SEARCH
Nurses Rally to Support Marriage Equality in California |
|
 |
|
Members of the California Nurses Association/National Nurses Organizing Committee (CNA/NNOC) joined several thousand LGBT, civil rights, labor, community and religious activists in San Francisco in recent days in a demonstration calling for marriage equality.
Along with the San Francisco rally, tens of thousands of people took part in rallies backing equal marriage rights for all and protesting the Nov. 4 passage of Prop. 8 in California, which bans lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) couples from the right to marry.
According to the Los Angeles Times, civil rights groups, religious organizations and local governments have filed six lawsuits asking the California Supreme Court to declare the measure an illegal constitutional revision.
Pride At Work, the AFL-CIO’s LGBT constituency group, the CNA/NNOC, California Teachers Association (CTA), California Federation of Labor, United Farm Workers (UFW), the League of Women Voters and the California NAACP were part of the large coalition that mobilized opposition to Prop. 8.
6 Comments
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
in my opinion the congress shall approve follwing
bailout the AUTO workers to safe 3000000 jobs
congress shall pass the 61mill to create more jobs and improve the economic condition and wall street as stated by obama
it is a complicated issue if poeple work pay taxes to IRS and IRS collects taxes as source of revenue
This is ridicules,I do not personally care if gays marry or not,but the people of California voted this issue down.This is a democracy.The majority of the people have spoken.Go home lick your wounds and try again the next time.What kind of country would we have if every time an election went against we marched in the streets in protest.This is not the way to change things,you will only make people like me, that do not have a solid position on issues like this form one,and I do not like people protesting issues decided fairly by the public in the polling place.
While I would generally agree with your sentiments on popular elections, I find it hard to justify voting AWAY people’s rights. What if a majority of people voted to make inter-racial marriage illegal? What if a majority of people voted to take away the right of women to vote? Would this be acceptable? There needs to be protections for the rights of “minority” groups.
Also, the way the campaign in support of Prop 8 (against marriage equality) was run raises many questions about church and state. The Mormon church raised a lot of money the campaign. In my honest opinion it should be treated as any other political advocacy group if it is taking part in the political process. There is supposed to be separation of church and state. This was set up deliberately to keep the state out of the business of the church and conversely to keep the church out of the business of the state. The lines here have not just been blurred, but erased.
Also, as a democracy, those who are upset with the results of this election can assembly for a redress of grievances. If activists and supporters of marriage equality are going to mount a campaign to hold an election to overturn Prop 8, then starting with demonstrations and education now is the best approach. Run a campaign for a full year rather than for a few months before the election.
Anyway, these are just my opinions.
I agree with NJUnionist. To vote away the rights of a minority is wrong. We as a country pride ourselves as a country of “rights and freedoms”. When there is something that my religion does not believe in that comes up in my life; I simply do not do it, but I would never dictate in any form that “all” people should follow what my religion tells me to do.
We must understand that adults can decide what other adults they want to spend their life with. Why should they be denied a “right” just because a particular religion does not like it. That church has no right at all to lay their beliefs at the feet of all Americans and say “You must believe as we believe!”. In the end…if you don’t like it, then don’t do it. I applaud the brave and open heart of the Nurses Union and its members!
A more fundamental question that should be addressed with these supposed “public initiatives” is the money that comes from outside the state to push for one side or the other. People are also brought in from out of state to do signature gathering to get the initiatives on the ballot in the first place. The initiative process serves a noble purpose, to allow the citizenry to make law directly, but too often it is abused by out-of-state interests. States with initiative processes should ban money from outside the state and require that signature gatherers be paid by the hour (not by the signature) and be residents of the State.
First of all, marriage is a legal issue. A couple can get married in a court house, a church, or under a spreading Chestnut tree. In each of those examples, a marriage occurs.
Heterosexuals who oppose same sex marriage seem to be talking out of both sides of their faces. They argue that sanctity of marriage is at stake. Huh? 50% of the marriages between men and women end in divorce. That’s sanctity?
Over the years the US has done some pretty awful things. Our nation has a history of denying people their civil rights. Change only came after people struggled – and died – in the pursuit of [partial] justice.
People were burned at the stake after being accused of “heresy”. Women were denied voting rights. Native Americans were herded into reservations. The Chinese Exclusion Act was voted into law. African Americans were enslaved. Land belonging to the peoples of Hawaii and of Mexico was stolen at gunpoint. Japanese were interred.
Years later, the US government apologized for those atrocities. Oh nice. Real nice. We said we were sorry. We said we were sorry for denying people their civil and political rights. Such a deal!
[Some] religion is sticking its nose into our civil rights! I am straight, and I know that civil rights belong to all of us. We must, therefore, protect everyone’s civil rights. If we do not, it may well be our civil rights that are the next to go. Churches have no business interfering in where or to whom I get married. If I were to choose a horse pasture for the ceremony that would be my choice…my civil right. If a particular church or religion wants to practice exclusion, they are free to do so. Hell, I wouldn’t be allowed to get married in some churches anyway. (And I wouldn’t if I could. That’s my civil right.)
So all you homophobes and/or religious fanatics, here’s the deal. You keep your noses out of the civil rights of others, and they will do the same for you. It’s called peaceful coexistence.
Lastly, “civil unions” are not the same as marriage. If gay people want to get married, “civil unions” are not the answer. Marriage is the answer. “Separate but equal” malarkey got tossed when the US Supreme Court handed down its decision in Brown v. Board of Education. The decision applies to everyone…straight, gay, religious, agnostic, black, white, landowner or not, Republicans, Democrats, Socialists, pagans and the pious.
When some in society become willing to sacrifice the rights of others, who will they call when it is their rights that are on the line?