It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Prop 8 Passed. We take a step back.

page: 11
20
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 5 2008 @ 07:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by jsobecky
That is a silly premise. Auto rentals do not even ask you if you are married.

I just called AVIS and asked them, btw.


It is after the questions:

Will there be anyone else driving the vehicle?

What is this persons relationship to you?

Because if you don't want to have to pay extra, you have to be either married or have DP benefits. Call AVIS back and see if I'm wrong.




posted on Nov, 5 2008 @ 07:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by JaxonRoberts
I was not trying to be insulting, sorry if you took my post that way.


Thank you, I think it's way more productive to have an exchange of ideas/opinions in a calm non accusatory way.

As for the rest I hate to continually cover the same ground with slightly different words.....but....

I have the right to vote in a way consistent with my beliefs just like you. When a ballot is put before me by the state you can bet I will vote for the direction I would like to see my state and country go. If the supreme court decides something is unconstitutional they will let us know.



posted on Nov, 5 2008 @ 07:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by rapinbatsisaltherage

Originally posted by PoliticalRevolutionUND

You know what? I think this countries founding fathers would be rolling over in their graves if they read that. Not that they already are....

Whether people like it or not, this country was built on Christianity. We have strayed so far from our past its not even funny.


I would never be so arrogant to assume what the founding fathers would think of this issue. While acknowledging some things are based on morals of Christianity one can not ignore the constitution states it is unconstitutional to make laws that favor one religion or religion.

[edit on 5-11-2008 by rapinbatsisaltherage]


Wasn't being arrogant. Was merely stating a fact as to what this country was based upon. And that is not favoring one religion over another. Christianity thinks being gay is a sin.



posted on Nov, 5 2008 @ 07:22 PM
link   
reply to post by PoliticalRevolutionUND
 


Althought the country was founded with a strong christian backbone (which I find to be a very bad thing, I mean it has done nothing but hurt us) Our constitution the supreme law of the land was written with the rights of all men in mind.

Never once does it say that christians are best, or that what they say think or feel goes. It was written in a fashion that religion is no part of the law making process that is the beautiful thing about it. No matter what Moral stance the nut job religious freaks (excuse my hostility) have it makes no difference to the law making process. That is why this had absolutely NOTHING to do with moral family values and everything to do with civil rights and freedom. Your family moral have no meaning to me so why should I or my family suffer because you dont agree with the way we live?



posted on Nov, 5 2008 @ 07:23 PM
link   
reply to post by jsobecky
 


Sure....



In Massachusetts, where more than 10,000 same-sex couples have married since 2004, the courts don't keep a breakdown of gay and heterosexual divorces. But Joyce Kauffman, a member of the Massachusetts Lesbian and Gay Bar Association, said probably more than 100 gay divorces have been granted in Massachusetts, and possibly many more.


Source

100 out of more than 10,000....what's that. Right around 1%. That's a little better than a divorce rate of 50+% for "traditional" marriage in the US.

That is neither here nor there, though. If they have the rights that married couples do, they should have the same social standing (label). It has to be equal.....not almost equal.



posted on Nov, 5 2008 @ 07:23 PM
link   
reply to post by PoliticalRevolutionUND
 


You obviously didn’t understand my statement. I’ll repeat it. The US constitution states it is unconstitutional to make laws that favor one religion or religion in general. Prop 8 is working towards doing just that.

The First Amendment states, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…"

[edit on 5-11-2008 by rapinbatsisaltherage]



posted on Nov, 5 2008 @ 07:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by jsobecky
The problem is that I comprehend the BS that's being slung here. If you can't do a better job with your arguments, your bad, not mine.


My example is perfectly fine as only married or DP people can drive anothers rental without an extra fee.


[edit on 11/5/2008 by Griff]



posted on Nov, 5 2008 @ 07:24 PM
link   
reply to post by Griff
 


So in other words, you're saying that either married or DP gets the same price break (I had already asked that of AVIS - I'm way ahead of you).

But you don't want them to know that you're gay?

Why not?

I wouldn't be ashamed to say I am married....

====
Mod Edit: large quote removed
Mod Edit: Big Quote – Please Review This Link.


[edit on 11/6/2008 by Badge01]



posted on Nov, 5 2008 @ 07:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by jsobecky
If you can't supply a relevant example, don't blame me.

The problem is that I comprehend the BS that's being slung here. If you can't do a better job with your arguments, your bad, not mine.


no, see the problem is that there are no relevant examples that can be applied to you, hence your total lack of empathy. It's a catch 22. You can cling to that loophole as long as you want, but it's preventing your participation in this thread from being anything more than comments from the peanut gallery.



posted on Nov, 5 2008 @ 07:27 PM
link   

Whether people like it or not, this country was built on Christianity. We have strayed so far from our past its not even funny.


Yes, we have strayed all right, by allowing Christianity to creep into our government. The Founding Fathers of this country were largely deists and religious skeptics who were more influenced by the Enlightenment than by the church. The Enlightenment was about reshaping society around reason rather than institutionalized dogma and faith. They specifically intended to exclude religion from public life, and they specifically attempted to protect American citizens from the sort of enforced religion they experienced as British subjects.



posted on Nov, 5 2008 @ 07:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by Badgered1
reply to post by PoliticalRevolutionUND
 



And slavery
And women having few rights

What does religious freedom mean to you?
Freedom to practice your own particular faith without persecution - which goes back to Plymouth rock....
or freedom from having to follow a particular religion?
"This country was based on Christianity" is the same as saying "Conform or perish." You can't have it both ways. You want revolution? Really? And yet you're saying that the status quo should prevail.

I don't follow you.




What does religious freedom have to do with Prop 8? Nothing.


And the "revolution" is something I really do not think you understand. Yet.



posted on Nov, 5 2008 @ 07:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by kinglizard
I have the right to vote in a way consistent with my beliefs just like you.


And I have a right to the same equality and benefits that you share given to you automatically. I am seriously not trying to be nasty with you as I do believe you the right to your opinions. I just believe a civil rights issue should not even be put to a vote to begin with. Where do we live? Saudia Arabia?



posted on Nov, 5 2008 @ 07:31 PM
link   
reply to post by scientist
 


Don't be snitty with your snide comments. You cannot attack an argument, so you go after the person.

Act like an adult or stay out of the discussion.

Mod Edit: Big Quote – Please Review This Link.


[edit on 11/6/2008 by Badge01]



posted on Nov, 5 2008 @ 07:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by Grumble

Whether people like it or not, this country was built on Christianity. We have strayed so far from our past its not even funny.


Yes, we have strayed all right, by allowing Christianity to creep into our government. The Founding Fathers of this country were largely deists and religious skeptics who were more influenced by the Enlightenment than by the church. The Enlightenment was about reshaping society around reason rather than institutionalized dogma and faith. They specifically intended to exclude religion from public life, and they specifically attempted to protect American citizens from the sort of enforced religion they experienced as British subjects.


Wrong.

Read this



posted on Nov, 5 2008 @ 07:33 PM
link   
reply to post by kinglizard
 


Then let me ask you how you stand on the basic founding principles of this nation, freedom and equality. These are the principles that I find this amendment in direct opposition to, and therefore unamerican. I agree that sometimes it is very difficult to seperate Church and State, but this is one of those times when that line gets blurred.

To me this is an instance of nonequality based on personal beliefs, and no matter what my religious morals dictate, I find it far more offensive to discriminate than to live and let live. Let each individual deal with the consequences of their lives in the next life.

Three quotes from Jesus come to mind when dealing with this issue: "Render unto Caesar what is Caesar's, and render unto God what is God's" (separation of Church and State), "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone" (or in this case, vote) and "Judge not lest ye be judged" (which clearly many are judging homosexuals and their lifestyle here). In my opinion, all three have been crossed by the outcome of this vote. Meanwhile, all of the instances used to condemn homosexuality are from the Old Testament, and it is my belief that the New Testament overides the Old when in conflict (unless of course you are Jewish, but I would assume that most, if not all of those opposed here are not Jewish).



posted on Nov, 5 2008 @ 07:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by rapinbatsisaltherage
reply to post by PoliticalRevolutionUND
 


You obviously didn’t understand my statement. I’ll repeat it. The US constitution states it is unconstitutional to make laws that favor one religion or religion in general. Prop 8 is working towards doing just that.


You are right. I don't think I did understand the first time. So please explain to me just HOW religion fits into a "gay marriage"? Because it really doesn't.



posted on Nov, 5 2008 @ 07:37 PM
link   




The original settlers were not the Founding Fathers. Neither were, in many cases, the elected officials who followed them. 19th and 20th century historical revisionism has taught us the biased point of view represented by the web site you link (faithofourfathers.net). Let me ask you this, if the Founding Fathers wished to establish a religion, why did they not do so, and why did they specifically prohibit such an establishment?



posted on Nov, 5 2008 @ 07:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by PoliticalRevolutionUND

You are right. I don't think I did understand the first time. So please explain to me just HOW religion fits into a "gay marriage"? Because it really doesn't.


I'd say at least 90% or more - - reasons for not allowing gay marriage is bible reference.

God and the bible are the primary reason/argument against gay marriage.

That makes the reason to deny equal rights - - religious based - - which goes against church and state.



posted on Nov, 5 2008 @ 07:37 PM
link   
This is an age old argument that's never settled and minds are not changed.
It's almost funny how the same people get caught up in it time and time again.
And I mean myself, too. Just taking a moment to laugh at us and myself.

The truth is, if religious people wanted to claim the word "marriage" for themselves, I wouldn't mind, as long as "marriage" had no legal meaning or attachments. A person getting "married", would do so in a church and (just as happens now), they would have to sign an additional document that declared a "union"of some sort, which would be the one that imparted legal rights according to the state. And other people (those desiring the equal secular union - like me - and gay people) could apply for that "union" and get hitched. We'd call ourselves "unioned" instead of "married".


Because the religious ceremony of marriage now has no legal ties. It's all about "in the eyes of God" and so forth. People married in a church still have to sign the legalities. Instead of taking the word "marriage" away from religious people, we could take the word "marriage" away from the state. That way, every couple, gay, straight or transexual, would get "unioned" and in addition, the religious would have their freedom to get "married" in the eyes of God.

How does that sound?



posted on Nov, 5 2008 @ 07:37 PM
link   
reply to post by PoliticalRevolutionUND
 


I explained in my argument on page 8: www.abovetopsecret.com...

That religion is the only “solid” opposition to gay marriage, making the passing of prop 8 a violation of our constitution, because it supports one faith and forces others to live by that faith’s standards. Please address the points I make in that post if you wish to counter this because it is too long for me to re-post.



new topics

top topics



 
20
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join