does not choose to be black, this is who he is. If you choose to lead a homosexual lifestyle, law entitles you to the same rights that correspond to marriage between members of the opposite sex. However, this is not marriage, nor should it be defined as such. Prop 8 only serves to define and clarify this. Marriage between a man and woman is the fundamental building block of society and should be protected and upheld.

The ProtectMarriage campaign has been hiding a dirty secret.

http://web.archive.org/web/20060508183535/www.protectmarriage.com/index.aspx?protect=FAQ

This is the FAQ of the website as it appeared in late 2006, when it tried to push for a ballot initiative that would be the predecessor to what is now Proposition 8.

The original wording for the amendment would have been:

“A marriage between a man and a woman is the only legal union
that shall be valid or recognized in this state."

Here's bullet points 6 and 7:

"6. Would the ProtectMarriage Amendment allow “homosexual marriage by a different name”?

Answer: No. By recognizing marriage between a man and a woman as the only legal union in California , this amendment would prevent any law from recognizing, or giving rights on the basis of, other personal relationships that attempt to imitate marriage, such as homosexual “domestic partnerships” or “civil unions.”

7. Would the ProtectMarriage Amendment allow the Legislature to give, or require private employers to give, the legal rights and benefits of married spouses to other relationships, such as “domestic partnerships”?

Answer: No. Since marriage would be the only legal union that may be recognized under the ProtectMarriage Amendment, no other adult relationships that attempt to imitate marriage could be legally recognized. Since no other type of intimate union would be legally recognized, it logically follows that there would also be no basis upon which to confer rights, benefits, or obligations on such un-recognized relationships."

Well, well, the true colors of the ProtectMarriage campaign are revealed. Clearly, they never intended to allow equal rights for same-sex couples AT ALL, even under domestic partnerships!

This completely undermines one of their biggest arguments: "no rights will be taken away from same-sex couples!" It was their every intention to eliminate rights!

The whole "Won't someone please think of the children" & "Protect the family" statements are just a distraction from the real issue. Children do not care. And the ones that do, are kind and open minded, unless their parents have made up their minds for them.

And a fact that is never mentioned by the "save the children" people is some of their children are gay. I would like to know what they plan to do with those kids. Do we still save them? Or do we only "protect" the straight children? Where is the line. People are what they are, this goes for children. Some are straight and some are gay. This is not an issue of course until they are older, but it is what it is, and we are who we are.

Not that long ago discriminating against black people was going to protect our families and save our nation. We learn nothing.

My heart breaks for any gay young person who has a "save the children" parent. I am straight, married for over 12 years and have a young son. Preventing gay people from being married does not effect my family at all. Nothing changes, other then the fact that my son is kind and loving to all, black, white, straight, gay, tall or short. All children are... unless raised otherwise.

And the "It's against God's word" argument, please stop and think. Does God love a gay person any less then he loves you? No. Are Christians suppose to live their lives as Jesus would? Yes. Would Jesus march in front of the courthouse with a yes on prop 8 sign. No. Would Jesus judge others? No. Are you?