Quantcast The State Hornet
College Media Network

Get macromedia Flash Player

Yes on Proposition 8, and here's why

Andrew McFadden

Issue date: 10/15/08 Section: Opinion
  • Print
  • Email
  • Page 1 of 1
This election season, Californians have many issues to consider and cast a vote on. Many of these measures stand to reshape the landscape of our culture, perhaps the greatest of which is Proposition 8, which hopes to ban gay marriage and put this issue to rest once and for all.

This is not the first time the state of California has seen this measure. In May of 2000, it appeared on ballots in the form of Prop 22 and passed when more than 4 million Californians voted and 61 percent of the vote wrote in our law books: "Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California." End of story.

Or so we thought. San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom has since then not only condoned the illegal activity of gay marriages taking place, but he encouraged others to go forward in this same illegal manor. Now if you will turn with me in your dictionary to the T's.., Tr's.., Tre's…, oh! There he is! Mayor Gavin Newsom's mug shot is right next to the word "treason." This whole situation could have been quickly resolved and the law upheld, but we saw shockingly little response from the powers that be when Newsom spit in the face of our democracy. Mr. Governator, care to comment? Mr. President, a call to action perhaps? But …nothing. Epic fail guys. Truly epic fail.

In May, the state Supreme Court completely ignored the will of those 4 million people and, as if our definition of marriage never existed, those seven justices donned the mantel of the legislative branch and rewrote the law books for us.

And now we have Prop 8. Yet another sink of time, money and energy that is necessary to defend ourselves from domestic terrorists.

Now, contrary to what you might believe, I in no way oppose gay rights. We all have freedoms and make decisions on how we live our lives, and if two people of the same sex are living and functioning together in a capacity similar to that of the traditional family, they should be accommodated in a similar fashion as well. However, marriage is not the appropriate vehicle to do this.

We need to strongly consider our First Amendment right, the freedom of religion, as well as the idea of separation of church and state. In recent history, separation of church and state has been discussed frequently and used as an argument to take any resemblance of religion out of our legal system. Despite the fact that this is a grave misuse from the concept's original intent, it is time we apply this idea appropriately.

Marriage wasn't created by a government agency; it is a holy union that was borrowed directly from religious establishments. For this reason the state should keep itself separate from the church and respect the fact that Christianity defines marriage as a union between a man and a woman. If this isn't sufficient for the people, then it is time to draft a new type of union that will not interfere with one's freedom of religion.

Vote yes on Prop 8 and send the message to our legislators that it is time for them to do their job: Draft a bill that will not infringe upon our rights and freedoms.

Andrew McFadden can be reached at amcfadden@statehornet.com
Page 1 of 1

Article Tools

Comments do not appear immediately.

Viewing Comments 1 - 10 of 65

Jeffrey I. Chang

posted 10/15/08 @ 12:56 AM PST

Clearly, Andrew McFadden did not finish his General ED's yet or failed them. Any relatively intelligent person would have realized that what the Judges did was exercise Judaical Review, "the idea that a constitution--which dictates the nature, functions, and limits of a government--is the supreme law. (Continued…)

Frank Loret de Mola

posted 10/15/08 @ 2:20 AM PST

Language. Language. Language.

The government should recognize "civil unions" between two people, regardless of gender, have that marker be used for all couples, so that all couples can get the same tax benefits. (Continued…)

Ross Archer

posted 10/15/08 @ 4:26 AM PST

Proposition 8 is illegal

Our Founders intended that the rights of individuals be determined by a Constitution, rather than ever by the whims of a popular vote. (Continued…)

(1 reply)   Details   Reply to this comment

Hornet Alum

posted 10/15/08 @ 7:38 AM PST

Um, no. Civil marriage in California - what Prop. 8 concerns - is the domain of a government agency. Religious marriage is another matter that will stay another matter - unaffected, and protected by the 1st Amendment and the language of the court ruling - regardless of whether Prop. (Continued…)

(1 reply)   Details   Reply to this comment

Scott Allen

posted 10/15/08 @ 12:01 PM PST

It's funny that people always attack the concept of judicial review when they disagree with a judicial decision. Right, wrong or indifferent, the job of courts is to make decisions above the political fray and regardless of public opinion. (Continued…)

joe

posted 10/15/08 @ 12:14 PM PST

Is this a satirical story or just really this bad?

"Mantel"? "Illegal manor"? No sources? Seriously I could write this in five minutes.

(1 reply)   Details   Reply to this comment

John Lowther

posted 10/15/08 @ 12:21 PM PST

AM,

How can you whine and complain about freedom of religion??? Last time I checked the U.S. Government had not picked out one specific religion that all Americans must follow(or in your case "obey"). (Continued…)

Kathleen

posted 10/15/08 @ 12:35 PM PST

You are right on target with this one! This proposition is designed to restore the decision that we Californians made in 2000 to define marriage as being between one man and one woman, which was so unjustly disregarded by 4 state Supreme Court justices. (Continued…)

(2 replies)   Details   Reply to this comment

Cullen Riggs

posted 10/15/08 @ 12:56 PM PST

I will have to disagree with you about the origin of marriage. If fact same-sex marriages were legal and quite common in ancient Rome. Marriage was not defined as strictly between a man and a women until the Theodosian Code from the Christian emperors Constantius and Constans which was passed 342AD. (Continued…)

(1 reply)   Details   Reply to this comment

Amy

posted 10/15/08 @ 1:12 PM PST

On this issue I am in complete agreement with Barack Obama, Joe Biden, and Bill and Hilary Clinton. I believe that people in same-sex unions are entitled to all of the same rights and civil liberties as heterosexual couples. (Continued…)

(1 reply)   Details   Reply to this comment

Post a Comment

  • NOTE: Email address will not be published

Type your comment below (html not allowed)

  I understand posting spam or other comments that are unrelated to this article will cause my comment to be flagged for deletion and possibly cause my IP address to be permanently banned from this server.

Get macromedia Flash Player

Advertisement

Print Edition

Online Features Section

Handling a breakup
Online Dating
Interview with Andrew Sean Greer
Hollywood Buzz No. 5 - The Oscar results
Hollywood Buzz No. 4 - The 81st Oscars
Sac in Stereo No. 19 - What makes a great singer?
Hollywood Buzz No. 4 - Classic Christmas Movies
Sac in Stereo No. 18 - Haven't I heard this song before?
Sexcapades No. 7 - Dating your co-worker or your boss
Hollywood Buzz No. 3 - Romantic Comedies
Sac in Stereo No. 17 - Eclectic additions for any record collection
Sexcapades No. 6 - Why men and women date
Sac in Stereo No. 16 - Dillinger Four CD review, worldwide Thriller dance, Prince's secret message
Sac in Stereo No. 15 - Mixtapes and D.Willz live in the studio
Sac in Stereo No. 14 - Soundtracks for the Obama and McCain campaigns
Hollywood Buzz No. 2 - Indie and DVD gems
Sac in Stereo No. 13 - Don't call it a comeback! Should Metallica, AC/DC, Journey and LL Cool J stay or go?
Hollywood Buzz No. 1 - Summer Blockbusters
Sac in Stereo No. 12 - We (almost) interview Kanye, Justin and Amy Winehouse
Sexcapades No. 5 - Going for home base on the first date; avoiding psychos
Sac in Stereo No. 11 - Turntablism v. mashups; Coachella recap
Sac in Stereo No. 10 - Mariah Carey: bigger than the Beatles?
Sac in Stereo No. 9 - Hip-hop meets rock culture; interview and freestlye with rapper D.Willz
Sac in Stereo No. 8 - The state of the Sacramento scene (with KWOD's Andy Hawk)
Sac in Stereo No. 7 - The most overrated artists
Sexcapades No. 4 - The safe Spring-Break hookup
Sac in Stereo No. 5 - Guilty pleasures from the CD bin
Celebrity Wrap-Up No. 3 - The ugliest, most drugged-up celebrities we love
Sac in Stereo No. 4 - The top artists to watch for in 2008
Sexcapades No. 3 - Sleeping together without staying together
Sac In Stereo No. 3 - The worst albums from our favorite artists
Celebrity Wrap-Up No. 2 - Who was hottest at the Oscars?
Sac in Stereo No. 2 - Is music more accessible in this generation?
Celebrity Wrap-Up No. 1 - Does Britney Spears smell; exploiting celebrities' children
Sac in Stereo No. 1 - Why form a side project? Can local musicians even make money?
Sexcapades No. 2 - Proper anal etiquette; watching porn as a couple
Reel Talk No. 7 - Oscarbation
Reel Talk: No. 6 - The dying drive-in
Sexcapades podcast: Hornet relationships and sex: No. 1
Reel Talk: Episode 5 - That annoying guy in the theater
Sex Ed(itors) - Episode 4: Mistakes women make in bed
Reel Talk: Episode 3 - Who's hot in film?
Sex Ed(itors): Episode 3 - Kinky relationships
Rapping with Kingspade's Johnny Richter
Sex Ed(itors): Episode 2 - Fetishes
Reel Talk: Episode 2 - Cult Classics
Reel Talk: Episode 1 - Summer movies
Sex Ed(itors) : Episode 1 - Oral Sex
Local reggae artists sound off
The Dimes to flip in for nooner
Jello to slide into Union Ballroom on Monday
Mayday Parade interview
Lovedrug interview
Red Jumpsuit Apparatus interview

Advertisement