Prop 8 Passed. We take a step back.

page: 5
20
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 5 2008 @ 03:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheRooster
it's a sexual preference. If that had passed, marrying farm animals would have been next.

...

Rather than remove the post, why don't you try to get me to see your light? Free speech doesn't just protect the popular words, it protects them all.


If you really think that the next natural step to gay marriage, is bestiality, then I'm afraid there's no way for you to see the "light," because you have your head in a place where the sun doesn't shine.




posted on Nov, 5 2008 @ 03:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheRooster

If you prefer to have gay sex and believe you should be afforded special rights for so, then open the door baby, because it shouldn't stop with you! Equal rights for all... Yes even farmers



Just what is so terrible about equal rights for all? If im not mistaken I believe the phrase "All men are created equal" is a very important phrase here in the united states.

No one is demanding special rights that others dont have. They are demanding equal rights.

Equal rights for all humans regardless of race, religion, gender, handicap or sexual orientation. Anythng less is just plain unamerican.

You seem to think that some people should have all the rights and others should only be allowed some rights.

You seem to think that equal rights for all is ignorant.
Please how is equal rights for all ignorant?

I am reminded of a quote from the book Animal Farm by george orwell...

"All men are created equal, but some are more equal than others."

Is that how you actually feel? Because thats how your post reads.



posted on Nov, 5 2008 @ 03:17 PM
link   
reply to post by skeptic1
 



What's less clear is the impact on as many as 16,000 gay and lesbian couples who have wed since June.

The answer could come from the same court that overturned California's previous law defining marriage as the union of a man and a woman. Or it could come from a higher-ranking tribunal in Washington, D.C.

Click for full article

From what I can gather so far there is a chance it will invalidate previous gay marriages as well.

So even when gay couples finally manage to get married, they have to continue to live in the very real fear that it will be taken back.

Everyone remember the thread about the Lesbian school teacher that recently married? Most of her students and their parents attended the wedding. I wonder how all those parents are going to explain this to their children??....

Sigh

[edit on 5-11-2008 by Lucid Lunacy]



posted on Nov, 5 2008 @ 03:21 PM
link   
Theres no doubt that the passing of this law is a step down in the advancement of a "truly equal" society for Americans. In my mind i thought there would be a huge majority of no voters... especially in California (where i reside). The very essence of this proposition takes away rights from free americans and it's very unnacceptable.

I've read many people who are dismissing this as just a piece of paper, or a formality that gays don't need to have a gay relationship. BS.

Marriage is about LOVE. Gay people feel the same love for each other that strait people share. It's not a piece of paper, this law will take the rights of free Americans to love each other, and to finalize that love in marriage. Any one who tells you that marriage is about anything else but LOVE is wrong, and have probably gotten married for the wrong reasons.

We should be past this as a society. Gays are no different that straits. What is so difficult about understanding that for people. It's just like race, and religious creed..... THESE OUR OUR RIGHTS AS AMERICANS..... TO CHOOSE ANY OF THE ABOVE AND NOT BE JUDGED. IT'S NOT WEATHER WE ARE GAY OR STRAIT OR BLAKC AND WHITE. IT IS THHE CONTENT OF OUR CHARACTER THAT SHOULD DECIDE HOW WE ARE JUDGED.

Makes me sad to see so many Americans still blinded by fear and ignorance. This goes beyond misunderstanding... Taking away the rights for people to love one another is just flat out wrong.



posted on Nov, 5 2008 @ 03:29 PM
link   
Gays should not have any right to biblical marriage if you belive in the bible you have to know if your gay it is sinful but not to say you are going to hell but marriage should have been left between a man and woman as the bible has it.

Jesus did say we would return to the days of sodom and gomorrah so I know his return could be like a thief in the night.



posted on Nov, 5 2008 @ 03:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by scientist
If you really think that the next natural step to gay marriage, is bestiality, then I'm afraid there's no way for you to see the "light," because you have your head in a place where the sun doesn't shine.


Only in the last what?? 25 to 50 years has homosexuality become somewhat acceptable and "mainstream"? Who's to say that in another 25 or 50 more years bestiality won't be considered "Mainstream" by some individuals (and find it's way onto a California ballot)?
Or God forbid, as someone pointed out earlier, sex with minors becomes more "mainstream" and they put a ballot initiative up to eliminate the minimum age requirement to obtain a marriage license.

So yes "Scientist", regardless of where my head seems to be, even a blind man can have the kind of vision it takes to protect a document that is supposed to serve society (from it's ills) until the end of time. Where do you draw a line forever and say it will never be breached, at homosexuality?

[edit on 11/5/2008 by TheRooster]



posted on Nov, 5 2008 @ 03:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by dbates

Originally posted by Kailassa
"Well son, your teacher and his partner must have loved each other very much, and decided to make a permanent commitment to each other, just like Mommy and I did."

I love my parents and brothers, but I don't need a contract with them to prove it. What exact purpose is the contract for? What good does it accomplish?




There are several legal benefits to marriage. There are both federal and state laws available only to married people. Other benefits include Social Security benefits, inheritance rights, property rights, the ability to sue third parties for the wrongful death of a spouse or loss of consortium, and the right to make medical decisions on a spouse's behalf.
. . .
Getting married is one of the most important things people do. Hopefully, it reflects a deep emotional commitment because it also truly changes the participants' legal statuses. By understanding your rights and obligations as a married person you may more fully appreciate the step you are taking.





On the order of 1,400 legal rights are conferred upon married couples in the U.S. Typically these are composed of about 400 state benefits and over 1,000 federal benefits. Among them are the rights to:
- joint parenting; bullet joint adoption;
- joint foster care, custody, and visitation (including non-biological parents);
- status as next-of-kin for hospital visits and medical decisions where one partner is too ill to be competent;
- joint insurance policies for home, auto and health;
- dissolution and divorce protections such as community property and child support;
- immigration and residency for partners from other countries;
- inheritance automatically in the absence of a will;
- joint leases with automatic renewal rights in the event one partner dies or leaves the house or apartment;
- inheritance of jointly-owned real and personal property through the right of survivorship (which avoids the time and expense and taxes in probate);
- benefits such as annuities, pension plans, Social Security, and Medicare;
- spousal exemptions to property tax increases upon the death of one partner who is a co-owner of the home;
- veterans' discounts on medical care, education, and home loans; joint filing of tax returns;
- joint filing of customs claims when traveling;
- wrongful death benefits for a surviving partner and children;
- bereavement or sick leave to care for a partner or child;
- decision-making power with respect to whether a deceased partner will be cremated or not and where to bury him or her;
- crime victims' recovery benefits;
- loss of consortium tort benefits; bullet domestic violence protection orders;
- judicial protections and evidentiary immunity;


There have been cases where a man could not visit his partner who was in hospital dying, because he was not related to him or married to him.

Denying these rights to a group of people because they have a need to be with their own sex rather than with the opposite sex is unconstitutional.
Trying to get around it by changing the wording in the law so it only allows for marriage to be between a man and a woman is no less discriminatory that saying you are free to drink from a water fountain if you are white.

Dark-skinned people could bleach all the colour out, but a homosexual man cannot change.

Some still spout the hatred-justifying lie that being gay is a choice. I've seen situations in which gay men have married women and tried to make that choice, and instead they've ruined two peoples' lives in the process.



posted on Nov, 5 2008 @ 03:44 PM
link   
Bestiality would not ever be allowed because there is no way for the animal to consent... Being entirely serious.

If an animal could turn around and speak plain English and say it gave consent...then after you realised you wern't high
it could be acceptable.


Sex with minors...perhaps more minor than it is today, but it would still always be set at an acceptable limit because when a child goes below a certain age they are not mature enough to make the decision for themselves.

[edit on 5-11-2008 by StevenDye]



posted on Nov, 5 2008 @ 03:45 PM
link   
My bad...double post

[edit on 5-11-2008 by StevenDye]



posted on Nov, 5 2008 @ 03:46 PM
link   
reply to post by TheRooster
 


Sex with minors, sex with animals, sex with trees. Christ man, are you even aware of how absurd this logic is??...

Homosexual Marriage is consensual between two adults.

The Gay Community SUPPORTS that marriage should be consensual and between two adults.

Your leap in logic isn't a leap in logic at all. It's a leap to bigoted ignorance.

[edit on 5-11-2008 by Lucid Lunacy]



posted on Nov, 5 2008 @ 03:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheRooster
Only in the last what?? 25 to 50 years has homosexuality become somewhat acceptable and "mainstream


The context in which you use "acceptable" is very loaded. For example.. it doesn't seem to be "acceptable" to you... which boggles my mind, as you are not gay - why do you care what gay people do together?

What if gays were allowed to vote on how often you had sex with your partner, and which positions were acceptable?

Personally, I'm waiting for the day that I can witness a child marrying an animal. I mean, that's the next step, right?


p.s. are you familiar with miscegenation laws? They made it a crime to have an inter-racial relationship, and many of the supporters of this used the same exact arguments you are using to attack gay rights.


Originally posted by Lucid Lunacy
Your leap in logic isn't a leap in logic at all. It's a leap to bigoted ignorance.


well said.

[edit on 5-11-2008 by scientist]



posted on Nov, 5 2008 @ 04:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by Lucid Lunacy
reply to post by TheRooster
 


Sex with minors, sex with animals, sex with trees. Christ man, are you even aware of how absurd this logic is??...

Homosexual Marriage is consensual between two adults.

The Gay Community SUPPORTS that marriage should be consensual and between two adults.

Your leap in logic isn't a leap in logic at all. It's a leap to bigoted ignorance.

[edit on 5-11-2008 by Lucid Lunacy]


It's not ignorance at all, the question I am begging to be answered is WHERE DOES IT STOP? Will the homosexual community be satisfied with marriage?

OR

Will each time something becomes "acceptable", will society be forced to conform to your lifestyle and preferences? If that sounds ignorant, then I suggest you get outside your own world for a minute and think in terms of a document that is to serve mankind until mankind ceases' to exist. We are not talking about your or my future, we are talking about our children and their children's future. When the founding fathers drafted the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, they did their best to set it up for hundreds of years, not 20, 30, or 40!


[edit on 11/5/2008 by TheRooster]



posted on Nov, 5 2008 @ 04:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by Lucid Lunacy
Sex with minors, sex with animals, sex with trees. Christ man, are you even aware of how absurd this logic is??...


It goes a lot further than this though.
If this movement is not nipped in the bud, people will start having sex with cars, bicycles and park benches.
Uh oh, it's too late; they already are!
All these helpless straight males are being forced to partake in conjugal intimacy with inanimate objects by the fact that homosexuals want to live as legally joined loving couples.



- That oak outside my window keeps flirting with me. Makes it so hard to concentrate on posting when it waves its branches, now sprouting tender chartreuse leaves, at me like that.



posted on Nov, 5 2008 @ 04:13 PM
link   
reply to post by TheRooster
 


The constitution is the document that also states the simple fact that we are all EQUAL. Hence the simple reasoning that suggests: If strait poeople can celebrate their love through marriage, gays should be allowed the same and EQUAL right to do so.



posted on Nov, 5 2008 @ 04:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by scientist
The context in which you use "acceptable" is very loaded. For example.. it doesn't seem to be "acceptable" to you... which boggles my mind, as you are not gay - why do you care what gay people do together?


Scientist, I could care less what happens in the privacy of anybody's home, what you do there (and keep there) is your business. If 100 years ago society deemed homosexuality to be deviant sexual behavior, then who's to say humanity won't go all the way down the gutter in another 100 years? I'm looking for a line, it's that simple! One we can all agree on, and then set in stone never to be breached... ever!

If you consider that opinion to be ignorant, then so be it. It would not be the first time I was wrong.



posted on Nov, 5 2008 @ 04:29 PM
link   
how about drawing the line at gay marriage? How is that so complicated?

Do they have to actually spell out everything that gay marriage does not include?

Gay marriage includes:
- allowing gays to marry
- allowing gays to adopt
- allowing gays to have same rights as hetero couples

Gay marriage does not include:
- murder
- robbery
- bestiality
- pedophilia
- torture
- autoerotic asphyxiation
- illegal poaching
- stealing candy from babies
- etc.


Originally posted by TheRooster
If 100 years ago society deemed homosexuality to be deviant sexual behavior, then who's to say humanity won't go all the way down the gutter in another 100 years?


so again, you are implying that providing gays the same rights as heterosexuals, is somehow going "down the gutter." Can you not see how offensive and ignorant such a mentality can come across to others?

Personally, I believe that we started going down the gutter as soon as the religious fanatics started to impose their beliefs on the rest of the world.

[edit on 5-11-2008 by scientist]



posted on Nov, 5 2008 @ 04:35 PM
link   
Although the need for human progression and evolution is no more evident than in today's society , i have always seen Gay marriage as a perversion of our fastly dissolving traditions.

its just wrong to be blunt.

There is no real need for it and i dont think it helps the ideology and structure of the Family institution as a whole.



posted on Nov, 5 2008 @ 04:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheRooster
When the founding fathers drafted the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, they did their best to set it up for hundreds of years, not 20, 30, or 40!


Good


Did you see my post on the previous page?

They would not agree with you.


Hint: Marriage is not defined in the U.S Constitution, but Equality for All is.


It's not ignorance at all, the question I am begging to be answered is WHERE DOES IT STOP? Will the homosexual community be satisfied with marriage?


It is ignorance because it is purely illogical.

You are trying to connect things to homosexuality that are not homosexual in nature.

[edit on 5-11-2008 by Lucid Lunacy]



posted on Nov, 5 2008 @ 04:38 PM
link   
reply to post by Lucid Lunacy
 


That is just wrong. They married with full protection and legality of the law; their marriages should not be invalidated.

And, for everyone saying that gays want "special" rights to get married....this is not about special rights for gay men and women. This is about equal rights for men and women.....gay, bi, or straight.



posted on Nov, 5 2008 @ 04:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by tombangelta
Although the need for human progression and evolution is no more evident than in today's society , i have always seen Gay marriage as a perversion of our fastly dissolving traditions.

its just wrong to be blunt.



out of curiosity, what do you consider to be these dissolving traditions? Please be specific. Also keep in mind my prior reference to anti-miscegenation laws, which were also "tradition" at one point in time:

en.wikipedia.org...



Anti-miscegenation laws, also known as miscegenation laws, were laws that banned interracial marriage and sometimes interracial sex between whites and members of other races. In the United States, interracial marriage, cohabitation and sex have since 1863 been termed "miscegenation." Contemporary usage of the term "miscegenation" is less frequent. In North America, laws against interracial marriage and interracial sex existed and were enforced in the Thirteen Colonies from the late seventeenth century onwards, and subsequently in several US states and US territories until 1967. Similar laws were also enforced in Nazi Germany, from 1935 until 1945, and in South Africa during the Apartheid era, from 1949 until 1985.


If that "tradition" were still upheld, our next president would be a walking, talking example of the result of a criminal act.

[edit on 5-11-2008 by scientist]





new topics
top topics
 
20
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join


Haters, Bigots, Partisan Trolls, Propaganda Hacks, Racists, and LOL-tards: Time To Move On.
read more: Community Announcement re: Decorum