Prop 8 Yes

Another friend voicing his position!

On election night, when other states tune-in to see the results of Proposition 8, how will they see California? How will California regard marriage and how will California define the family? What will the purpose of marriage be in California and to whom will California extend the “right” and privilege to marry?

First, who has the “right” to marry? To answer this question, we must differentiate a “right” from a “right” for which we must qualify. For example, everyone has the “right” and opportunity to become a lawyer. However, one must qualify to be a lawyer. There are standards, qualifications, and hurdles. It is the only way the integrity of the profession can be protected. Now, we must acknowledge that some people in our society, because of no fault or failure of their own, do not have the physical, mental, or emotional capability of completing law school, passing the bar examination, and receiving the necessary credentials. Is the requisite of completing law school and passing the bar exam then bigotry? Does it create inequality? Is it unfair? For some of these people, it is their lifelong dream and passion to be a lawyer. The formal certification would bring them great happiness and give meaning to their life, yet we are still enforcing difficult and challenging requirements that prevent them from attaining their desire. Are these standards discriminatory? Is this unnecessary? Is this wrong? Are we hung up on the definition of a word that has no real impact? Are we taking away “rights?” Are we limiting “liberties?” Are we keeping good people from achieving the “happiness” only some can obtain? We also know the system isn’t perfect as many in the profession already fall short of performing as competent and honest lawyers. So, why not qualify everyone who wants to be lawyer? What difference will it really make? Quickly, we see the red flags and understand the consequences of such an idea. The definition DOES matter and the qualification must be ensured.

Similarly, everyone has the “right,” “freedom,” and opportunity to marry. However, one must also qualify to marry. There is a standard, a qualification, and a hurdle. It is the only way the integrity of the institution can be protected. A constitutional amendment limiting the union of marriage between one man and one woman does not take away that “right” or “freedom” from anybody. No “inequality” or “injustice” is created. If one is predisposed to same sex-attraction, we are not taking away his “right” to marry. We are simply limiting and reserving marriage to only those who properly qualify to marry. The integrity of marriage must be upheld and strengthened! We know not all heterosexual marriages and parents uphold the integrity of the commitment they’ve made, but the answer lies not in qualifying all and any, but in further strengthening the institution as it is (and demanding more and better from those already married).

Next, the “right” to marry must be given only when marrying a member of the opposite sex because of marriage’s unique purpose. Marriage is to provide an opportunity for a man and a woman to support and love each other and their children. To the child, marriage provides a stable foundation for support and love. Marriage unites the three core dimensions of parenthood – biological, social, and legal into one pro-child form. The unique characteristics of both mothers and fathers are crucial to the emotional, physical, and mental development of a child. Many would like to focus the Proposition 8 debate on the “rights” and “freedoms” of independent adults to practice marriage in the way they desire. However, we must focus the debate on the “rights” and “freedoms” of dependent children. We DO NOT have the “right” to tell one child they get two moms, another child they get two dads, and another child they get a mom and a dad. Every child has the “right” to a mom and dad! From the child’s point of view, Proposition 8 could not be more “fair,” more “necessary,” or more “right.” Proposition 8 is what will guarantee “equality for all.” Homosexual couples are extremely capable, intelligent, and caring. But, gender matters! Children have a need for both a mother and a father – the sexes are not interchangeable. Whatever a father can do a second mother CANNOT do. Whatever a mother can do, a second father CANNOT do. “Parents” DO NOT equal any two capable, loving adults. “Parents” equal a mom and a dad. We CANNOT equate that which is not equal.

Finally, we have inherited (and are fighting to maintain) the “right” to ‘life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.’ These "inalienable rights" often define what it means to be an American. However, we forget these freedoms are NOT without limitations. We must make and enforce laws to protect and preserve citizens from bringing undue harm upon themselves and/or others to protect the very “freedoms” and “rights” we enjoy. In that light, we must protect the “inalienable right” given to a child to have both a mom and a dad. And, we must protect the institution of marriage and uphold the most important and fundamental societal unit -- the family.

On election night, other states will see the results of Proposition 8 and California will say what our former President and Governor once said: “We will be as a city upon a hill!” California will be the example. California will stand up for marriage. California will support the family. California will give children both a mom and a dad. California will vote YES on Proposition 8!