Hey, y'all. My wife hates it - says nobody will get the"H8" part, among other things. She says the H looks like part of a ballot designation instead of a comment. Oh, and the "fairness" is too wussy.

I said I'd run it past some folks before printing it on the 11" x 3" magnets. So, what do you think - leave it, or back to the drawing board? Suggestions?


(I don't know why the color came out this snot green when I converted it to a BMP image - in "real life" the background is a golden yellow.)

Forgot to add - for those non-Californians. Proposition 8 is a proposed amendment to the state Constitution prohibiting any "marriage" other than that between one man and one woman.

Thanks for this, printing it out for my window now.
Why is KTLK running so many damn yes on 8 ads. I know it's money, but it's the friggin' liberal station.

I like the message, and understand the "H8" part. I really enjoy the idea of you making your own bumper stickers.

But, a few issues I do have with it include:

The type face you are using doesn't say to me "this guy really wants me to stop the hate." Well that, and it's comic sans.

The color scheme looks too serene for the message to work. I suggest just using a white or black background. Until you find a color that better represents your message.

The positive-negative space doesn't seem to work in synch. I suggest you take out the flag, and replace that line in the center with a red, white, and blue line.

Take those suggestions if you will, I guess. Other than that I'd rather see that than nothing at all or a pro-prop 8 bumper sticker in the streets.

this your idea? clever

i love the h8 part

it is a hate prop, that is for sure

Yes, it's bugging a lot of listeners here on the board. I can only offer the silver lining that they're throwing money down the hole to keep Randi Rhodes, Thom Hartmann, Mike Malloy et al on the air.

Thanks for the comments thus far. No one has a problem with it? Not looking for compliments - I'd like to make it better if anyone has any ideas!

I don't have a problem with the words, just the type face and some of your coloring decisions.

I'd leave off the "religion bullies" part. Clouds the issue. Lets religious paranoia into the mix.

"Fairness for all. Vote no on Prop H8" says it all. Fewer word, more powerful message.

The religious H8ters already have their minds made up. You are marketing the undecideds.

Edit punctuation.

It's all stupid anyway. The first such legislation was challenged in court and thrown out. This one will be as well. The people feel this strongly about civil marriages should JUST GET THE FUCK OUT OF CALIFORNIA.

The first prop was tossed out premised upon it violating the State Constitution. (Hence, when the Yes on 8 commercial says those mean old judges "ignored 4 million voters." what it SHOULD say is that those mean old voters - and the prop's authors - ignored the State Constitution. Indeed, they were all warned well in advance of the election of precisely that.)

Prop 8 is a CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT to the State of California's Constitution. If it gets passed, it sticks - unless of course the US Supremes deem it in violation of the US Constitution. What do you imagine the chances of THAT are? I say slim and none. leaning towed none.

If 4 million "Californians" don't want civil rights then get the fuck out of California. This is obviously not their place. 32 million of us are really getting tired of their shit, and want them out yesterday.

The coloring decision I made are not reflected in the image posted above. As I noted, for reasons beyond this simpleton's understanding, when I converted from the original graphic file to a BMP file for posting, the colors shifted rather dramatically. be assured, my tastes may suck every bit as much, but they're not seen in the above. When I simply print I DO get the actual colors I selected.

It's a fair point - I simply chose to be more confrontational. I don't figure I'll be winning over any of the religious whack jobs, anyway, so I'll try to communicate in simple terms that it's a religious whack-job proposal to those space cadets who otherwise uninformed and might not otherwise even vote.

But again, your point is fair. I just don't have the same concern for my paint job that you may have for yours. My paint finish has already been badly keyed as a result of my previous magnetic "stickers."

Fair enough, sometimes a print comes out worse, or better, than what is on the screen.

I really suggest, if you want to keep the colors, do not use a bitmap. Bitmaps do not have the range of colors in them that other formats do nowadays.

Use a jpeg or a png file when exporting out as an image from you program. If it offers those options. = /

Stroke on text, needs an axe.

I guess I'm doing a very bad job of explaining and reexplaining this.

For these I use an ancient Arts and Letters program that creates a file type that is not compatible with ...well, really, ANYTHING - not even the current versions of A&L.

But I can print it just fine, and I do get what's on the screen. (I'm using this ancient program simply because I originally set up the templates in that program. Obviously, I could start creating them in any of a half dozen OTHER arts/graphics programs I have, but I'm too lazy to recreate the multi-sticker-per-page template.)

However, I cannot upload those A&L files to Photobucket, or any of the conventional means of posting pictures on line. And so I use the A&L program's conversion feature to convert those A&L files to BMP, JPG, TIF - what have you - ONLY for the purpose of displaying them here. And in the process of that conversion - to ANY file type other than the original - the colors get tweaked. In this case, for example, a golden yellow background came out of the conversion a vomitous snot green. A bright pink line came out as an odd magenta.

But when I print the original file, it will appear exactly as I intended. When I print directly from the A&L file, there is no change.

As a old hippie, I was always skeptical of the marriage institution, in so far as the legal implications are concerned. In these days of high divorce rates, prenuptuals, etc... I am really wondering why gays are so intent on this issue.

If you are a gay couple, why not prepare a Will, a power of attorney in the event of a serious injury or sickness, , get you paper work together. This way there will be no question in times of crisis as to who can do what. Marriage has a lot of legal quagmires that people have been trying to avoid for centuries and now this has become a question of equal rights in the gay community.

I have to say this may be similar to gays wanting equal rights in the military. Do you really want to make joining the military a priority when the priority should be to stop military agression?

I am not a gay basher so don't start in on me. I've a number of gays in my immediate family who would kick my ass if that were the case, but I am a critic of society and the ramifications of marriage legally.

If only it were that simple. It's not. You apparently aren't aware that precisely the paperwork you describe has been routinely ignored, even by hospitals.

You're not familiar with episodes where a patient's family - estranged from a gay son, brother, parent for decades - can and has swooped in at the time of crisis and swept all such arrangements aside as if they were sandcastles built on the water line. And the law has repeatedly helped them do exactly that, or at least permitted it for a time. And even when the loved one is able to prevail after months and years of litigation, retain their share of a home, win back the right to make decisions, in the interim they've lost so much that can never be returned, from the right to plan a service, to just a simple visit.

I've been in a courtroom as a witness to testify that a dead man's notarized wills and contracts actually spelled out the intentions and plans he expressed in the months and years before death, virtually all of which had been ignored and held in abeyance for months at a time in the interim because a nasty, hateful family was angry. I've been there to see a mother adorn her dead son with religious medals despite his repeated and written prohibitions against exactly that, because a partner had to make deals in order to have OTHER aspects of his partner's wishes respected.

It sounds to me like the problem really isn't legal, since the paper work is there, but the administrators don't want to recognize it. Even if a gay couple were legal married as they can be in Cal presently (or is that called a "Civil Union"), does this eliminate the problem? I suspect that if the family puts up enough resistance, hires a lawyer, the result will be the same, delays and problems.

Marriage, legal institution, was created to put into place rights to property and children, and to limit those rights to the current legal spouse. Considering all the "illegitamite" children and spouses out there, one might actually make the arguement that marriage is unfair to those "illict" family members. The bottom line is if you want to give the people in your life property, if you want, after death, to be handled in a certain way, get it down on a legal document, notarized, ..... if that doesn't work well we need to work on the legal system so that it does.