Ellen Equates Support for Prop 8 as ‘Hate’

Ellen Degeneres, appearing on the Tonight Show with Jay Leno Monday, voiced her opposition to California’s Proposition 8 by saying financial contributors supporting a ‘yes’ vote on the measure “don’t need to promote hate.”

“There’s a lot of people raising millions of dollars. They are trying to take this away from us and trying to stop gay people from marrying…,” Degeneres said. “I look at the people that are losing their homes and that are foreclosing, and people in Texas that have lost their homes. There are so many people that need money right now and if you are raising money right now, and if you are raising millions of dollars, give it to those people right now because you don’t need to promote hate.”

Proposition 8, as defined by the Yes on 8 campaign, places into the California Constitution the same language that voters already passed by 61% of the vote in 2000. This is necessary to overturn an outrageous California Supreme Court decision that overturned Proposition 22, supporters say.

Although gay activists and opponents to Prop 8 have used terms such as “homophobia” in describing supporters of traditional marriage, the Yes on 8 campaign’s website, ProtectMarriage.com states otherwise:

Proposition 8 is about preserving marriage; it’s not an attack on the gay lifestyle. Proposition 8 doesn’t take away any rights or benefits of gay or lesbian domestic partnerships. Under California law, “domestic partners shall have the same rights, protections, and benefits” as married spouses. (Family Code § 297.5.) There are NO exceptions. Proposition 8 WILL NOT change this.

Protect Marriage: About Prop 8

Proposition 8 is simple and straightforward. It contains the same 14 words that were previously approved in 2000 by over 61% of California voters: “Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.”

Because four activist judges in San Francisco wrongly overturned the people’s vote, we need to pass this measure as a constitutional amendment to restore the definition of marriage as between a man and a woman.

Jay Leno also voiced frustration as to why people would be against gay marriages, saying he visits West Hollywood frequently and that “it’s the nicest area, the cleanest area, the safest area.”

“I don’t get it,” Leno said. “If two people want to do something together…”

Degeneres and Leno on California’s Prop 8

DIGG!

_______________

Other Blogs:

Gay marriage: California parents beware
Massachusetts second graders
Gay Marriage Certain To Impact California Education
Pro-Marriage, Not Anti-Gay
Ellen Equates Support for Prop 8 as ‘Hate’
California’s Slithering ‘No’ Campaign
What same-sex “marriage” has done to Massachusetts
Marriage Prop Opponents Talk the Talk, Don’t Walk the Walk, on Equality and Tolerance
School Holds Surprise “Gay” Day for Kindergartners
The Asymmetric Case for CA Prop 8 – Protecting Traditional Marriage
Coming Out for Kids
Why Preserve Man-Woman Marriage

UPDATES AFTER PASSING OF PROP 8

Ellen DeGeneres ‘saddened beyond belief’ at California’s narrowly passed ban on same-sex marriage

Examiner.com:

Ellen DeGeneres is not alone in mourning the passage of Californian’s Proposition 8, an initiative that would change the state’s constitution to require that marriage is between a man and a woman. The City and County of San Francisco, the City of Los Angeles and the County of Santa Clara have sued to invalidate Proposition 8.

Obama Behind the 8 Ball?

Prop 8’s Pink Elephant in the Room

How ‘gay rights’ is being sold to America

Misguided Activism

29 thoughts on “Ellen Equates Support for Prop 8 as ‘Hate’

  1. @Robert…duped how?

    I read your “letter” from the link you provided. A: It appears bogus and is not promoted or associated by or with the Yes on 8 campaign. B: Whatever “reverand” that is who allegedly wrote the piece has a faulty idea of scripture.

  2. Marriage is ordained by God as between a man and a woman.

    People caught up in that lifestyle already have their domestic partners rights, protections, and benefits as married spouses…as stated previously.

    People pushing that agenda need to leave this God ordained institution of Holy Matrimony alone. It’s an agenda to force people to accept that lifestyle as morally acceptable..which clearly stated in Scripture it is not. No bashing here..no hatred….just stating the facts.
    Jesus died for all sins….homosexual sins and sins of heterosexuals.

  3. Calling it “hate” doesn’t make it hate. Caring people are studying the issue and discovering that same-sex couples will continue to have the same rights as traditional married couples if prop 8 passes. They are becoming aware of real litigation and examples trying to limit parental rights and freedom of speech and religion. There are good people who are concerned about the increase in children being raised without a father or a mother and the detriment that will be to the family as the basic unit of society. It’s not about hurting feelings. Sorry, Ellen — it’s not really all about you.

  4. people need to understand that marriage is a civil and societal institution, not a religious one. if it were religious, no one would receive tax ride-offs.

    i agree with ellen to an extent. for a lot of people it is from a point of hate. i say this about the people who have flipped me off, thrown soda at me, exposed themselves to me, sexual harassed me, called me a “fucking faggot,” called me a “dyke,” etc etc.
    you can’t say this is about hate or not about hate. everyone’s different.

    also, marriage is good for the economy. we definitely need this. countries that tend to not give equal rights to everyone aren’t doing as well as countries that do.

    i also want to question what about marriage is being protected. there is nothing to protect. you want to protect a 55 hour marriage over a lifelong gay marriage solely due to the sexes and genders and the parties involved? i’m sorry, but that’s ridiculous. massachusetts, a state with legal gay marriage as we know, has one of the lowest divorce rates in all of the united states. i would rather defend that. i would rather defend basic human rights.
    the purpose of the government is to protect its people, not permit those who are afraid of change to suppress those begging for it.

    all in all, i’m voting no on 8.

    p.s. i’m a christian.
    society changes. get used to it.

  5. From the Holy Bible:
    Genesis 2:24 – “For this reason a man shall leave his father and his mother, and be joined to his wife; and they shall become one flesh.”

    With all due respect, Aleeza, marriage is God ordained. God created life as we know it. There would be no people to get married if God hadn’t created life.

    Also, being a “Christian” and simultaneously practicing homosexuality do not go together…you can repent though. If you never repented of this, you were never truly a Christian.
    1 Corinthians 6:9-11

    And here’s what’s really going on in Massachusetts: http://www.massresistance.org/docs/marriage/effects_of_ssm.html

  6. The California Teacher’s Association (CTA) donated $250,000 to the No on Prop 8 campaign in August. They recently donated an additional $1 million, making them the largest institutional donor. They did this even though our schools are struggling for every dollar to educate our children. Please join with Californians everywhere in protest by joining a donation blitz to the Yes on 8 campaign. If only half of the 600,000 people who already donated money gave an additional $10, we would raise $3 million and effectively negate the CTA’s efforts. Imagine what would happen if they donated $20 each. Or $100? To donate, go to http://protectmarriage.com/ and follow the link Donate Now.

  7. It is amazing that the hate label sticks to us when we actually take a live and let live approach to gays. We just don’t like it when they shove their agenda down our throats.

    If you want to disarm the liberals, just point out that if homosexuality could be detected in utero that you would be against those abortions, and ask them if they would agree to make those abortions illegal.

    I have yet to find a heterosexual liberal who doesn’t love abortion rights more than gays. So this argument is a great way to make them squirm and to point out how ridiculous it is for them to label you as a homophobe. After all, they think it should be legal to destroy gays in the womb (even hypothetically) while you think they should be protected.

    The most I’ve ever seen them say in response is that I’m against all abortions, so specific protections for gays isn’t meaningful. But I point out that if this was the only restriction made that I’d favor it.

    It also forces them to reconsider their pro-abortion views, because it points out how the unborn are real human beings. That is one reason they fight any exceptions, even for gender selection abortions. They know that once you concede the humanity of the unborn for any reason then other abortions wouldn’t be justified.

  8. “If you want to disarm the liberals, just point out that if homosexuality could be detected in utero that you would be against those abortions, and ask them if they would agree to make those abortions illegal.”

    Not at all. I, a liberal, would agree to make any abortion illegal that was based on arbitrary criteria. In my book, the only times abortion is acceptable is when medically necessary or when done so early in the pregnancy that it is only cells.

    And no one is ‘pro abortion’. No one looks at a baby and says “Shoot, that could have been aborted!”.

    Giving gays the ability to be married does not shove anything down your throat.

  9. “done so early in the pregnancy that it is only cells.”

    I don’t follow that. They are the cells of a unique human being. By that definition you and I are “only cells,” albeit a few more. The value of human life is not dependent on our size.

    Obama is pro-abortion. Among other things, he wants to repeal the Hyde Amendment so taxpayers would have to fund abortions, thus taking away their “choice” to participate in the process.

    P.S. The truth sounds like hate to those that hate the truth.

  10. Then you do know that over half of normal pregnancies end in spontaneous abortion, correct? When only cells in the first few weeks, more than half are miscarried naturally.

    Does this mean that your god designed women to be mass murderers without a choice?

  11. Although we often don’t know why tragedies happen, I believe deep down inside, you know your question, Does this mean that your god designed women to be mass murderers without a choice? is just a mean-spirited attempt at a rebuttal, because it makes no sense at all.

  12. It makes complete sense.

    Neil has stated that a human being is a human being, whether cellular or not.

    I assume he also believes that his god created and designed human beings.

    If it is a scientific fact that more than 50% of fertilized eggs are miscarried, then it follows that his god designed humans so that more than 50% of human lives are killed in the uterus. Under no control from anyone. Other than your god, of course, if it existed.

  13. “Neil has stated that a human being is a human being, whether cellular or not.”

    I just stated what secular embryology textbooks will tell you: That a unique human being is created at conception. Human embryo ==> human fetus ==> human baby ==> human teen ==> etc. So are you really interested in what science has to say on the topic?

    Perhaps you could tell us the precise amount of cells required before you recognize the humanity of a human being? Remember, wherever you draw the line there is murder on one side and a benign or even positive “right” on the other.

    Re. “mass murderers” – You don’t think there is a distinction between a woman who has a miscarriage and one who pays someone to crush and dismember her child?

    God is sovereign over life and death, so ultimately He is responsible for all death. So trying to call him a mass murderer — as fallacious as that is — wouldn’t be impacted whether miscarriages happened or not.

  14. “So are you really interested in what science has to say on the topic?”

    I am. Are you?

    I fully accept that every fertilized egg has the potential to become a unique human being. But again, as over half of those potential human beings are miscarried, most without even the notice of the average woman, I have to accept that those fertilized eggs are not the equivalent of a human being.

    An acorn has the potential to be an oak tree. But an acorn is not a tree.

    I’m not saying that it’s nothing, nor is it ‘right’ to just arbitrarily destroy all fertilized eggs. But it also isn’t murder. Far from it.

    “Perhaps you could tell us the precise amount of cells required before you recognize the humanity of a human being?”

    No idea. That’s a question for scientists. I would say that when a fetus can conceivable survive outside a woman’s womb is closer to that line than conception. And as science and technology advances, we’ll be able to help fetuses survive outside of a woman’s womb much earlier than we can now.

    “You don’t think there is a distinction between a woman who has a miscarriage and one who pays someone to crush and dismember her child?”

    I certainly do. But as you are a Christian, I assume you operate with absolutes. Am I wrong? Are there shades of gray? I think there are.

    “God is sovereign over life and death, so ultimately He is responsible for all death. So trying to call him a mass murderer — as fallacious as that is — wouldn’t be impacted whether miscarriages happened or not.”

    So if I have a child I can kill it? Indiscriminately?

    And have you read the bible? I would call “the flood” mass murder. I would call ordering the genocide of the Midianites mass murder.

    And if I believed that a fertilized egg is equal to a human, I would think you would see that as mass murder too. But I don’t.

  15. I fully accept that every fertilized egg has the potential to become a unique human being. But again, as over half of those potential human beings are miscarried, most without even the notice of the average woman, I have to accept that those fertilized eggs are not the equivalent of a human being.

    The science textbooks don’t say “potential” human being. They say human being. The fact that some may die doesn’t mean they aren’t human beings.

    In some countries the infant mortality rate is higher than average. That doesn’t mean they are fair game to destroy.

    Do you have a source for your “over half” statistic? It is irrelevant to the discussion, but I think it is overstated. I had heard the figure was more like 15%.

    That’s a question for scientists.

    Agreed. My point is that they already answered it.

    You said that you agree that there is a “distinction between a woman who has a miscarriage and one who pays someone to crush and dismember her child.” What do you see the distinction as?

    But as you are a Christian, I assume you operate with absolutes.

    Yes, I am a Christian, and yes, I think there are some absolutes (or more specifically, I think some things are true for all people at all times). You seem to think your view is true, and I think my view is true. So we both appear to believe that some things are true and some are not.

    Re. mass murder — I noted that God is sovereign over life and death.

  16. There are so many people that need money right now and if you are raising money right now, and if you are raising millions of dollars, give it to those people right now because you don’t need to promote hate.”

    Back to the original post . . . if Jay was thinking he would have asked Ellen why she donated her own money to the anti-prop 8 movement ($100,000, I believe) instead of helping the people in Texas.

    The whole “hate” think is just a trick the pro-gay lobby has used rather effectively. Sadly, people just aren’t well informed on how to respond to these logical fallacies.

  17. “The science textbooks don’t say “potential” human being. They say human being.”

    Do you have a source of a science textbook that calls a fertilized egg a human being?

    “In some countries the infant mortality rate is higher than average. That doesn’t mean they are fair game to destroy.”

    I didn’t say they were. I only say, if there is a god, and being fertilized makes the egg a full human being, then your god obviously doesn’t have as much respect for life as you seem to do.

    “Do you have a source for your “over half” statistic?”

    I’ll find it. I remembered the statistic as three-fourths, but I thought that sounded too high, so I brought it down to over half. I could have misremembered one-fourth, and if I did so then I will admit it. But either way, that’s far too much if you think a fertilized egg is a human being.

    “What do you see the distinction as?”

    One is legal and one is not. You’ll find that nowhere in the US is it legal to “crush and dismember a child”, under any normal definition of the words “crush” “dismember” and “child”.

    “Re. mass murder — I noted that God is sovereign over life and death.”

    So mass murder is fine, as long as you’re really powerful?

  18. Do you have a source of a science textbook that calls a fertilized egg a human being?

    Yes — http://www.abort73.com/HTML/I-A-1-medical.html

    then your god obviously doesn’t have as much respect for life as you seem to do.

    I am quite familiar with God and his standards and respect for life. I also know we live in a fallen, sinful world. If you are seriously interested in gaining a better understanding of God and getting away from your sound bites, feel free to ask.

    So mass murder is fine, as long as you’re really powerful?

    If you are interested in a charitable dialogue you might want to tone things down a bit. Do you see a distinction between a God (whether you believe He exists or not) that we claim is eternally existent and the creator of all things vs. a man who breaks the rules of this God?

    But either way, that’s far too much if you think a fertilized egg is a human being.

    Thanks for doing the research. But regardless of the actual percentage I don’t see how you’ve demonstrated your point. How do you determine that if miscarriages happen X% of the time that the unborn are human beings but if they occur (X+1)% of the time then they are not?

  19. Do you have a source of a science textbook that calls a fertilized egg a human being?

    Yes — http://www.abort73.com/HTML/I-A-1-medical.html

    then your god obviously doesn’t have as much respect for life as you seem to do.

    I am quite familiar with God and his standards and respect for life. I also know we live in a fallen, sinful world. If you are seriously interested in gaining a better understanding of God and getting away from your sound bites, feel free to ask.

    So mass murder is fine, as long as you’re really powerful?

    If you are interested in a charitable dialogue you might want to tone things down a bit. Do you see a distinction between a God (whether you believe He exists or not) that we claim is eternally existent and the creator of all things vs. a man who breaks the rules of this God?

    But either way, that’s far too much if you think a fertilized egg is a human being.

    Thanks for doing the research. But regardless of the actual percentage I don’t see how you’ve demonstrated your point. How do you determine that if miscarriages happen X% of the time that the unborn are human beings but if they occur (X+1)% of the time then they are not?

    You’ll find that nowhere in the US is it legal to “crush and dismember a child”, under any normal definition of the words “crush” “dismember” and “child”.

    Are you familiar with what occurs during a typical abortion? The skull is often crushed and the limbs are ripped off. The abortionist puts the pieces together sort of a like a puzzle to ensure that none were left inside. Sadly, they sometimes miss a piece and it causes great harm to the mother.

    Though I concede that not all abortions involve this. “Partial birth abortion” (aka infanticide) involves sticking a sharp object in the baby’s skull when she is 90% outside of her mother then sucking her brains out. BTW, Obama promised that his top priority would be to overturn this restriction, among many others.

    The fact is that most states consider the unborn human beings and that if you kill them it is murder — unless the mother wants them killed via abortion — http://4simpsons.wordpress.com/2008/09/01/it-is-murder-unless/

  20. Pingback: Dear Gays: Quit Raining on Obama’s Parade! « TheScroogeReport

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s