![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
I viewed the results of the presidential race with a mixture of happiness and sheer relief. I believe in Obama as a candidate, but these last few months, even over that, the thought of Sarah Palin in the Whitehouse scared the shit out of me.
But aside from that.
Prop 8.
As of the time I write this, according to CBSNews.com, 24898 of 25429 precincts have reported their votes. It's ... still close. That means there's still a SLIM chance. But I know better than to get my hopes up. Right now, 52% of the votes that have been tallied are "yes" votes. That means, 52% of the voting population let lies and scare tactics persuade them into legalizing discrimination. Into writing discrimination into the constitution.
Come on, California. I thought you were better than that.
I've always loved my state. I've always been proud to live here. Right now - not so much.
But aside from that.
Prop 8.
As of the time I write this, according to CBSNews.com, 24898 of 25429 precincts have reported their votes. It's ... still close. That means there's still a SLIM chance. But I know better than to get my hopes up. Right now, 52% of the votes that have been tallied are "yes" votes. That means, 52% of the voting population let lies and scare tactics persuade them into legalizing discrimination. Into writing discrimination into the constitution.
Come on, California. I thought you were better than that.
I've always loved my state. I've always been proud to live here. Right now - not so much.
no subject
Date: 2008-11-05 07:25 pm (UTC)I am profoundly sad that California, a state that so often leads the nation in progressive issues, took a huge leap backward on this one. I can only hope that things will change in the future.
no subject
Date: 2008-11-14 03:56 am (UTC)Had the public voted, 60+ years ago, to allow a marriage between a Latina American and an African American instead of the courts ruling; the majority would have likely voted against the marriage. Why? Because they didn't see it as the discrimination it was...Just as today, many do not see that taking away a basic right such a marriage between two people is discriminatory...
Rewriting the constitution to take away peoples rights instead of insuring that those rights are protected.
It is frustrating.
Grrrr.
no subject
Date: 2008-11-14 05:40 am (UTC)No. No, they couldn't have. Nobody has sued the Catholic church for refusing to marry non-Catholics, and nobody could have sued over this. Then it went on:
Which is such a complete fabrication that I struggle to find a place to start.
Someone responded to that with this:
Which pretty much nails it.
It's sad. I hope this gets overturned.