• 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 7
 
diamond
Posts: 3000
Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2004 8:01 am

Californias Day Of Shame - Prop 8 Passes (#2)

Fri Nov 07, 2008 5:43 pm

Continuation of Part 1 which had reached 301 replies.

http://www.airliners.net/aviation-fo...ms/non_aviation/read.main/2001069/
Blank.
 
User avatar
OA412
Crew
Posts: 3730
Joined: Thu Dec 28, 2000 6:22 am

RE: Californias Day Of Shame - Prop 8 Passes (#2)

Fri Nov 07, 2008 6:03 pm

Quoting Slider (Reply 296):
I'm sorry you're so bitter...your own bigotry seems to poison your attitude and tone.


Nice attempt at changing the subject. I'm more than willing to admit that I despise organized religion and the hatred it engenders but, are you willing to admit that you dislike gays?

Quoting Slider (Reply 296):
For the world's religions, it's clear that homosexuality is a sin. Being a woman isn't. Being black isn't. But the act of homosexuality is. Now you may not agree with that, and that's your prerogative, but there are forces and factors here that are MUCH larger than the instant-gratification whims of protesters in California, USA in 2008.


For the sake of those of us who choose to make life decisions based on something other than the fact that religion has deemed it a sin, explain to us why being gay is wrong. That's right, take religion completely out of the equation and explain to me why it's wrong for me to have been born gay.
Hughes Airwest - Top Banana In The West
 
AirCop
Posts: 5553
Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2005 2:39 am

RE: Californias Day Of Shame - Prop 8 Passes (#2)

Fri Nov 07, 2008 6:05 pm

Today's Sacramento Bee also points out another group that voted against Prop 8 in big numbers:
http://www.sacbee.com/111/story/1378391.html
 
PSA727
Posts: 845
Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2006 7:49 am

RE: Californias Day Of Shame - Prop 8 Passes (#2)

Fri Nov 07, 2008 6:25 pm



Quoting AirCop (Reply 2):
Today's Sacramento Bee also points out another group that voted against Prop 8 in big numbers:
http://www.sacbee.com/111/story/1378....html

That's what I love about this the most! Prop 8 passed by 2.5%, Blacks made up 10% of the
vote, and 70% of them voted for Prop 8, which means that they account fo 7% of the "yes"
totals. Now it said that Blacks accounted for 6% of the vote in 2004, but because of Obama,
their participation this election increased by two-thirds. See Obama is already bringing change.
And who would have thought that so many Blacks are Mormons!
fly high, pay low...Germanwings!
 
allstarflyer
Posts: 3264
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 7:32 am

RE: Californias Day Of Shame - Prop 8 Passes (#2)

Fri Nov 07, 2008 6:30 pm



Quoting TWFirst (Reply 300):
By any view or measure of BASIC EQUALITY and HUMAN DECENCY, you CANNOT say that two non-related, consenting adults can enter into that contract and receive those benefits, but this group of non-related, consenting adults over here cannot, soley because one of those adults is of the wrong sex!!!! PERIOD.

The law says it, and in a consistent manner - it's not an issue that equates it w/gender or race.

Quoting TWFirst (Reply 300):
It is DISCRIMINATION

If it fell under the same classification as gender, race, etc., then it would be wrongful discrimination.

Quoting Allstarflyer (Reply 249):

homosexuality is something that involves behavior, which reflects choices, responsibility, morality, etc. Being of a certain color or gender is not in the same category - these are obviously inherent qualities to who individuals are - and until there's absolute scientific proof that homosexuality is purely an inherent part of who an individual is, those 11.7 million and more will continue to conclude that same-sex relations are a matter of behavior.



Quoting TWFirst (Reply 300):
you certainly are no less 'sinful".

That's true - Romans 2:1.

Quoting TWFirst (Reply 300):
Wash yourself in the blood of Christ as much as you want.

Anyone - you, me - is welcome to do that.

Quoting TWFirst (Reply 300):
But you do NOT have the right to impose your g-d religious beliefs on others, especially when the act of those people receiving the same benefits as you does not affect you in any way.

It's a matter of how it defines marriage in society . . .

Quoting Allstarflyer (Reply 290):
Who said it redefine's yours or any other's in particular? It's redefining the concept.



Quoting TWFirst (Reply 300):
I'm sure your unmarried messiah is repulsed at how people are treating each other in his name.

As long as people are living by Romans 2:1 (not subjectively judging - basically condescending), there's nothing in Scripture to support your remarks. He's the living Word, and the written Word has references concerning His take on the matter (beyond the Leviticus citing some like to make) such as Romans 1:26-27 - "For this reason God gave them up to vile passions. For even their women exchanged the natural use for what is against nature. Likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust for one another, men with men committing what is shameful, and receiving in themselves the penalty of their error which was due", 1 Timothy 1:9 - "knowing this: that the law is not made for a righteous person, but for the lawless and insubordinate, for the ungodly and for sinners, for the unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers, for fornicators, for sodomites" and 1 Corinthians 6:9 - "Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites".
Living the American Dream
 
slider
Posts: 6805
Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2004 11:42 pm

RE: Californias Day Of Shame - Prop 8 Passes (#2)

Fri Nov 07, 2008 6:31 pm



Quoting OA412 (Reply 1):
Nice attempt at changing the subject. I'm more than willing to admit that I despise organized religion and the hatred it engenders but, are you willing to admit that you dislike gays?

No, I'm not willing to admit that because I don't. I have gay friends, have no problem with co-workers, fraternity brothers, neighbors, et al bieng gay. I condemn the sin not the sinner. If anything, I shouldn't shun them. That would be hateful.
 
allstarflyer
Posts: 3264
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 7:32 am

RE: Californias Day Of Shame - Prop 8 Passes (#2)

Fri Nov 07, 2008 6:34 pm



Quoting OA412 (Reply 1):
That's right, take religion completely out of the equation and explain to me why it's wrong for me to have been born gay.

For starters, it's wrong for you to assume you were born gay. From the previous thread . . .

Quoting Vikkyvik (Reply 263):

I'm sorry, but I'd have to say that the burden of proof should be on those who say that homosexuality is NOT an inherent part of who you are.



Quoting Allstarflyer (Reply 293):
Sexual relations obviously deal in more than just mutual pleasure - they deal in reproduction - basically the most natural thing in life. Being naturally disposed to procreate with each other, heterosexual relations are the natural way to accomplish that - obviously it's not done through same-sex relations, thus, the burden of proof should (and usually does) rest with those who advocate for same-sex relations.

Living the American Dream
 
User avatar
WarRI1
Posts: 8458
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2007 10:51 am

RE: Californias Day Of Shame - Prop 8 Passes (#2)

Fri Nov 07, 2008 6:40 pm



Quoting OA412 (Reply 1):
That's right, take religion completely out of the equation and explain to me why it's wrong for me to have been born gay.

No, it is not wrong, you are what you are from birth. The question here, is it a violation of your "rights" to not be allowed to marry? Obviously, the majority of voters feels no at this point in California. Blaming it on certain groups is not the way to go, they are all legal voters and well within their rights to say no on a ballot, or yes. Everyone had an agenda, even the losing side.
It is better to die on your feet, than live on your knees.
 
Venus6971
Posts: 1415
Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2004 1:55 pm

RE: Californias Day Of Shame - Prop 8 Passes (#2)

Fri Nov 07, 2008 6:41 pm

Did anyone think about the cold hard fact the reason the Gov't is against Homosexual marriage is just a monetary one.
Lost revenue by filing married instead of single for income tax.
Paying surviiving SS benefits to surviving spouse.
I'm sure we are talking billions in payouts.
I would help you but it is not in the contract
 
TWFirst
Posts: 5752
Joined: Wed Apr 19, 2000 5:30 am

RE: Californias Day Of Shame - Prop 8 Passes (#2)

Fri Nov 07, 2008 6:44 pm



Quoting Allstarflyer (Reply 4):
The law says it, and in a consistent manner - it's not an issue that equates it w/gender or race.

??????????????????

That's EXACTLY what these laws say... that the benefits endowed by this civic contract are available only to two parties of opposite gender - it's the only such legal construct defining the gender of the parties who may enter into it. So, how exactly is it not a gender issue??

Also, if you're not able to debate a matter of law and the issue of discrimination without quoting the bible, how do you expect to be taken seriously?

To argue with a fool is to become one, thus, I'm done arguing. Logic cannot be used with someone who unfortunately can only view the world through his/her blind faith in an omnipotent being.
An unexamined life isn't worth living.
 
PSA727
Posts: 845
Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2006 7:49 am

RE: Californias Day Of Shame - Prop 8 Passes (#2)

Fri Nov 07, 2008 6:54 pm



Quoting WarRI1 (Reply 7):
The question here, is it a violation of your "rights" to not be allowed to marry?

Actually they can marry, just not to the same gender. Growing up in San Diego next to the
Naval Bases, I can tell you this, gay men would marry a woman (usually a lesbian) because
it meant more cash each month. Now nothing about the passage of Prop 8 stops that.

Quoting Venus6971 (Reply 8):
Did anyone think about the cold hard fact the reason the Gov't is against Homosexual marriage is just a monetary one.
Lost revenue by filing married instead of single for income tax.
Paying surviiving SS benefits to surviving spouse.
I'm sure we are talking billions in payouts.

Except for the Joint Filing one, all of those others involve the federal government, not the
state governments which is where these ballot measures are taking place. And the Joint
Filing tax revenue thing is negligible. It's not like it's a 2-for-1 discount.
fly high, pay low...Germanwings!
 
PSA53
Posts: 2928
Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2003 1:54 pm

RE: Californias Day Of Shame - Prop 8 Passes (#2)

Fri Nov 07, 2008 7:20 pm



Quoting AirCop (Reply 2):

Today's Sacramento Bee also points out another group that voted against Prop 8 in big numbers:

This is mostly what I've been reading and hearing as to why 8 had passed.But there were two other factors weighed as well.

1)The Lesbian couple that got married to close to election day that had school children in attendence.

2)And,here in SoCal(state?),the WW2 Japanese-American TV ads felt to have a negative.Some ask how can you compare the pruging and imprisionment of Japanese-Americans with gay politics.

Quoting WarRI1 (Reply 7):
Blaming it on certain groups is not the way to go, they are all legal voters and well within their rights to say no on a ballot, or yes. Everyone had an agenda, even the losing side.

 checkmark  So,stop the protests against the votors and the Norman church(SoCaL news).This could turn ugly.It takes one idiot to make everyone else look bad if damage is done.

Respect the vote.
Tuesday's Off! Do not disturb.
 
Mir
Posts: 19092
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 3:55 am

RE: Californias Day Of Shame - Prop 8 Passes (#2)

Fri Nov 07, 2008 7:38 pm



Quoting Allstarflyer (Reply 6):
it's wrong for you to assume you were born gay.

Not wrong at all. Do you think anyone would choose to be gay in the current social environment? It's a genetic pre-disposition. And not just a human one - it's been observed in a number of species.

-Mir
7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
 
huskyaviation
Posts: 912
Joined: Mon Aug 27, 2007 4:38 am

RE: Californias Day Of Shame - Prop 8 Passes (#2)

Fri Nov 07, 2008 8:02 pm



Quoting Allstarflyer (Reply 4):
As long as people are living by Romans 2:1 (not subjectively judging - basically condescending), there's nothing in Scripture to support your remarks. He's the living Word, and the written Word has references concerning His take on the matter (beyond the Leviticus citing some like to make) such as Romans 1:26-27 - "For this reason God gave them up to vile passions. For even their women exchanged the natural use for what is against nature. Likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust for one another, men with men committing what is shameful, and receiving in themselves the penalty of their error which was due", 1 Timothy 1:9 - "knowing this: that the law is not made for a righteous person, but for the lawless and insubordinate, for the ungodly and for sinners, for the unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers, for fornicators, for sodomites" and 1 Corinthians 6:9 - "Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites".

Interesting. What's the Bible say about slavery? Are your opinions on that subject as consistent with the Good Book as they are regarding homosexuality?

Quoting WarRI1 (Reply 7):
Blaming it on certain groups is not the way to go, they are all legal voters and well within their rights to say no on a ballot, or yes. Everyone had an agenda, even the losing side.

You can absolutely blame certain groups in this case, and to argue otherwise is pretty lame. To be completely blunt, blacks should be ashamed. They among all others should know something about the "legal" restrictions on civil rights, but yet they continue to perpetuate anti-gay sentiment in greater numbers than most other communities. What a disgrace. I guess civil rights are only important when it's convenient for them, but screw anyone else.
 
allstarflyer
Posts: 3264
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 7:32 am

RE: Californias Day Of Shame - Prop 8 Passes (#2)

Fri Nov 07, 2008 9:16 pm



Quoting HuskyAviation (Reply 13):
Are your opinions on that subject as consistent with the Good Book as they are regarding homosexuality?

A far cry than the system that was laid down in the O.T., Philemon was told to treat his servant/slave like a brother - which even goes beyond the admonition Paul gave to "masters" to "give what is just and fair" (Col. 4:1) - what would be wrong in being consistent about treating people like one would a brother? Lots of good things you'd find in the "Good Book".
Living the American Dream
 
huskyaviation
Posts: 912
Joined: Mon Aug 27, 2007 4:38 am

RE: Californias Day Of Shame - Prop 8 Passes (#2)

Fri Nov 07, 2008 9:24 pm



Quoting Allstarflyer (Reply 14):
A far cry than the system that was laid down in the O.T., Philemon was told to treat his servant/slave like a brother - which even goes beyond the admonition Paul gave to "masters" to "give what is just and fair" (Col. 4:1) - what would be wrong in being consistent about treating people like one would a brother? Lots of good things you'd find in the "Good Book".

O Holy One, you missed my point--because the Bible inherently accepts slavery, do you thus support the existence of slavery in 2008? Or do you disagree with it?
 
Alias1024
Posts: 2223
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 11:13 am

RE: Californias Day Of Shame - Prop 8 Passes (#2)

Fri Nov 07, 2008 9:31 pm



Quoting Allstarflyer (Reply 4):
If it fell under the same classification as gender, race, etc., then it would be wrongful discrimination.

So they you agreed with the California Supreme Court decision that Proposition 22 was wrongful discrimination? They ruled that it was a protected class, just as race, gender, age, and religion are.
It is a mistake to think you can solve any major problems with just potatoes.
 
allstarflyer
Posts: 3264
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 7:32 am

RE: Californias Day Of Shame - Prop 8 Passes (#2)

Fri Nov 07, 2008 9:59 pm



Quoting HuskyAviation (Reply 15):
O Holy One, you missed my point--because the Bible inherently accepts slavery, do you thus support the existence of slavery in 2008? Or do you disagree with it?

Don't be a child, Husky - in the O.T., slavery was used (often) to punish enemies, but there's no indication of that in the N.T. - Paul never condoned/condemned slavery, but only told Philemon to treat his servant like a brother. And, of course, I don't accept slavery. Care to address any of the other content I've offered w/o simply waving your hand in dismissal? Moving on . . .

Quoting Alias1024 (Reply 16):
So they you agreed with the California Supreme Court decision that Proposition 22 was wrongful discrimination? They ruled that it was a protected class, just as race, gender, age, and religion are.

Actually, the court got it wrong - look at the very preamble of the California Constitution - "We, the People of the State of California, grateful to Almighty God (hmm, interesting  scratchchin  ) for our
freedom, in order to secure and perpetuate its blessings, do establish this
Constitution
. The people established it - not some court - and the people have spoken again.
Living the American Dream
 
mt99
Posts: 6166
Joined: Wed May 26, 1999 5:41 am

RE: Californias Day Of Shame - Prop 8 Passes (#2)

Fri Nov 07, 2008 10:01 pm

Quoting Allstarflyer (Reply 17):
Don't be a child, Husky - in the O.T., slavery was used (often) to punish enemies, but there's no indication of that in the N.T. - Paul never condoned/condemned slavery

The NT does talk about divorce though. How come divorce is perfectly legal and acceptable?

Quoting Allstarflyer (Reply 17):

Don't be a child, Husky - in the O.T., slavery was used (often) to punish enemies

So the OT is not valid anymore?

Does the NT even mention the 10 commandments? What the NT does mention is animal sacrifices (Matthew 8:4),

And dont forget the torrid love affair between David and Saul mentiones in the OT

"1 After David had finished talking with Saul, Jonathan became one in spirit with David, and he loved him as himself. 2 From that day Saul kept David with him and did not let him return to his father's house. 3 And Jonathan made a covenant with David because he loved him as himself. 4 Jonathan took off the robe he was wearing and gave it to David, along with his tunic, and even his sword, his bow and his belt"

They made a covenant uh huh..

click here for the first gay soft porn

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/...earch=1%20Samuel%2020;&version=31;

[Edited 2008-11-07 14:22:07]

[Edited 2008-11-07 14:26:02]
Step into my office, baby
 
mt99
Posts: 6166
Joined: Wed May 26, 1999 5:41 am

RE: Californias Day Of Shame - Prop 8 Passes (#2)

Fri Nov 07, 2008 10:13 pm



Quoting Allstarflyer (Reply 4):
o you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites".

Yet there hasn't been a ban on masturbation has it?
Step into my office, baby
 
StuckInCA
Posts: 1618
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2005 12:55 pm

RE: Californias Day Of Shame - Prop 8 Passes (#2)

Fri Nov 07, 2008 10:26 pm



Quoting PSA727 (Reply 10):
I can tell you this, gay men would marry a woman (usually a lesbian) because
it meant more cash each month. Now nothing about the passage of Prop 8 stops that.

So much for that "sanctity of marriage" argument we keep hearing.

If this was really about "protecting the sanctity of marriage" rather than just outright discrimination, why aren't these people fighting to make getting married something you can't do at a drive through? Why aren't they fighting to make it harder to get a divorce?

Why? Because that's not what this is all about. And everyone knows it.
 
Mason
Posts: 636
Joined: Sat Jun 12, 1999 12:01 am

RE: Californias Day Of Shame - Prop 8 Passes (#2)

Fri Nov 07, 2008 10:36 pm

Quiting Mir:

"If this is the case, then you would agree that the government should play no part in a marriage - neither granting nor denying them to anyone. Let the church take care of that, and let the government take care of civil unions for both gay and straight couples. Marriage should have no legal standing - it's just a religious ceremony."

Exactly.
 
Alias1024
Posts: 2223
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 11:13 am

RE: Californias Day Of Shame - Prop 8 Passes (#2)

Fri Nov 07, 2008 10:43 pm



Quoting Allstarflyer (Reply 17):
Actually, the court got it wrong - look at the very preamble of the California Constitution - "We, the People of the State of California, grateful to Almighty God (hmm, interesting    ) for our
freedom, in order to secure and perpetuate its blessings, do establish this
Constitution. The people established it - not some court - and the people have spoken again.

What is the point of equal protection for protected groups if the majority gets to decide who is a protected group? First you say that discrimination is against protected groups, and therefore homosexuals don't qualify. When it is pointed out that your argument doesn't hold up because the California Supreme Court has ruled that homosexuality does qualify under the state constitution, your argument is that the justices of that court are ignorant as to the purpose and meaning of the constitution.

You are correct that the people established the constitution. As part of that constitution they included equal protection language to ensure that the majority could not trample the basic rights of the minority. That same constitution also established a court system that would evaluate and rule on these constitutional issues, based not on what the majority wants, but on what the constitution already says.
It is a mistake to think you can solve any major problems with just potatoes.
 
sbworcs
Posts: 667
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2005 11:19 pm

RE: Californias Day Of Shame - Prop 8 Passes (#2)

Fri Nov 07, 2008 11:03 pm



Quoting HuskyAviation (Reply 13):
Interesting. What's the Bible say about slavery? Are your opinions on that subject as consistent with the Good Book as they are regarding homosexuality?

No the opintions would not be consistent because like a lot of religious people they only choose to belive the parts of the Bible that support their own ideas / prejudices and conveniently ignore the rest.

My argument against the whole thing is why this was even put to the vote - who decided that one group of people should be able to have a direct effect on someone elses life because of their beliefs.

I would love to be able to marry a gay partner at some point in the future as I want to be able to express my love for a person just the same way that everyone else can! - WHY IS THAT SO WRONG??
The best way forwards is upwards!
 
LAXintl
Posts: 20183
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

RE: Californias Day Of Shame - Prop 8 Passes (#2)

Fri Nov 07, 2008 11:17 pm



Quoting Alias1024 (Reply 16):
So they you agreed with the California Supreme Court decision that Proposition 22 was wrongful discrimination? They ruled that it was a protected class, just as race, gender, age, and religion are.

Prop-22 was a family law statue which the court found contravened the states constitution.

In its 120 page decision the same court however actually hinted as a remedy voters could consider amending the constitution instead. (something that we know has been successfully done in 29 other states now)

Quoting Allstarflyer (Reply 17):
look at the very preamble of the California Constitution - "We, the People of the State of California, grateful to Almighty God (hmm, interesting ) for our
freedom, in order to secure and perpetuate its blessings, do establish this
Constitution. The people established it - not some court - and the people have spoken again.

 checkmark 

Courts interpret laws including the constitution. However those laws are created by society.

Super liberal CA attorney general Jerry Brown who supported same-sex marriages is even skeptical as to the basis of any challenge against Prop-8.

“At the end of the day, it is the people who determine what their constitution looks like. The idea that people are disabled from making changes to their own constitution is a hard argument to make to a judge.”
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
 
Superfly
Posts: 37735
Joined: Thu May 11, 2000 8:01 am

RE: Californias Day Of Shame - Prop 8 Passes (#2)

Fri Nov 07, 2008 11:27 pm



Quoting AirCop (Reply 2):
Today's Sacramento Bee also points out another group that voted against Prop 8 in big numbers:
http://www.sacbee.com/111/story/1378....html

What a lot of people don't realize is that there are a lot of religious church going Blacks, Latinos as well as Russian and Filipino immigrants that are Democrats but are against gay marriage. Look at how narrow the defeat of Proposition 4 was.
This is a classic example of the typical divisive wedge issues that the religious right and the Republican Party uses to divide people.
It's happened before in the past with Proposition 187, Proposition 209, Proposition 227 and Proposition 22.
It's sick if you ask me.
Bring back the Concorde
 
Alias1024
Posts: 2223
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 11:13 am

RE: Californias Day Of Shame - Prop 8 Passes (#2)

Sat Nov 08, 2008 12:33 am



Quoting LAXintl (Reply 24):
Prop-22 was a family law statue which the court found contravened the states constitution.

Yes it was, and I never said it wasn't. I was responding to an assertion that sexual orientation would not be a qualifying classification under the concept of equal protection. The court ruled in the Prop-22 case that does in fact qualify, and was a basis for the application of strict scrutiny. I don't see why you feel that it is important that a family law statute was involved.

I also agree that attempts to challenge Prop-8 in court face a very steep uphill battle. However, it does not change my concern about the precedence it represents. Prop-8 lays the blueprints for revoking rights and not running afoul of equal protection in the state constitution. Just redefine the right so that it is technically impossible for the targeted group to exercise it as they previously had.
It is a mistake to think you can solve any major problems with just potatoes.
 
vikkyvik
Posts: 11757
Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2003 1:58 pm

RE: Californias Day Of Shame - Prop 8 Passes (#2)

Sat Nov 08, 2008 2:05 am



Quoting Allstarflyer (Reply 293):

Sexual relations obviously deal in more than just mutual pleasure - they deal in reproduction - basically the most natural thing in life. Being naturally disposed to procreate with each other, heterosexual relations are the natural way to accomplish that - obviously it's not done through same-sex relations, thus, the burden of proof should (and usually does) rest with those who advocate for same-sex relations.

OK, well first of all, I am generally utterly opposed to using science in any way to promote discrimination or to suppress rights.

But to address your point:

Science is not perfect. It is far from perfect. God is not perfect either. God, science, nature, whatever or whomever, does not create perfection in the world. You are not perfect, nor am I. We all have our flaws, as does everything and everyone in this world.

I, personally, refuse to discriminate or look down upon you due to whatever flaws you may possess in my mind.

So, all I'm left with, here, is the idea that you believe that homosexuality must be a flaw of nature (god, whatever, whomever). And somehow, we are allowed to discriminate based on that flaw, but not on any other flaw.

So please explain that to me, because I don't get that at all.

Hey, maybe god just wanted to institute some form of population control, so (s)he made some people gay!

Quoting Allstarflyer (Reply 290):

Who said it redefine's yours or any other's in particular? It's redefining the concept.

OK, well I'll go back to science here, again (hey, you brought it up, not me!).

Scientific concepts get redefined CONSTANTLY. The one greatest facet of science is that it is open to change, and it is NEVER deemed to have reached perfection.

Listen, if you're going to bring science (and proof) into it, then frankly, the burden of proof should be on you to prove that there even is a god, and that he wants us to prevent gay folks from getting married. I haven't seen any evidence.
I'm watching Jeopardy. The category is worst Madonna songs. "This one from 1987 is terrible".
 
huskyaviation
Posts: 912
Joined: Mon Aug 27, 2007 4:38 am

RE: Californias Day Of Shame - Prop 8 Passes (#2)

Sat Nov 08, 2008 2:12 am



Quoting Superfly (Reply 25):
What a lot of people don't realize is that there are a lot of religious church going Blacks, Latinos as well as Russian and Filipino immigrants that are Democrats but are against gay marriage. Look at how narrow the defeat of Proposition 4 was.
This is a classic example of the typical divisive wedge issues that the religious right and the Republican Party uses to divide people.
It's happened before in the past with Proposition 187, Proposition 209, Proposition 227 and Proposition 22.
It's sick if you ask me.

And my feeling, harsh though as it may be, is that blacks most of all should simply know better than (1) be played as a pawn of conservatives and (2) stripping others of their legal rights. They should have looked in the mirror rather than listen to their preachers.

To answer someone else's question from earlier, if an amendment were made to the state constitution, the Cal. Supreme Court would not be able to overturn it; however, a federal court could.
 
User avatar
mariner
Posts: 18098
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

RE: Californias Day Of Shame - Prop 8 Passes (#2)

Sat Nov 08, 2008 2:16 am



Quoting Allstarflyer (Reply 6):
For starters, it's wrong for you to assume you were born gay. From the previous thread . . .

Not to me.

Even if I never had sex - or had sex exclusively with women - I would still be homosexual, and have known that since my earliest cognizance of myself.

I had no choice in the matter.

mariner
aeternum nauta
 
User avatar
WarRI1
Posts: 8458
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2007 10:51 am

RE: Californias Day Of Shame - Prop 8 Passes (#2)

Sat Nov 08, 2008 2:35 am



Quoting Mariner (Reply 29):
Not to me.

Even if I never had sex - or had sex exclusively with women - I would still be homosexual, and have known that since my earliest cognizance of myself.

I had no choice in the matter.

mariner

I agree, you were born that way, as I was born the other. I do think anyone who thinks that it is a matter of choice is naive to a fault. As to the matter of Prop 8, I will keep my opinion to myself.
It is better to die on your feet, than live on your knees.
 
Starbuk7
Posts: 555
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2008 7:09 pm

RE: Californias Day Of Shame - Prop 8 Passes (#2)

Sat Nov 08, 2008 3:06 am



Quoting Sbworcs (Reply 23):
I would love to be able to marry a gay partner at some point in the future as I want to be able to express my love for a person just the same way that everyone else can! - WHY IS THAT SO WRONG??

Because of two things:

Either
A: Until two men can have sex and produce a child, they shouldn't be married.
or
B: Until two women can have sex and produce a child, they shouldn't be married.

Marriage is for the sanctity of family. A man and woman get married, have children, and raise a family. To me this is what marriage is all about. Religion has nothing to do with it.

If you love your gay partner, that is fine with me, I personnaly don't care one way or the other, I feel that you can love someone with all your heart and they can love you as well but that doesn't mean you have to get married to prove it. IMHO, marriage is about family and family only.
 
LAXintl
Posts: 20183
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

RE: Californias Day Of Shame - Prop 8 Passes (#2)

Sat Nov 08, 2008 3:07 am



Quoting HuskyAviation (Reply 28):
To answer someone else's question from earlier, if an amendment were made to the state constitution, the Cal. Supreme Court would not be able to overturn it; however, a federal court could.

Well to date no one has tried - or should I say wanted to risk taking anything to Federal and ultimately the US Supreme Court as the outcome could be the final nail in the coffin of achieving what the GLBT community wants.

A challenge to the US Supreme Court faces the multiple large risk as the court 1) might not even accept to hear the case 2) Affirms that marriage is a state and not federal issues, or 3) Affirms the right of States to manage marriage and change their own constitutions. Basically approaching the federal court systems might be the ultimate gamble for the GLBT with many more negative outcome possibilities then positive one.

Remember also depending on how such this issue plays out on a national stage in the coming years its not too far fetched to see a US constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage even as it could be possible that 2/3 of states would approve. I mean we already have 30 states that individually have placed their own laws into into effect.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
 
StuckInCA
Posts: 1618
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2005 12:55 pm

RE: Californias Day Of Shame - Prop 8 Passes (#2)

Sat Nov 08, 2008 3:32 am



Quoting Starbuk7 (Reply 31):
Either
A: Until two men can have sex and produce a child, they shouldn't be married.
or
B: Until two women can have sex and produce a child, they shouldn't be married.

But you don't have to be able to or intend to have children to get married. Do you suggest that that is a prerequisite? Should infertile women (or men) be disallowed marriage? If you desire a life without children should you not be able to marry?
 
User avatar
mariner
Posts: 18098
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

RE: Californias Day Of Shame - Prop 8 Passes (#2)

Sat Nov 08, 2008 3:39 am



Quoting Starbuk7 (Reply 31):
A: Until two men can have sex and produce a child, they shouldn't be married.
or
B: Until two women can have sex and produce a child, they shouldn't be married.

That's jolly bad news for a man and a woman who are married and cannot, for whatever reason, have a child.

Or how about chilldless - married - straights who adopt? I guess in your book, they are not really married.

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 32):
Remember also depending on how such this issue plays out on a national stage in the coming years its not too far fetched to see a US constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage even as it could be possible that 2/3 of states would approve. I mean we already have 30 states that individually have placed their own laws into into effect.

It is not so very long ago that several states had statutes in their constitutions banning miscegenation.

mariner
aeternum nauta
 
Charles79
Posts: 1117
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 12:35 pm

RE: Californias Day Of Shame - Prop 8 Passes (#2)

Sat Nov 08, 2008 3:45 am



Quoting Starbuk7 (Reply 31):
Marriage is for the sanctity of family. A man and woman get married, have children, and raise a family. To me this is what marriage is all about. Religion has nothing to do with it.

And having kids has nothing to do with it either. As the others already posted, marriage licenses are not handed out on the condition of procreation. If that were the case then thousands of Americans wouldn't be allowed to marry.

Besides, what sanctity is there to preserve? 50% of all marriages end up in divorce, and plenty of folks are into their 2nd or 3rd marriage. Aren't they also destroying the "sanctity" of marriage?

I got a simple solution for you: don't like gay marriage, then don't marry a gay person!
 
diamond
Posts: 3000
Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2004 8:01 am

RE: Californias Day Of Shame - Prop 8 Passes (#2)

Sat Nov 08, 2008 3:53 am



Quoting Slider (Reply 5):
I condemn the sin not the sinner.

Do you realize that the same book you use to define sin considers condemnation a sin?

Quoting Slider (Reply 5):
If anything, I shouldn't shun them. That would be hateful.

Condemnation is hateful.
Blank.
 
allstarflyer
Posts: 3264
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 7:32 am

RE: Californias Day Of Shame - Prop 8 Passes (#2)

Sat Nov 08, 2008 4:12 am



Quoting Sbworcs (Reply 23):

No the opintions would not be consistent because like a lot of religious people they only choose to belive the parts of the Bible that support their own ideas / prejudices and conveniently ignore the rest.

The Bible says I'm a sinner and I need Christ. It also says I'm no one to judge another (Rom. 2:1), but it does say to judge righteous judgement. That can only mean that the Bible alone can define the lines, since no person can (or, for some, it doesn't define boundaries, but then what's their lasting source of objectivity?). If you can show me in Scripture where it allows/permits/promotes anything that has to do with same-sex relations, I'm open to hearing it. But I read it a lot, so I hope I'm able to aptly respond.

Quoting Alias1024 (Reply 22):
What is the point of equal protection for protected groups if the majority gets to decide who is a protected group? First you say that discrimination is against protected groups, and therefore homosexuals don't qualify.

A good chunk of all this has to do w/boundaries. If the boundaries are redefined on this, they can be redefined on anything down the road, stuff a lot of people may not consider and would (at least currently) find wrong.

Quoting Vikkyvik (Reply 27):

Scientific concepts get redefined CONSTANTLY.

While it's good to know there's always insightful research/studies going on, that statement alone doesn't give me comfort to trust in the lasting value (of at least some parts) of science.

Quoting Mariner (Reply 29):

I had no choice in the matter.

I'm not going to rip you for having an opinion.
Living the American Dream
 
User avatar
mariner
Posts: 18098
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

RE: Californias Day Of Shame - Prop 8 Passes (#2)

Sat Nov 08, 2008 4:20 am



Quoting Allstarflyer (Reply 37):
I'm not going to rip you for having an opinion.

Whoa. I haven't expressed an opinion. I have stated a fact.

mariner
aeternum nauta
 
vikkyvik
Posts: 11757
Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2003 1:58 pm

RE: Californias Day Of Shame - Prop 8 Passes (#2)

Sat Nov 08, 2008 6:42 am



Quoting Allstarflyer (Reply 37):
While it's good to know there's always insightful research/studies going on, that statement alone doesn't give me comfort to trust in the lasting value (of at least some parts) of science.

OK. So why did you bring science into it, then? Now I'm more confused.

And if you have the time or the inclination, I'd be interested in your response to the rest of my post.

Quoting Starbuk7 (Reply 31):
Marriage is for the sanctity of family. A man and woman get married, have children, and raise a family. To me this is what marriage is all about. Religion has nothing to do with it.

That's fine. But marriage, for many people, isn't about procreating. Or it isn't solely about procreation.

I admire your view of marriage in a way - I think many people could learn from it. But I don't see the point of trying to enforce that view on everyone.
I'm watching Jeopardy. The category is worst Madonna songs. "This one from 1987 is terrible".
 
UAXDXer
Posts: 700
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2004 3:36 pm

RE: Californias Day Of Shame - Prop 8 Passes (#2)

Sat Nov 08, 2008 7:11 am



Quoting Charles79 (Reply 35):
Besides, what sanctity is there to preserve? 50% of all marriages end up in divorce, and plenty of folks are into their 2nd or 3rd marriage. Aren't they also destroying the "sanctity" of marriage?

So are you saying gay marriages won't wind up in divorce?
It takes a bug to hit a windsheild but it takes guts to stick
 
airxliban
Posts: 4285
Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2003 12:14 pm

RE: Californias Day Of Shame - Prop 8 Passes (#2)

Sat Nov 08, 2008 7:21 am



Quoting SR117 (Reply 297):
Quoting AirxLiban (Reply 289):
Then if the argument about whether gay couples should be allowed to married is an argument about whether they should be entitled to the rights above, where is the major issue? There shouldn't be much argument about the first two - why should the right to share assets and enjoy tax benefits as a domestic couple be determined by sexual orientation?

Another problem with civil unions is that they are mostly only recognized in states which confer the same rights.

Here are a couple of articles that go further into detail on the civil union difference:

"The General Accounting Office in 1997 released a list of 1,049 benefits and protections available to heterosexual married couples. These benefits range from federal benefits, such as survivor benefits through Social Security, sick leave to care for ailing partner, tax breaks, veterans benefits and insurance breaks. They also include things like family discounts, obtaining family insurance through your employer, visiting your spouse in the hospital and making medical decisions if your partner is unable to. Civil Unions protect some of these rights, but not all of them."

Thanks for that. I just went online and downloaded the GAO report http://www.gao.gov/archive/1997/og97016.pdf which groups those 1,049 benefits into 13 categories:

Social security housing, and food stamps
Veterans' benefits
Taxation
Federal civilian and military service benefits
Employment benefits
Immigration, naturalization, and aliens
Indians
Trade, commerce, and intellectual property
Financial disclosure and conflict of interest
Crimes and family violence
Loans, guarantees, and payments in agriculture
Federal natural resources
Miscellaneous laws

I wonder if anyone has looked through each one of these 1,049 benefits and indicated which ones are at the core of issue. For instance, I can't believe that anyone would be opposed to the idea of gay couples not being able to asset share but I could imagine that there would be a lot of debate around adoption of children. Interesting enough I am not sure where either of those two fall in the list above.
PARIS, FRANCE...THE BEIRUT OF EUROPE.
 
User avatar
kc135topboom
Posts: 10997
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2005 2:26 am

RE: Californias Day Of Shame - Prop 8 Passes (#2)

Sat Nov 08, 2008 8:08 am

I find this most interesting. It seems to me, the people of California spoke, and passed Prop 8. Now, those on the losing side want to go against the will of the people.

Some call this a "gay rights" issue. That is pure BS. Any gay person, here in any state of the US, has exactly the same "rights" I, or any other single person has.

Marrage, is not a state given right. If it were there would not be anything called "common law marrage", that 11 US states recongnise. In the eyes of a state in the US (any state), marrage is a contractual agreement between two people, usually a man and a woman. It really does not matter if there is a peice of paper (marrage license), or not.

If health insurance is an issue, then the "non-working spouse" needs to get a job that provides that.

Inhearitance issues really are non-issues, if you write a will.

The Supreme Court has aleady ruled, in 1972 that it is not a violation of the US Constitution for any state to deny marrage licenses to same sex couples (Baker v. Nelson).

I find it funny, that the LGBT community was fully supporting putting Prop 8 on the ballot, they thought they would win. But, now that they lost, riots and lawyewrs run to the first courthouse they can find..............to hell with the "will of the people". Attack the messanger (Mormons?), challange their IRS tax exempt status.

Here is the problem the LGBT community face with a "straight" person. They repeatedly try to convince us they are a race, religion, or some other protected group status. Straght people recingnise LGBTs as a lifestyle, nothing more, nothing less. It is like being a liberal or conservitive.

I will continue to see gays as people who have a different lifestyle than I do, no more, no less. They can marry, as they have for years, just not each other, it must be the opposite sex.
 
Alias1024
Posts: 2223
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 11:13 am

RE: Californias Day Of Shame - Prop 8 Passes (#2)

Sat Nov 08, 2008 8:30 am



Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 47):
Marrage, is not a state given right.

The California Supreme Court has repeatedly affirmed that in the state of California marriage is a basic right.

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 47):
Here is the problem the LGBT community face with a "straight" person. They repeatedly try to convince us they are a race, religion, or some other protected group status. Straght people recingnise LGBTs as a lifestyle, nothing more, nothing less.

Two problems here.

First is that the same California Supreme Court has affirmed that they do indeed qualify as a protected group. Even if it were a lifestyle choice as you assert, that would not exclude it from being a protected group, just as the lifestyle choice of religion does not exclude religion from this same protected status.

The second problem is your generalization of straight people. Many straight people, myself and many of my friends included, do not see homosexuality simply as a lifestyle choice. When gay people tell us that being gay isn't a choice, we believe them. After all, they are the only people that would know for sure.

I'm off to sleep for the night. I suggest PilotNTrng do the same, to spare himself any further embarrassment.
It is a mistake to think you can solve any major problems with just potatoes.
 
stratosphere
Posts: 1057
Joined: Sat Sep 22, 2007 12:45 pm

RE: Californias Day Of Shame - Prop 8 Passes (#2)

Sat Nov 08, 2008 8:44 am

I guess because crime is so prevelant in my current suroundings this topic is really a non-issue for me..As I have gotten older I have become more mellow. I really believe in live and let live. Now while I do believe that "marriage" is between one man and one woman. It isn't a deal breaker for me. I say if it brings happiness to two people who are law abiding and they are not pushing any beliefs on me I say fine have a great life.. I will respect you views as you need to respect mine. But my focus is on more important things like crime the economy and loss of jobs..We have far more important things to lose sleep over than this..
 
ltbewr
Posts: 12361
Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2004 1:24 pm

RE: Californias Day Of Shame - Prop 8 Passes (#2)

Sat Nov 08, 2008 2:15 pm

The issue of civil marriage allowing same gender unions is a very emotional one for many, especially those of active faith and those that are Gay/Lesbian/Transgendered. Those of faith feel allowing it violates their faith and cannot let it be law and some of those who ar GLT cannot find the happiness in thier lives if they cannot have the full legal rights and emotional committment of legal marriage. The comprimise of 'CIvil Unions' doesn't have the same recognition outside of a state it is done in and there is the variances in rights under Civil Unions that may be well short of full Civilily recognized marriage.

Perhaps we need to do what is done in some countries like Belgium for example that only recognize marriage as by the civil authorities and not recognize that done by anyone else including religious ministers. There if you want your marriage recognized by your faith, you have to go to the town hall and have a separate ceremony there or file the documents and say the oath of marriage then you go to your priest/minister/Iman for their recoginition.

As to California, Florida and other USA states that ban same gender marriage or civil unions or certain right of same gender partners, economic and political pressures must be put on them. From for examples not supporting or attending 'Gay' days at Disney facilities, pressuring corporations, organizations and political parties not to hold meetings or conventions at facilites in those states, to making choices in their elections to support those who support same gender marriage and pressure by celeberties may all be needed to reverse these policies.
 
tsaord
Posts: 1267
Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2005 2:46 pm

RE: Californias Day Of Shame - Prop 8 Passes (#2)

Sun Nov 09, 2008 1:26 am

When is traditional marriage going to get fixed in all of this? Because right now its in shambles and made a complete joke of. People get married to get divorced in higher number, cheating is more acceptable, children being split from other parents out of scorn, cheating spouses having other children unbeknown to their other children, and SWINGERS!

But traditional marriage is so scared lol
there are icons, then there are legends, then there is rick flair
 
iairallie
Posts: 2326
Joined: Thu May 20, 2004 5:42 am

RE: Californias Day Of Shame - Prop 8 Passes (#2)

Sun Nov 09, 2008 1:43 am

Quoting IAirAllie (Reply 241):
My next door neighbor is a gay man. My former roomate and close friend was a gay man.

Some of my friends are black, er, gay. Just as bad no matter how you say it.

You are taking my words out of context. That is not the argument I was trying to make. I was responding to the person who was saying those who support prop 8 also dont' want gays as neighbors etc. I was just pointing out that I support prop 8 yet have no issues with gays as neighbors, friends or roomates.
Enough about flying lets talk about me!
 
User avatar
Aaron747
Posts: 8524
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 2:07 am

RE: Californias Day Of Shame - Prop 8 Passes (#2)

Sun Nov 09, 2008 1:45 am



Quoting IAirAllie (Reply 56):
I was just pointing out that I support prop 8 yet have no issues with gays as neighbors, friends or roomates.

Boy, I can't think of the last time I supported denying rights to my friends or roommates on account of my personal beliefs. Talk about selfish.
If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
 
johnboy
Posts: 2554
Joined: Wed Aug 18, 1999 9:09 pm

RE: Californias Day Of Shame - Prop 8 Passes (#2)

Sun Nov 09, 2008 3:05 am



Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 44):
I find it funny, that the LGBT community was fully supporting putting Prop 8 on the ballot, they thought they would win.

btw, you are so misinformed if you think this is the case.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 7

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: pvjin, tommy1808 and 14 guests