Doni Greenberg.com

Comment on How to Solve the Prop 8 Problem by Morgan - Wed, 03 Dec 2008
Donovan, I refuse to allow my life to be governed by statistics. Just because something can happen doesn't mean it will or won't. Every individual situation is different. That's why it's called "freedom:" the freedom to decide what an individual wants, regardless of the what-ifs, the most-likelys, the maybe-or-nots. Furthermore, your point that only an estimated 11% of same sex couples were married when it was legal speaks perhaps to foresight before entering into binding legal contract. How many heterosexual couples aren't married but live together, have children together, or love each other enough to provide for the other in sickness and in health? Ultimately, there are bigger problems out there, and to spend the time, money, and energy fighting for and against equality is a sad statement of California's priorities. Think of how California's education system could have benefited from the $70 odd million that went into the respective Prop 8 campaigns. Tim, can we agree that every individual is allowed the right to pursue happiness without restricting someone else's? How does your neighbor's marriage, regardless of the genders, affect your ability to live your life as you see fit?

Comment on How to Solve the Prop 8 Problem by Donovan - Wed, 03 Dec 2008
Mr. Katz, Actually, (and sadly) Christians get divorced at about the same rate as non-Christians, which is around 50%. Yes, they divorce a lot. Regarding your comment about 89% of gays having faith in the California majority (which did vote FOR Prop 8, by the way, however slim people felt a 500,000-person margin was), my original point was when same-sex marriage became legal, even after years of being denied the right to marry, only an estimated 11% of same-sex couples ran out and got married. That indicates to me a lack of urgency for marriage on the part of same-sex couples. Granted, the same can be said about heterosexual couples nowadays, but it is legal for them to marry, so the urgency is really not there. In the face of prohibition, wouldn't a sense of urgency arise? Wouldn't same-sex couples literally fall over themselves to finally marry, if it were that important to them? In my opinion, marriage really isn't that important to homosexuals. I would further contend that the homosexual lifestyle is not borne from a desire to marry. Instead, promiscuity and experimentation has largely characterized homosexual behavior for centuries, whether it be in the Roman Empire or in the San Francisco bathhouses of the 1970s and 1980s. Regarding the stability of homosexual marriages, my original point was that homosexual marriage are more inherently unstable than heterosexual marriages, and this was in response to Ms. Balavage's contention that homosexual marriages are more stable. The numbers (even if they are estimations) spell it out. And, yes, married heterosexual couples are more likely to stay together than unmarried couples because marriage is both a legal commitment and (for many) a religious covenant. Without the commitment, it is easier to drift in and out of relationships because there is less at stake. In my opinion, though, if you put a heterosexual marriage alongside a homosexual marriage, the homosexual marriage will always be lacking in two ways: the inability to procreate in any way without technological assistance; and, the inherent incompatibility of physiology (if you understand my point). Oh, and a same-sex couple could never provide the balanced influence of a mother and a father; some may downplay this, but a heterosexual marriage is the only one that can provide such a balanced perspective on things.

Comment on How to Solve the Prop 8 Problem by Tim - Wed, 03 Dec 2008
In my opinion the greatest benefactors of same sex marriages would be lawyers. I am surprised homosexuals aren't talking about the negatives of this. If a couple are even going to live together long enough to be considered married legally then the partner with the most assets better have had a prenup written up and signed before this time. When there is a breakup it will be much more ugly with more violence and murders if a person will also be losing a large sum of money in association with the breakup. I am surprised that(apparently) so many homosexuals want this. Human nature is such that the grass looks greener on the other side. But usually isn't. Marriage is tough. Heterosexual marriage is necessary for a healthy society but it isn't easy. In the sixties marriage was portrayed as passe, overly restrictive, undesirable etc.. I don't understand why homosexuals would want it when they now have the rights of civil unions for the positive legal needs. If same sex marrige is legalized how long before polygamy is legalized. Regardind your quote of the Declaration of Independence you seem to indicate that the pursuit of happiness shouldn't have boundaries. To a pedifile not being able to molest kids would be a violation of his rights. I know my example is to the extreme but I think you get my point. I haven't studied the matter but I am pretty sure that at the time of the signing of the Declaration of Independance homosexuality was illegal, and the rights indicated by the Declaration of independance as they were originally intended would not have overthrown the law.