{"id":6541,"date":"2008-10-22T18:29:59","date_gmt":"2008-10-23T02:29:59","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/?p=6541"},"modified":"2008-10-22T18:29:59","modified_gmt":"2008-10-23T02:29:59","slug":"the-case-for-prop-8","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/?p=6541","title":{"rendered":"The Case For Prop 8"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><a href=\"http:\/\/www.thebulletin.us\/site\/index.cfm?newsid=20172852&amp;BRD=2737&amp;PAG=461&amp;dept_id=576361&amp;rfi=8\">Dennis Prager writes<\/a>:<\/p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>But even though California voters decided by a large margin to retain the man-woman definition of marriage, passing Proposition 8 will be a challenge.<\/p>\n<p>First, the attorney general of California, Jerry Brown, unilaterally renamed the proposition as it appears on California ballots. It had been listed as &quot;Amends the California Constitution to provide that only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.&quot; Mr. Brown, a liberal Democrat, changed the proposition&#8217;s wording to: &quot;Eliminates Right of Same-Sex Couples to Marry. Initiative Constitutional Amendment.&quot;<br \/>\nThe reason for this change is obvious &#8211; to make the proposition appear as a denial of a basic human and civil right.<\/p>\n<p>Marriage has never been regarded as a universal human or civil right. Loving and living with anyone one wants to live with are basic human rights. But marriage is actually a privilege that society bestows on whom it chooses. And even those who believe that any two unmarried people who want to get married should be given a marriage license should regard as wrong an attorney general changing a ballot proposition&#8217;s language to favor his own social views. What Mr. Brown did was attempt to manipulate people who lean toward preserving the definition of the most important social institution in society &#8211; people who have no desire whatsoever to hurt gays &#8211; to now think of themselves as bigots.<\/p>\n<p>According to Sacramento Bee columnist Margaret A. Bengs, &quot;a recent Field Poll analysis found&quot; that the new wording by Brown &quot;had a &#8216;striking&#8217; impact on those newly familiar with the measure, with a 23-point swing against it.&quot;<\/p>\n<p>What we have here is truly manipulative. Four justices create a right and then a sympathetic attorney general renames a proposition so as to protect a 4-month-old right that no one had ever voted to create.<\/p>\n<p>And the left accuses the right of imposing its values on society.<br \/>\nThe second hurdle for Proposition 8 is even greater: the multimillion dollar campaign to label proponents of Proposition 8 &quot;haters&quot; and to label the man-woman definition of marriage as &quot;hate.&quot; Or as they put it: &quot;Prop 8 = Prop Hate.&quot;<\/p>\n<p>It is apparently inconceivable to many of those who wish to change the definition of marriage that a decent person can want to retain the man-woman definition. From newspaper editorials to gay and other activist groups, the theme is universal &#8211; proponents of traditional marriage are haters, the moral equivalents of those who opposed racial equality. As the New York Times editorial on the subject put it, Proposition 8 is &quot;mean-spirited.&quot;<\/p>\n<p>But it is the charge of hate (along with bigotry, homophobia and intolerance) that is the primary charge leveled against supporters of Proposition 8. That&#8217;s why one major anti-Proposition 8 group is &quot;Californians Against Hate.&quot;<\/p>\n<p>Any honest outsider would see that virtually all the hate expressed concerning Proposition 8 comes from opponents of the proposition. While there are a few sick individuals who hate gay people, I have neither seen nor heard any hatred of gays expressed by proponents of Proposition 8. Not in my private life, not in my e-mail, not from callers on my radio show.<\/p>\n<p>It is the proponents of same-sex marriage who express nearly all the hate &#8211; because in fact many of them do hate, loudly and continuously. But hate in the name of love has a long pedigree. Why should our generation be different?<\/p>\n<p>These charges of &quot;hate&quot; against proponents of retaining the man-woman definition of marriage do not speak well for those who make them. I, for one, find it easy to believe that most opponents and most proponents of Proposition 8 are decent people. There are millions of decent people who think marriage should be redefined. I think they are wrong, but I do not question their decency.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Dennis Prager writes: But even though California voters decided by a large margin to retain the man-woman definition of marriage, passing Proposition 8 will be a challenge. First, the attorney general of California, Jerry Brown, unilaterally renamed the proposition as &hellip; <a href=\"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/?p=6541\">Continue reading <span class=\"meta-nav\">&rarr;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[26],"tags":[8063,29761,13729,13726,13728,13727],"class_list":["post-6541","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-homophobia","tag-california-constitution","tag-dennis-prager","tag-field-poll","tag-initiative-constitutional-amendment","tag-poll-analysis","tag-same-sex-couples"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6541","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=6541"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6541\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":6543,"href":"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6541\/revisions\/6543"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=6541"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=6541"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=6541"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}