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.

 

Same-sex marriage ban wins; opponents sue to block measure

page: 16
5
<< 13  14  15    17  18  19 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 11 2008 @ 06:01 PM
link   
reply to post by mproject
 


*Snip* minority is not specific to race, look it up in a dictionary.

mi·nor·i·ty (m-nôr-t, -nr-, m-)
n. pl. mi·nor·i·ties
1.
a. The smaller in number of two groups forming a whole.
b. A group or party having fewer than a controlling number of votes.
2.
a. An ethnic, racial, religious, or other group having a distinctive presence within a society.
b. A group having little power or representation relative to other groups within a society.
c. A member of one of these groups. See Usage Note at color.
3. Law The state or period of being under legal age: still in her minority.

and gays should be able to be married, they want to get married for the same reasons hetero's do. as show of their love for each other.

Mod Edit: There will be no derogatory name calling.



2) Behavior: You will not behave in an abusive, hateful and/or racist manner, and will not harass, threaten, nor attack anyone.
Terms and Conditions

[edit on 11-11-2008 by MemoryShock]




posted on Nov, 11 2008 @ 06:11 PM
link   
reply to post by Jemison
 



Well can you state a reason as to why you do not believe in gay marriage; how can those people be your friends if you do not believe in those rights for them; I would say it is hard to call them a friend then if you feel they are not deserving enough of that privilege....I still think it is homophobic



posted on Nov, 11 2008 @ 06:13 PM
link   
reply to post by calcoastseeker
 




And abnormal is an opinion for the most part and they are lots of gays in the community?

So when people are different then the status quo, we should have them burn at the stake, very civilized and advanced of you.



posted on Nov, 11 2008 @ 06:16 PM
link   
reply to post by reconpilot
 



You sum it up very well; appreciate your opinion overall



posted on Nov, 11 2008 @ 06:24 PM
link   
It is not unusual for a minority to believe they do not deserve equal rights.

It is the responsibility of those who are stronger in equal mindset to see that they get it.



posted on Nov, 11 2008 @ 06:27 PM
link   
Isn’t it odd for this religion to deny love, why would anyone want to be apart of that.
It seem to me that this Mormon religion has lost its way. To deny a person their equal right is what this Mormon religion teaches its congregation, and to spend millions of dollar of donations to push their hateful agenda.

These people will have to stand before G-d one day and explain why they chose to take his teaching and spin it in to lies to spread evil. No one gets away with anything after you die.

Gay people want equal rights! What is so hard to understand You Mormon religion nuts have no “right” to interfere in other people rights!

If gays want to get married let them get married (it can “not” hurt you!) and it is “NONE” of your business anyway. TAKE YOU HATE AGENDA ELSE WHERE!



posted on Nov, 11 2008 @ 07:02 PM
link   
Well... let's contemplate, and take a SERIOUS look at objections (especially those of you who have an "enlightened" open mind compared to us "unenlightened moral types"). Ask yourself a question... where is your line if any? Seriously. Where is your line? Your line today may be being argued in a few years ... so think hard on this.

Polygamy ! Why not... there is definitely more history and custom related to this type of marriage. Still practiced in many circles and cultures around the world.

How how about insestual marriage? This historically has been practiced even by royalty.

How about Pedophile marriage.. hey, the 8 year old consented, run to Vegas.

How about marrying your farm animal.... oh wait that ain't natural.

So, Where is THE line?



I use this same argument AGAINST school prayer and Religion in School... yeah, all fine and dandy to have fellowship Christian prayer in school, until you really think about it.... what happens when the "muslim call to prayers" starts coming over the loudspeaker and all the kids think it is cool to wear face hiding "religious garb"... all of a sudden those for School prayer and religion in schools have to think twice.

Can of worms.



posted on Nov, 11 2008 @ 07:12 PM
link   
But let us make it clear it is not exclusively Mormon.

It is one or two lines of "bibleism"

I have been Mormon for a few years (no longer because of male domination) - but I support them in many ways. They are Christian - whether they or other choose to accept that.

There is a site: mormonsformarriage.com... - - - Mormon's that supports Equality of Marriage.



posted on Nov, 11 2008 @ 07:16 PM
link   
reply to post by reconpilot

Thank you for the same, and no, I'm not really surprised... 'pleased' would be a better word.


What you are describing is a disturbing trend I have noticed as well, and we could indeed be seeing a preview of the collapse of the US. Instead of trying to accomplish a stated goal the way practically every other group has accomplished theirs (by changing public opinion), people on this subject want to take the easy way out and get judges to thwart the will of the people. This has already created two sides who will not now listen to the other side of the debate, and will no doubt continue to solidify those sides until some physical violence is likely to occur.

You're right; we are a country of gluttons and impatience. We want it, we want it now, and how dare anyone even think of denying it to us? The methods used to advance the cause are of little or no consequence, as long as the ends are achieved. Who objects, why someone objects, it doesn't matter; they objected, so they are now a mortal enemy.

You have found another of those crazy Americans who tries to sit back in self-sufficiency and watch with sadness and a bit of humor as the population at large turns into a 'gimme gimme' society. Soon enough, the things we have built our life around will run out, and the result will be what you are seeing here, multiplied.

I tend to think of this as some sort of dress rehearsal for our future instead of a manufactured issue in itself. but, hey, we could debate over which came first: the chicken or the egg as well. And we would accomplish just as much. But either way, I think we are both too aware of what is coming.

TheRedneck



posted on Nov, 11 2008 @ 07:17 PM
link   
I have no problem with Polygamy.

All unions/marriages need to be that of INFORMED consensual adults.

What exactly connection is there between any of this and two consenting adults?



posted on Nov, 11 2008 @ 07:36 PM
link   
reply to post by infolurker
 




I'll address all of these, again.

Polygamy: I actually have no problem with polygamy, if all involved are consenting adults. I don’t like the practice personally, but I don’t judge people for it, it is frankly none of my business.

Incest: As for incest, research shows incest usually results in psychological harm and if a child is produced from incest it has a higher risk of medical defects. A brother marrying his flesh and blood is not the same as two, unrelated adults committing to one another.

Pedophilia: Two consenting adults marrying is not pedophilia. You are comparing apples and oranges. Two adults committing their lives to each other is not the same as an adult sexually abusing a child.

PS- none of these things have been legalized in other places where gay marriage and civil unions have been legal for years.

The “line”: Where is the line for the people pushing their morality on others? If we allow that mentality to be legal with gay marriage then what next? Don’t agree with gay marriage, but should you really make laws against other people doing something that does not lawfully affect you? I also oppose 8 because I fear this mentality that if something makes you uncomfortable for whatever reason, even if it doesn’t lawfully affect you, it should be put to a vote and that vote is somehow constitutional. I don’t care if you don’t consider marriage a right and only think of it as a privilege, that is a very scary mentality. Gay marriage doesn’t lawfully affect you, if you can make an amendment against it despite this fact then imagine what else can be passed? People say this isn’t about religion, but many churches gave money to support Prop 8, no, it was not illegal for them to do so but imagine what else they can get passed by endorsing this mentality with millions? If marriage is not a right that should be protected and given to all consenting adults who wish to wed then who is to say they will not exclude another group of people from marriage using the same argument? Or force their other beliefs on people using this mentality? Would people consider that constitutional just because it is put to a vote?



posted on Nov, 11 2008 @ 07:50 PM
link   
Now this is pure, unhindered democracy in action. The majority wins... when, by the very tenets of our Constitution, they have no right to influence such a decision. Sure, they're free to voice their opinions, but not to make law out of it.



posted on Nov, 11 2008 @ 07:55 PM
link   
Am I wrong?

The constitution protects the minority over persecution of the majority.



posted on Nov, 11 2008 @ 07:56 PM
link   
reply to post by infolurker
 


That's quite interesting that you compared homosexuality to incest, pedophilia, beastiality and polygamy. Not only have you insulted every homosexual with your crass comparisons, but you've insulted the "enlightened" minds that support them. There is no widespead movement to legalise incest, pedophila, beastiality or polygamy. Homosexual couples only want the same rights as heterosexual couples, but you didn't read that part did ya?

It isn't a can of worms you've opened. You're just being offensive and bigoted by claiming that those who support homosexuals getting married would also support marriages of illegality. It isn't illegal to be gay last time I checked troll.

[edit on 11/11/08 by MacDonagh]



posted on Nov, 11 2008 @ 08:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by Annee
Am I wrong?

The constitution protects the minority over persecution of the majority.


I totally agree. However, it's the long standing of social institutions such as the Church, which prevent that document from protecting the minority at all, if ever.



posted on Nov, 11 2008 @ 08:12 PM
link   
reply to post by MacDonagh
 


Exactly the point.... so by your logic because there isn't a large group of "the other" catgegories with a political lobbying arm that they somehow have less rights than you do.

So, what's the "marriage" line? That's all the question is about. Because YOU believe that one, two, or whatever examples are "OK" doesn't mean everyone else does... sure I went down in descending "offensive" order (I think since Polygamy is less offensive than the next, etc.) So. What the hell is wrong with polygamy? Oh, ya know your view might not match someone else's and your a TROLL close minded ****! See what I mean, what is wrong with 2 couples getting married in a "group" marriage? Why does marriage now have to be 2 people instead of more?

Before you cry TROLL or "these 2 are OK but" ... Think about it. So any opponent to redefining marriage is ****! But again, where is YOUR line.

I simply list other alternative possibilities of present and future forms of marriage that could come to the table.

And I could care less if gays marry or have civil unions, whatever. I was responding to the "opponents" must be hater this, bigot that posts and you pretty much proved the point.

Can of worms

[edit on 11-11-2008 by infolurker]

[edit on 11-11-2008 by infolurker]



posted on Nov, 11 2008 @ 08:38 PM
link   
Ok all you people that are against prop 8 do you condone the act of violence against people that don't agree Gays should marry? If you don't condone it then why haven't you said so in this Thread

See its your case that those of us that oppose gay marriage should tolerate it. But yet the people that are for gay marriage don't have to tolerate people opposed to it.

So its ok for gays and those that believe gay marriage should be legal to attack a woman? then when the media tries to interview her its ok for those same people to not allow her to voice her opinion?

So what do you say prop 8 opponents, you going to defend your friends actions or are you going to denounce them?

Now back to the issue of this thread.

I want to know how exactly the people that oppose this ban are going to go about getting it over turned? See since it is now part of the constitution for the state of California you can't sue and say its unconstitutional. because when you amend a constitution you make what your adding very constitutional. Also sexual orientation and being homosexual are not protected classes under the equal rights clause in the U.S. Constitution so again you can't sue saying its unconstitutional under that clause.

So i ask again just how do you think you could possibly get the ban in California lifted?

Also for your info California is the 30th State to amend their constitution to define marriage as being between a man and a woman. and only 3 states allow same sex marriage. 30 states is clearly a majority of the American public that is mixed between religious and non religious people that has said marriage should be defined between a man and a woman. If you fight to amend the U.S. Constitution to allow same sex marriage you will lose since you will not get a majority vote to amend it.



posted on Nov, 11 2008 @ 08:42 PM
link   
reply to post by infolurker
 

your wasting your time trying to convince these people that allowing same sex marriage could possibly open the doors to other even less popular marriages. They only see what they want to see and they are to narrow minded to see past this issue that they currently believe they should force on everyone else



posted on Nov, 11 2008 @ 08:59 PM
link   
reply to post by infolurker
 



Exactly the point.... so by your logic because there isn't a large group of "the other" catgegories with a political lobbying arm that they somehow have less rights than you do.


Gay people are just asking for the right to be married, because being gay is not a crime and marriage isn't a privilege.


So, what's the "marriage" line? That's all the question is about. Because YOU believe that one, two, or whatever examples are "OK" doesn't mean everyone else does.


So it's okay to refuse two consenting adults to marry because you believe they don't deserve the right to because they are of the same gender? That's weird because marriage is just a piece of paper at the end of the day and is no more sacred than a Kerrang magazine with most of the pages missing. It is however, a contract to which each person in the ceremony promises to be faithful to the other, to love and to hold, till sickness and health and blah blah blah blah.


What the hell is wrong with polygamy?


Different cultures practice it. Whether or not I agree with it doesn't matter. In most western countries, it's listed as a crime; i.e. bigamy since you can't marry someone else if you're already married since you have an obligation in your first marriage; to not marry anyone else and stay faithful to your partner.


See what I mean, what is wrong with 2 couples getting married in a "group" marriage?


There is a practice that circumvents the need for a "group" marriage. I'm not at liberty to say it, because this site may have youngsters reading this, but there is little point of a group marriage because of it. How would such a ceremony happen anyway? Would each participant have to say their vows to each other 3 times? That sounds like a waste of energy to me.


But again, where is YOUR line.


The obvious. I can guarantee you incestuous, pedophillic and group marriages won't come to the table due to the fact that it's distastful. If you can't stand the idea that gays want to get married because it's distastful, then tough luck. It's not illegal to be gay. So let the gays marry each other and let them be miserable.

[edit on 11/11/08 by MacDonagh]



posted on Nov, 11 2008 @ 09:06 PM
link   
reply to post by Mercenary2007
 



you condone the act of violence against people that don't agree Gays should marry? If you don't condone it then why haven't you said so in this Thread

There are a lot of people on this site who have not replied to that thread, why assume they agree with the violence? I know you are trying to make a point, but your logic as usual falls flat. Stop these silly assumptions and using them to demonize the people you disagree with, I beg you. I do not condone the violence. As for tolerating people who are pro-Prop 8 I have to, some of those people are my family.

I want to know how exactly the people that oppose this ban are going to go about getting it over turned?

The same way we’ve had these amendments overturned before. When people’s ignorance and bigotry is not in the way and civil rights issues are not put to a vote judges who understand the constitution and faulty arguments against homosexuals and homosexual marriage often side with us. That is the increasing trend, this same trend happened with African-Americans, whose rights if put to a vote would have been hindered for many more years.

your wasting your time trying to convince these people that allowing same sex marriage could possibly open the doors to other even less popular marriages.

Why should we believe this when there is absolutely not a shred of evidence for it, only evidence to the contrary? That would be very ignorant, unless we were –like you-trying to make any excuse as to why gay marriage shouldn’t be legal. It has had no adverse affect on societies or other countries that have embraced it, nor has it led to sexual abuse, incest, or polygamy being legalized. Also gay couples are not proven to have caused any harm to our society, despite some people’s opinions, to assume their marriages would is just another poor attempt to make excuses to support the real reason you oppose it.

They only see what they want to see and they are to narrow minded to see past this issue that they currently believe they should force on everyone else

No one is forcing you to like or tolerate homosexuality or gay marriage; we are trying to block your attempts to force your morality on the way homosexuals and others should live their lives. Gay marriage does not lawfully affect you in any way, pushing your morals on gay couples does affect them and their families legally. Who is being forced in this situation to succumb to another’s morality?



new topics

top topics



 
5
<< 13  14  15    17  18  19 >>

log in

join