|
On August 05 2010 06:10 D10 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 05 2010 06:08 Gatsbi wrote:On August 05 2010 06:03 Diuqil wrote:On August 05 2010 05:51 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:Prop 8 overturned. - CNN EDIT: Proposition 8 has been overturned by Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker, reports CNN.
The decision is expected to be appealed to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court, and could reach the Supreme Court if the high court justices agree to review it. Aw man.. I'm a strong supporter of Prop 8  ...Why? He believes in the dictatorship of the majority, and think that the minorities desires should be crushed under popular vote, even if they dont directly affect anyones life but theirs
Yes I do.
Yes, that too.
What is the problem here though? They're just my beliefs, you act like yours are something better, its all an opinion.
|
Marriage should not be a government institution. It should all be done by contract whether with your church, lawyer, etc. Please, do we really need to force an idea onto someone else?
|
On August 05 2010 06:10 D10 wrote:
He believes in the dictatorship of the majority, and think that the minorities desires should be crushed under popular vote, even if they dont directly affect anyones life but theirs
If you believe in Democracy, that's pretty much the purest form of it...
|
On August 05 2010 06:14 Diuqil wrote:Show nested quote +On August 05 2010 06:10 D10 wrote:On August 05 2010 06:08 Gatsbi wrote:On August 05 2010 06:03 Diuqil wrote:On August 05 2010 05:51 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:Prop 8 overturned. - CNN EDIT: Proposition 8 has been overturned by Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker, reports CNN.
The decision is expected to be appealed to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court, and could reach the Supreme Court if the high court justices agree to review it. Aw man.. I'm a strong supporter of Prop 8 ...Why? He believes in the dictatorship of the majority, and think that the minorities desires should be crushed under popular vote, even if they dont directly affect anyones life but theirs Yes I do. Yes, that too. What is the problem here though? They're just my beliefs, you act like yours are something better, its all an opinion.
Yeah, but the difference is that your opinion is backwards and harmful. Just because it's an opinion doesn't mean it's not stupid.
|
Hooray, time for the second coming of Roe v. Wade. This is the type of crap that needs to be handled legislatively and with the will of the people. Now we're going to take another fairly minor issue (when compared to economic and foreign policy) and blow it out of proportion, giving it more importance than is due.
Before any retard calls me a gay-hater, understand that:
1) I support gay rights
2) My beef with what this judge has done is about PROCESS.
|
On August 05 2010 06:17 xDaunt wrote:
Hooray, time for the second coming of Roe v. Wade. This is the type of crap that needs to be handled legislatively and with the will of the people. Now we're going to take another fairly minor issue (when compared to economic and foreign policy) and blow it out of proportion, giving it more importance than is due.
Before any retard calls me a gay-hater, understand that:
1) I support gay rights
2) My beef with what this judge has done is about PROCESS.
yeah, we should have waited until a majority of people supported racial integration. Brown v Board of Education was such a load of bull
OH WAIT
|
On August 05 2010 06:14 Diuqil wrote:Show nested quote +On August 05 2010 06:10 D10 wrote:On August 05 2010 06:08 Gatsbi wrote:On August 05 2010 06:03 Diuqil wrote:On August 05 2010 05:51 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:Prop 8 overturned. - CNN EDIT: Proposition 8 has been overturned by Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker, reports CNN.
The decision is expected to be appealed to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court, and could reach the Supreme Court if the high court justices agree to review it. Aw man.. I'm a strong supporter of Prop 8 ...Why? He believes in the dictatorship of the majority, and think that the minorities desires should be crushed under popular vote, even if they dont directly affect anyones life but theirs Yes I do. Yes, that too. What is the problem here though? They're just my beliefs, you act like yours are something better, its all an opinion.
The problem is that legal gay marriage can be beneficial to many couples for [reason reason reason] and would have no effect on your life, yet you choose to support the banning of gay marriage. Don't you see something wrong here?
|
Sanya12364 Posts
Holy gay marriage bump. Marriage as legal status vs marriage as spiritual/religious status.
Legal status is one issue, social acceptance and religious status is another. I wish they would just separate those two.
|
Great news, although I wonder how long it will be before we get a SCOTUS decision and it finally gets put to rest.
|
About time. I never did understand the logic that gay marriage was somehow harmful to straight marriage.
Divorce is more common and much more harmful yet none, or very few, of the anti-gays wants to consider a government ban on it.
|
On August 05 2010 06:21 TanGeng wrote:
Holy gay marriage bump. Marriage as legal status vs marriage as spiritual/religious status.
Legal status is one issue, social acceptance and religious status is another. I wish they would just separate those two.
If they did things my way, "marriage" would be run and kept track of by the churches/other religious organizations, while the government would hand out civil unions. This would pretty much eliminate the debate entirely, but religious people are just too insistent on having special government recognition.
|
On August 05 2010 06:14 Diuqil wrote:Show nested quote +On August 05 2010 06:10 D10 wrote:On August 05 2010 06:08 Gatsbi wrote:On August 05 2010 06:03 Diuqil wrote:On August 05 2010 05:51 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:Prop 8 overturned. - CNN EDIT: Proposition 8 has been overturned by Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker, reports CNN.
The decision is expected to be appealed to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court, and could reach the Supreme Court if the high court justices agree to review it. Aw man.. I'm a strong supporter of Prop 8 ...Why? He believes in the dictatorship of the majority, and think that the minorities desires should be crushed under popular vote, even if they dont directly affect anyones life but theirs Yes I do. Yes, that too. What is the problem here though? They're just my beliefs, you act like yours are something better, its all an opinion.
An opinion isn't immune from being called stupid, especially when there is no evidence to back up a statement.
|
What was the name of the report that said if Gay marriage was made legal the wedding industry would rake in billions upon billions of profit in which the Government could then tax....
|
Gosh, too long to read this thread. My 2 cents:
The California voters chose a traditional definition of marriage, 1 man + 1 woman. This was in spite of a very $$$ campaign by the homosexual organisations, and violence against the supporters of traditional marriage.
Too exhausted to post any more; just wanted to show my support
|
On August 05 2010 06:23 matjlav wrote:Show nested quote +On August 05 2010 06:21 TanGeng wrote:
Holy gay marriage bump. Marriage as legal status vs marriage as spiritual/religious status.
Legal status is one issue, social acceptance and religious status is another. I wish they would just separate those two. If they did things my way, "marriage" would be run and kept track of by the churches/other religious organizations, while the government would hand out civil unions. This would pretty much eliminate the debate entirely, but religious people are just too insistent on having special government recognition.
I thought the government wasn't supposed to recognize any religion? Sorry if I am totally wrong, I am only speaking of knowledge from my senior year gov class =/
And yes, I agree with you. I am religious myself (flame all you want), but I believe this would be the easiest way to do it. And if iit does happen this way, it doesn't affect me in any way, shape, or form. People get the right to live their own life how they want it. That is why we live in America no?
|
This is what courts are for: fixing travesties and abominations of law such as prop 8.
|
Violence against supports of traditional marriage? That's asking for a flamefest without any logical or factual backing
It also conveniently ignores decades of mindless violence against gay individuals for no reason.
Furthermore, it's not up to State or federal legislature to define marriage with respect to a religious viewpoint. Though it's far from the case, this country at least ostensibly recognizes a separation of church and state.
As such, preventing two legal age adults from marrying has no basis.
|
YEEEEEEEEEEEESSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS!!!!!!!!!
Finally!!! Machine and Gretorp can make it official!
![[image loading]](http://img121.imageshack.us/img121/4105/ief006.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://img405.imageshack.us/img405/8538/ief009.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://img198.imageshack.us/img198/8999/ief2001.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://img29.imageshack.us/img29/8921/ief3197.jpg)
|
On August 05 2010 06:27 Crimson wrote:Show nested quote +On August 05 2010 06:23 matjlav wrote:On August 05 2010 06:21 TanGeng wrote:
Holy gay marriage bump. Marriage as legal status vs marriage as spiritual/religious status.
Legal status is one issue, social acceptance and religious status is another. I wish they would just separate those two. If they did things my way, "marriage" would be run and kept track of by the churches/other religious organizations, while the government would hand out civil unions. This would pretty much eliminate the debate entirely, but religious people are just too insistent on having special government recognition. I thought the government wasn't supposed to recognize any religion? Sorry if I am totally wrong, I am only speaking of knowledge from my senior year gov class =/ And yes, I agree with you. I am religious myself (flame all you want), but I believe this would be the easiest way to do it. And if iit does happen this way, it doesn't affect me in any way, shape, or form. People get the right to live their own life how they want it. That is why we live in America no?
Well, Constitutionally, the wording is that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion," which in itself is really vague and doesn't imply a separation of church and state. But over hundreds of years of American history, the generally accepted interpretation is that religion and state shouldn't mix.
I'm honestly fine with having the government call unions "marriages," but the issue is when people use government marriage and religious marriage interchangeably in this argument. They're two completely separate things, and the issue we are debating is government marriage. If we called these things "civil unions" vs. "marriages" instead, the semantics of the whole thing would be much clearer.
|
On August 05 2010 06:23 Jayme wrote:
An opinion isn't immune from being called stupid, especially when there is no evidence to back up a statement.
Why does he need evidence to back up his opinion that he believes in majority rule? It's not like it's a science formula where you could unequivocally prove that one is more correct than the other. It's completely subjective... The fact that you don't happen to personally agree with his opinion doesn't make it "stupid".
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://img121.imageshack.us/i/ief006.jpg/)
![[image loading]](http://img405.imageshack.us/i/ief009.jpg/)
![[image loading]](http://img198.imageshack.us/i/ief2001.jpg/)
![[image loading]](http://img29.imageshack.us/i/ief3197.jpg/)
