We had one of those amendments about one man/one woman type thing. I voted No but it still passed. Now all the elderly that couldn't marry so they could both get their SS checks are going to be in trouble. They were talking about that when I left home. Really smart. Cut your nose off to spite your face.
They said it was already illegal for same sex marrage in Florida anyway so I don't know why it was even on the ballot.
It was on the ballot because the zealots wanted to deprive gay families of any semblance or recognition.
All the fuss about CA's Proposition 8 is ironic. Even after Proposition 8, gay families in CA have more rights and privileges (and responsibilities) than do gay folks anywhere except MA.
Gay folks in FL are being stripped of their hard-earned status and other states are not even addressing the possibility of domestic partner ships.
We still do not have a Federal Employment Non-Discrimination Act. Many states (like Delaware) still sanction overt gay discrimination.
Prop 8 is a done deal in CA. The next step is in process - a petition to the CA Supreme Court to throw out the Proposition because it is a "revision" not an "amendment" to the Constitution (revisions can not be enacted by voter initiative). If that fails, then it's back to square one and a campaign to put another initiative on the ballot to repeal Proposition 8. (At this point, the gay activist community does not want to risk an appeal to the US Supreme Court). In Arkansas voters have approved a measure banning unmarried couples who are living together being adoptive or foster parents. So, no more gay couples providing foster home for unwanted AIDs babies.
The CA after-the-fact posturing on Prop 8 may feel good, but it accomplishes little - that rage needs to be converted to diligent and persistent outreach to the minority communities that tipped the scales against the initiative and to the churches that want to impose their morality on everybody.
der Brucer
