PROP 8 MAY GET TO STAY BUT THE POINT WAS LOST ALONG THE WAY

While the California Supreme Court upheld the Prop 8 standing thus ending future same sex marriages, what it did by affirming the 18,000 marriages that existed is to make the state a same sex marriage state, regardless whether more take place. Since the whole argument revolved over the word "marriage" as opposed to having the same legal rights in all capacities except the word "marriage" the fact that 18,000 such marriages exist and will continue to exist makes Prop 8 supporters the winners and losers at the same time. Granted the whole campaign was a smear of confusion and half-truths on both sides, and granted that playing on the public fear of some wildly flamboyant education on the merits of gay, lesbian and transgender history taught in the classroom was a master stroke of negative PR, the fact remains through all the angst, anger, protests, not to forget millions spent in promoting both sides of the debate the end result was not much different than bitterly contested custody disputes in the state; joint custody. Without endorsing a side, I am more amazed at the energy that people put in to public policy that invades the privacy of the individual, in this case a sexual orientation. That individuals should be able to be so riled over a word "marriage" to the extent of denying others the same rights they enjoy and inflict their views in this manner is illogical given the spate of things that lurk unwanted in our society. Why not tackle something more invasive like crime, pedophiles or high school dropouts? Perhaps we should ban the word "dropout" in the hope that it does something to change the reality of the current situation. Perhpas we should spend less time and money worrying about the pain death row inmates might feel upon execution. I felt the same way about the abortion/pro-life battles that at one point extended to doctors being shot because they agreed to perform the procedure. What kind of insanity exists in a country built upon freedoms, regardless of their validity, when one group is happily shooting another group in the name of God because it conflicts with their view on life?  It is not about what is right or wrong but rather about your right to inflict your way upon others just because you believe it. We are very good at throwing terminology out like a shield. Terms like "conservative values" or "liberal whackos" and so on. These are not absolutes; neither are they shields to be used to protect others from our own fearful ignorance. Perhaps that is a better question for this nation. For if we have the right to judge others then we certainly should expect that at some point we will be judged with the same level of absolutism and righteousness as we have seen during the above two mentioned issues.   I feel sorry for both sides of the gay marriage issue. The rights of people to exist in peace and with freedom of choice in this country are paramount to the foundation of the principles of democracy. Just like there is no such thing as being slightly pregnant, there is no such thing as partial freedoms. What this whole exercise showed is more our puritanical foundations based on absolutes and fears than a measure of pride at a society based on equality and freedom, regardless what you do in the bedroom. And at the end of the day, California is a same sex marriage state, at least for 18,000 people who said "I do" and nothing will change that. Read the ruling HERE. MisterWriter