Gunderman 1 Kayla Gunderman Government 5 8 December 2009 Californias Proposition 8 In the 2008 general election, the State of California

included a ballot measure entitled Proposition 8. Prop. 8 was a voter initiative put up to add to the state constitution 14 simple words. Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California. A Yes vote on the measure meant the voter agreed that only marriage between a man and a woman is valid, and that it should be written into the states constitution as so. A No vote meant the voter believes that gender should not prohibit a couple from receiving a marriage license, and it would result in no change to the constitution. Prop. 8 passed with 7,001,084 (52.3%) Yes votes and 6,401,482 (47.7%) No votes. I voted, No. The title text for Prop. 8 in Californias Statement of Vote for the 2008 general election is, Proposition 8 Eliminates Right of Same-Sex Couples to Marry. Thats exactly what it did; it took away the rights of certain citizens. I think that simple summary statement, given by the State of California, should be all the reasoning needed to deem Prop. 8 unconstitutional. Anything that eliminates any rights from any U.S. citizen goes against the 14th amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which explicitly states, No State shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States That is obviously what happened with Prop. 8. The official title of Prop. 8 is the California Marriage Protection Act Now, to that, I pose the question; what is it protecting marriage

Gunderman 2 from? What consequences does allowing gay marriage have? Besides, of course, same-sex couples getting married. As far as I knownone. The most vocal proponents of Prop. 8 are those that represent religious groups. They believe that same-sex marriage is unnatural and a sin, so they think it should not be allowed. They say that marriage should only be between a man and a woman and that domestic partnerships grant equal rights to same-sex couples, so they shouldnt need to get married. That kind of statement reminds me of the Jim Crow laws that were in effect in the south during the civil rights movement of the 1960s. Those laws made segregation legal as long as the facilities were of equal quality. In most cases, things were not equal. I dont think same-sex couples desire to get married stems completely from the legal rights involved. I think that its simply a traditional idea, that when you want to be in a relationship with someone long term, you should get married. If you really think about it, what would happen if you told an opposite-sex couple that they would have the same legal rights in a domestic partnership as in a marriage, how many of those couples do you think would choose to go the domestic partnership route instead? My guess is very few. So my argument to those is favor of Prop. 8 is that its not so much about the law, but about the idea of being married. There are also those in religious groups that argue that marriage is a sacred union recognized by God. Now, that may be true, but not all people are religious, and those that are can differ greatly in their beliefs. That is why I think the religion argument is invalid. Also, is marriage really much of a sacred union anymore? To some people, it definitely is, but there are also many people that get married for stupid or even illegal reasons. For example, a couple getting married while intoxicated. They obviously arent in the right frame of mind to realize what they are doing. Then there are some people

Gunderman 3 that get married simply to be allowed to live in the United States; those are sometimes called green card marriages and are punishable by deportation for the non-citizen and a fine and/or federal prison sentence for the U.S. citizen. That closes my argument against the supporters of Prop. 8. Those that disagree with Prop. 8 argue that it is simply unfair and wrong. I agree that it is unfair and wrong, and I argue that, in addition to that, it is unconstitutional. Why should only opposite-sex couples have the right to marry? The way I see it, its nobodys business who a person decides they want to marry. Maybe Im just a silly romantic, but I personally believe that marriage should be about love, and wanting to spend the rest of your life with someone, it shouldnt matter the gender of the person you choose. The United States Constitution and more specifically, the 14th Amendment says that it is unconstitutional and unlawful for a state to take away any natural rights of its citizens. The summary wording on the ballot itself says that Prop. 8 Eliminates Right Those two words should say it all. It eliminates the rights of citizens of the State of California and the United States and therefore is unconstitutional. Unfortunately, neither the majority of California voters, nor the California Supreme Court saw it that way. On May 26, 2009, the California Supreme Court rejected the challenges to Prop. 8, but ruled that existing marriages of same-sex couples would remain valid. That decision was bittersweet for those same-sex couples that had the opportunity to get married before the vote to pass Prop. 8 went through. It was seen as a partial victory for the opposition to Prop. 8 because the validity of existing same-sex marriages wasnt overturned, but it still upheld the decision to define marriage in California as between a man and a woman only.

Gunderman 4 I dont believe that those in favor of gay marriage will rest until those rights are restored, not only in California, but in every state. I believe that anyone should be able to get married if they want to. Not all people or couples are well-suited for marriage, obviously, but I still think that they should be able to decide for themselves whether or not to get married. If its a mistake, they will learn, and if not, they will hopefully be happy. The government should have no right to interfere in something like marriage. Marriage should be something to be happy about, not something that people argue over.