Not sure what you meant here- remember a “yes” vote is for traditional marriage between a man and woman exclusively-
–
I didn’t misspeak. I’m planning (as of now) to vote no on proposition 8.
I see being pro-8 as NOT “anti-gay”, but as in favor of retaining our rights to advocate marriage between a man and woman.
Just as I see being anti-8 as NOT “pro-gay”, but as in favor of equal rights. I am not convinced that 1st amendment rights extend to us in forcing other people (not of our faith) to recognize the Catholic standard of what is sanctioned by God and what isn’t.
I am concerned that lawsuits will be brought (it’s only a matter of time) attempting to compel, for example, the Catholic church, to perform gay marriages, which of course they will not.
Again, besides personal conjecture, what evidence do you have that such is going to happen? Even the supreme court ruling that repealed the “one man one woman” law here in California explicitly stated that churches as well as independent self-contractors will not be obliged to forego their religious morality.
What will happen then? You would have the Catholic church then taking a position that is seen as legally “discriminatory”. It would legally be similar for the church to refuse to perform, say, inter-racial marriages for example.
No, not at all. The LDS church practice ecclesiastical racism up until 1978 (well pass the onset of the Civil Rights Movement) and they were NEVER sued for marrying White Mormons in their temples and not Black Mormons, nor were they ever at pain of losing tax exemption. I believe racial anti-discrimination laws have been in existence much longer than sexual orientation anti-discrimination laws, hence I see nothing to fear. Remember, the 1st amendment still guarantees that people can freely practice their religion. Technically speaking the KKK is classified as an ecclesiastical organization (i.e. a church) and yet they are still in existence despite the secular law.
You would also see gay marriage taught in schools, etc.
You may or may not see gay marriage taught in schools, yet this has absolutely nothing to do with the state of marriage for gay couples.
Cirricula in public schools is determined by school boards, which are locally elected officials. Having lived in California my entire life, I can testify to the fact that tolerance for gay couples has been taught in public schools since before there was even a legal recognition of such relationships demonstrating that the state of the law has no bearing on what is taught in schools.
If you want to ensure that the sensitivites of marriage are not touched base on in schools, then correspond with your school boards. Exercise your power as the electorate, and if they fail to live up to your standards, vote the incumbents out come next election.
