It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable 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: 7
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in


posted on Nov, 8 2008 @ 04:12 PM

I told you what the legality is, expressed in the constitution, of denying a right or making a law against a right that has been deemed a right in another state. Again, this is your lack of understanding that complicates the issue, which I can not help or fix.

typical Liberal and classic double talk. Again MArraige of any kind is not a right its a priviledge. And just because a state says same sex marriage is ok with them doesn't mean every state has to agree and allow it. what you want to do with what i have quoted here is say ok so since this state and that state allow same sex marriages every state should again one state can not tell another state what to do.

Also did yuo really read what you quotes further down page 6. what your quoted only backs up what myself and others have been telling you. Since marriage is not regulated by the federal government and it is not a protected right under the U.S. Constitution it is left up to the individual states to decide the requirments for marriage.

You are the one that doesn't understand everyone else gets it.

whether you want to realize it or not the prop 8 Admendment IS NOT UNCONSTITUTIONAL. Its an Admendment to california's state constitution banning same sex marriages, Which the people of California are well within their rights to do.

and legally gay marriage does not affect you, but your opposition legally affects gay families.

you can't have it both ways if allowing gays to marry doesn't effect me then by allowing them not to marry shouldn't effect them either.

Listen i can see where people like yourself will take this and i wish you luck in your courth fight. BUt don't be surprised when you lose your fight and all your money trying to force your will, and beliefs on the rest of us.

I'm done with this thread because you lack the simple logic, and reasoning to have abasic understanding of the Constitution or the issue. YOu have become blinded by what you think is unconstitutional which the admendment is not since it amendes a states constitution.

posted on Nov, 8 2008 @ 04:40 PM
reply to post by reconpilot

You know i really shouldn't feed the trolls but since you want to call me out

You have no clue you don't know me personally. How do you know i'm white? i could be black or i could be Asian. the point is your making assumptions.

First i have said many times that if the gays feel they are being discriminated against then the should persue an amendment of their own banning all marriages in the state of California. its only fair huh?

second every knows why Gays want to have that piece of paper that says they are legally married its for tax breaks health insurance, and to leave property to their partner. Hummm didn't I just earlier give suggestions how to get around 2 of those issues? Oh i guess you didn't see those

third did i say straight marriages were perfect? no i didn't so whats your point. Oh i know your just a troll and your trying to derail this thread. If a husband beats his wife I'm Not ok with that. I don't know how many fights i have gotten into because I pulled a "man" off his wife/ girlfriend and told him to hit a target that will fight back.

yeah if i was gay i might be on the other side of this issue, But then again i wouldn't try to lift the ban i would find away to force both sides to compromise.

The U.S. will never be Officially declared bankrupt for one. the rest of the world will become bankrupt before that happens.

what does the gay community have to do with the financial mess the U.S. is in? just like in the straight community some of them didn't live within their means, they allowed the politicians to remove the regulations put in place to keep this from happening just as straight people did. Again once a troll always a troll huh?

Now let me think . How did the US end up unserviceable . Was it that gun totin right wing Bush who put your beloved country on the economic trash heap or was it those 'fags in frisco' ?

You really show a liberal bias here i just had to quote that directly. You do know that the Dems and the american people are just as responsible for all the problems in this country.

Since when was a big tough guy like you afraid of a gay man ? Or is it you are afraid you may be one too ,deep inside that tough wrapped in the flag shell ?

again there ya go making assumptions and showing your ignorance. I'm not afraid of anyone. And i don't have a problem with Gays or liberal like yourself as long as you don't try and force your beliefs on me or anyone else. But once you try then your fair game to have the same done to you!

The last part of that quote is just so stupid i'm not even going to respond.

The moral of the story is you are a troll and trolls don't last long around here so unless you have something actually useful to contribute to this thread instead of assumptions then i'd suggest you move along before a mod decides to ban you for bein a troll.

posted on Nov, 8 2008 @ 04:43 PM

Originally posted by Mercenary2007
you can't have it both ways if allowing gays to marry doesn't effect me then by allowing them not to marry shouldn't effect them either.

Ummm...that doesn't make any sense at all.

Their are benefits of being married besides just saying your married...

Originally posted by Mercenary2007
...trying to force your will, and beliefs on the rest of us.

I think my head just exploded.

posted on Nov, 8 2008 @ 06:21 PM
reply to post by Mercenary2007

What liberal double talk? I never said marriage is a right protected in the constitution. You think the constitution is liberal is it? I'm showing you and explaining to you what the constitution expresses and you seem utterly confused by this. I'm not doing any sort of double talk. Please quote each of my post and explain to me how I contradict myself? I've been saying the same thing to you since page 2 and you keep misunderstanding.

you can't have it both ways if allowing gays to marry doesn't effect me then by allowing them not to marry shouldn't effect them either.

How is that having it both ways? Do you not understand what that phrase means as well? This is a legal issue, legally denying gays the right to marry affects their families, legally giving them the right to marry does not lawfully affect yours. This is a simple point to comprehend, don't blame me if you have trouble with it.

[edit on 8-11-2008 by rapinbatsisaltherage]

posted on Nov, 8 2008 @ 06:44 PM
reply to post by TheRedneck

You posted a thread about how you intended to defeat the Prop 8 amendment.

I did not start this thread.

As for listening to others opinions and changing mine, I did listen to your opinion, I presented my evidence and you presented yours. We both still disagreed with the other, therefore I think agreeing to disagree makes sense, we both have lives and there is no need to waste them debating the same exact issue over and over again based on our personal assessments.

I’ve changed my mind a lot before actually, your argument didn’t even seem to counter mine, in my eyes anyway, and the rest of the opinions were something I simply do not agree with. Therefore I have no reason to change my mind. Other posters in the past have changed my mind when they presented evidence and opinions that I decided were accurate and helped me to change mine. Simply because this did not happen in my discussion with you does not mean I never change my mind on an issue, you can believe that assumption though if you like. There is a thread here on ATS called “Is Pedophilia a Sexuality?”. In that thread after reading a poster’s counter argument for one I made about the death penalty I started to question my anti-death penalty belief system. I held on to my beliefs strongly for four years. That post changed my way of thinking though, and now I am no longer anti-death penalty. That is one instance where I actually changed my mind completely during a discussion, and I have no shame in admitting that (in my opinion) I was previously wrong during those anti-death penalty years.

posted on Nov, 8 2008 @ 06:54 PM
reply to post by Mercenary2007

Cannot understand why you think that marriage is the rights to the state? If you care to explain?

These amendments shouldn't even be put up to vote on...It is a "belief" and an "opinion" that gays should not be able to marry...I think it is unconstitutional in any form you want to put it..

Most people that...or all people(at least ones I know) that are Religious, DO NOT believe that gays should marry...does that tell you right there, that it should not be an amendment in any constitution...

It boils down to religious people...or homophobic people...otherwise...why would you give a crap????

It is a disgrace that we cannot exist peacefully together and people cannot have the same rights....absolutely absurd

posted on Nov, 8 2008 @ 06:57 PM
reply to post by Mercenary2007

Also, why would one want to get around the system instead of changing it?

I do agree that they should come together to ban those amendments all together but still it shouldnt even be in the ballot

posted on Nov, 8 2008 @ 07:00 PM
reply to post by rapinbatsisaltherage

i know for a fact that rapin is a reasonable young lady, not unfair in the least, and actually listens to others.

i have to say i have always thought marriage should be between a man and woman, but rapin is starting to change my mind and way of thinking a little on this one.

in no way would it affect me for two gay people to get married, whatever they do is their own business, the only problem i have is when they do " stuff " in front of me. i dont like to see it, thats where i draw the line.

just like when my wife and i go out in public we are not all over each other, because if someone see's that who may have just broken up with their bf/gf i dont want it to cause them more pain, just as an example.

good job rapin, you have changed my ways of thinking slightly, i just dont like to see whats going on with gay people, but what they do in their own home is none of anyones business.

posted on Nov, 8 2008 @ 07:04 PM
reply to post by pureevil81

You cannot say that "gays" are all over each other...Every single couple is different and express themselves differently in public....

People are afraid of the unknown...get to know some one that is gay and you will see they have a lot in common.....they go to work, eat, sleep, have friends...etc.....

I have a close friend that is gay, who serves the community and helps sick children.....I think he deserves to be treated like a human who has the same rights as me

posted on Nov, 8 2008 @ 07:08 PM
reply to post by qd22vcc

i didnt say they are all over eachother, re-read my post, all i ask is they dont do that kind of stuff in front of me. besides that it is noones business.

i do know a few gay people, and love them very much. they know exactly where i stand so it is never a problem, i was just going over the what if's

ok.....ok. peace

posted on Nov, 8 2008 @ 07:11 PM
Always peace, just sounded like a pointed finger

Just like I wouldn't want to see public affection ..really from any one...maybe holding comes to a point of be respectful of each others space..right?

I think people don't realize that gay people want the same,...they are actually human beings....some good some bad....

I see it so clearly but somehow cannot understand how no one else would see that???

posted on Nov, 8 2008 @ 07:14 PM
reply to post by qd22vcc

exactly what i was getting at, thank you.

i do see your point, there are people that are going to break the rules regardless of sexual preference or race, or what have you.

definitely not pointing any fingers.

posted on Nov, 8 2008 @ 07:35 PM
reply to post by pureevil81

I’m so glad you showed up in this post pureevil81, I forgot to include you in the people that have shifted my way of thinking. Remember a thread I made about aliens once living among us as Gods? You made me reconsider that stance and possibility quite a bit, which is why I stopped contributing to that thread.

I’m glad if I’ve shifted your perspective a little, I’m very glad to have done so since you also shifted mine.

posted on Nov, 8 2008 @ 07:40 PM
reply to post by rapinbatsisaltherage

thats what open minded people can do for eachother.

i have been trying to lose my ego for a long time now, admitting youre wrong, or at least changing your mind helps in losing ones ego.

and yes i do remember that thread, it was very interesting, that is where i also met reconpilot, hes quite a character. i met some of my favorite ATS'ers on that thread.


posted on Nov, 8 2008 @ 07:42 PM

Originally posted by qd22vcc
reply to post by Mercenary2007

Cannot understand why you think that marriage is the rights to the state? If you care to explain?

I'll step in. Who makes the regulations and laws for marriage, the Federal or State Governments? If you look into it Marriage is not mentioned in the U.S. Constitution as an explicit job of the Central Federal Government, therefore it has been left up for the States to have jurisdiction over, much like many other areas of governance.

Here's another one, why do States get to choose the age you can get married and not the Federal Government? It (marriage) has most certainly been left to the States to manage and regulate as each State sees fit. Same sex marriages are not a protected class as defined in most cases. Until the Supreme Court of the United States weighs in, States can establish laws limiting / controlling marriage like those passed in California and other States.

Conversely, there is nothing to stop a State allowing Same Sex Marriages, provided the proper legal means are used. Unless, that is, there was an Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which theRedNeck alluded to.

[edit on 8-11-2008 by pavil]

posted on Nov, 8 2008 @ 07:47 PM
reply to post by Mercenary2007

Well lets assume your a black american okay ? how lond did it take for you to get equal rights under the constitution ? two hundred years plus ?

but your not black are you ?

So lets assume your gay instead .

How long did it take before you right to contract in marriage was allowed under the provisions of equality provided for under your wonderfull 'fair' constitution ?

We hold these truths to be self evident , that all (white) men are created equal ,(except fer those damn injuns who are just plain savages ).

The only reason you white folk celebrate thanksgiving is so you can buy off your conscience for ripping off the REAL AMERICANS you defrauded raped and murdered using your superior fire power.

Without your fire power, the natives would have kicked your ass . Thats the only reason you own this country , abuse of power on both sides of the house , liberal ,democrat and republican , abeted by your religious institutions who provide a 'moral cover ' for your insidious genocide .

You know, your Official history is a crock . Puritans escaping religious persecution ? Please .

They got kicked out of england because they were rabid fanatics who thought themselves 'chosen ' .

No , if you cannot provide even Basic equality for ALL ,your constitution is a Joke . Justice for some and the devil take the hindmost .

Thats what eats me about you rightwingers. You try SO HARD to steal the moral high ground with your squeaky clean rhetoric but when it really comes down to it ,you never ever have the courage to answer the native american question do you ? EVER .

because it eats you up knowing your Constitution has never really been honoured in full to ALL your citizens . You just dont have the honour and integrity to admit it .

The US was built on a lie , your money system is crumbling because it was built on fraud and all you can worry about is gay marriage ?

Now personally , I am a very happily married white male with a wife and daughter . The gay thing is not my thing but as long as they are not abusing children then whatever they do is fine by me.

We never bothered with marriage for ten years and only went through with the ceremony for legal and family reasons . A legal document does not make a marriage last twenty years .

Love makes a marriage as far as I'm concerned , not a piece of bloody paper . In most respects I laugh at laws because 'justice' on this crappy planet is bought and sold to the highest bidder as often as not .

My personal code of honour means far more to me than all this diversionary legal BS .

During the battle of britain a very significant proportion of the best fighter pilots were gay or Bi . Did you know that ? And if they served honourably who the hell are you to say they cant shack up if they got through in one piece ?

And some of them were women .

And if you were a real soldier you would know that love and mutual respect is an important part of unit cohesion . Not romantic love , no , but brotherly love certainly .
Now I admit that in our units romantic attatchments are considered unproffesional AND DANGEROUS . but thats a service thing and an entirely practical consideration in a tactical unit in particular .

BUT I reckon if two guys want to share all they have in civvy world then *Snip* let them .

your attitude is exactly the kind that gravitates to Blackwater .

MOD Note: Please Review This Link: Please Do Not Evade the Automatic Censors.

[edit on 11/9/2008 by semperfortis]

posted on Nov, 8 2008 @ 07:55 PM
reply to post by DocMoreau

yup, one more civil right made illegal by the belief in, and the supposed philosphy of, a mythical being. i say eliminate all tax breaks for churches, ban all public media from showing any religous shows. keep all "spreading of the word" limited to inside churches and inside homes. you have the freedom OF religion, not the promotion of it. i will say it again, and i'm civil laws passed on all people, based on a mythical being.

posted on Nov, 8 2008 @ 08:12 PM
reply to post by jimmyx

Ok, one last time, while the Proposition might have been supported by many religious groups, do you not think that the Great State of California has more non-Church going people of voting age or more Church going people of voting age?

California's black and Latino voters, who turned out in droves for Barack Obama, also provided key support in favor of the state's same-sex marriage ban. Seven in 10 black voters backed a successful ballot measure to overturn the California Supreme Court's May decision allowing same-sex marriage, according to exit polls for The Associated Press. More than half of Latino voters supported Proposition 8, while whites were split. Religious groups led the tightly organized campaign for the measure, and religious voters were decisive in getting it passed. Of the seven in 10 voters who described themselves as Christian, two-thirds backed the initiative. Married voters and voters with children strongly supported Proposition 8. Unmarried voters were heavily opposed.

So only 2/3rds of Christians that voted supported the Prop. Most people over 30 voted for the Prop while most of those under 30 voted no.

Here's a CNN exit Poll sampling of the Prop 8 Voters

To say the only the Religious voted for Prop 8 is disingenuous. It passed because of a fairly wide group of voters in California voted for it. Take a look at these samplings if you doubt me. The Prop passed because most People in California (at least those that voted) wanted it to, plain and simple.

If you don't vote, you don't get to complain about the results.

posted on Nov, 8 2008 @ 08:25 PM
reply to post by rapinbatsisaltherage

I did not start this thread.

I stand corrected, my apologies. Somehow along the line, I got it into my mind that you did.

I did listen to your opinion, I presented my evidence and you presented yours. We both still disagreed with the other, therefore I think agreeing to disagree makes sense

And I agreed with you to disagree. But as a thread progresses, new concepts arise. When such happens, I sometimes feel it necessary to point out my opinions in a new light. Even if a concept arises that makes me tend to agree with you, I would weigh in on that as well. I'm sure you would have no problem if that were the case?

Also, I am sure you are aware that this thread is about much more than you and I. There are many others posting, and many more are no doubt reading and following it. When I respond to a post, it is for more than a direct conversation with one particular member. That can be better accomplished by U2U. Rather, it is a response directed at the issue, prompted by the post I reply to.

In any case, I am glad you considered my opinion, and of course you are under no obligation to agree with it. I do hope that during the course of the legal battles to come, you will continue to bear what I said in mind. No hard feelings, but please do not expect me to go away.

You will be sorely disappointed if you do.


posted on Nov, 8 2008 @ 09:12 PM

Originally posted by pureevil81
reply to post by qd22vcc

i didnt say they are all over eachother, re-read my post, all i ask is they dont do that kind of stuff in front of me. besides that it is noones business.

i do know a few gay people, and love them very much. they know exactly where i stand so it is never a problem, i was just going over the what if's

ok.....ok. peace

Whats with that no kissing or affection in public thing all about ?
my Irish buddy Hated it when I kissed and hugged my wife ANYWHERE !


Actually , I still get funny looks in OZ but only from the humans .

And dude , you have not LIVED until you have slept with a Lesbian !
Its kinda different but its kinda Nice . Well hey I got it out of my system before I settled down okay ?

No , I dont have a problem with gay people kissing and stuff but full on sex ? get a room .call me old fashioned if you like....

Mod Note: Review this Link: Please Do Not Evade the Automatic Censors.

[edit on 11/9/2008 by semperfortis]

top topics

<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in