With 92.3% of the vote in, Yes on Prop 8 is leading 51.9% to 48.1%. Still holding; a 3.8% margin is still sufficient to weather the uncounted votes. What is an interesting view is to see the county by county breakdown, see here. A predictable dissection of the State demographics. With critical wins in Florida and Arizona, and a likely and hoped for win in California, perhaps we can begin to heal the wounds that became very evident in this campaign. To do so we need to find open and honest common ground for the arguments, without the unbridled passions that tend to inflame and cloud the issues. We need to better communicate the real substance of the issue at hand and the likely compromises to our freedoms if we succumb to temptation to adopt the civil rights argument. As much as we would hope, it will not likely end here. The unfortunate and bitter divisiveness arising from the opposition to Proposition 8 is of serious concern. Many is this election were confused and I believe the vote would have been stronger in favor of Proposition 8 had the extremes in the opposition not clouded the issue as they did.
In an effort to legitimize lifestyle, the extremes in the No on 8 campaign found a thread to bring others to their side, which will bode for more challenges going forward. To consider the same gender attraction issue as a "civil rights" issue is a flawed and veiled argument proffered by the extremes in that society. Sexual preference or lifestyle is not a civil rights issue. It was revealed what was really at the heart of this argument by the extremes, as illustrated in a recent debate on Prop 8 at Chapman University. When challenged by a sociologist on why the same gender attraction community sought for marriage, a covenant of fidelity, when in fact it is accepted that 25% of the same gender attraction community have 100 or less sexual partners, leaving 75% with 100 or more? The response was stated was shocking because of the public protestation. It was stated by an advocate for same sex marriage, "the problem in our society is that we deem promiscuity as immoral, a perception that needs to be changed." Whether heterosexual or homosexual, promiscuity is not moral to any degree. To the fringe, this hasn't been as much about marriage as it has about legitimization and societal acceptance and validation of an immoral lifestyle under the veil of civil rights. The concerns are evident in this destructive effort to diminish the sanctity of marriage for the sake of alternate lifestyles, alter the educational landscape of our children by numbing them to the extremes, and subordinate religious freedom, each of which sets us on an irreconcilable course. To heal the wounds and resolve the conflict we need to have an honest dialog without the proffering of the extremes. We need to honestly and openly discuss the agenda's at hand. As much as we might hope for such, I doubt we will come to a meeting of the minds. Even so, hope demands that we try. The alternative is not pretty.
The broader argument remains and change demands that we stray from our current societal trends of entitlement; I am entitled to do and have whatever I will. We pay a price and are accountable in all things! Unfortunately, we are trending in society to a day when those without and who advocate entitlement are greater in number than those who have to ultimately pay the price.