California Supreme Court To Hear Prop 8 Challenges, page
Pages:
ATS Members have flagged this thread 3 times


reply posted on 19-11-2008 @ 05:35 PM by TheRedneck
reply to post by rapinbatsisaltherage
Either way people are going to be pissed.

If the court rules in favor of gay marriage the people who voted for Prop 8 are going to think that their say about others rights that don’t lawfully affect them is still constitutional and that the liberal judges are infringing on their rights.

If the court rules in favor of Prop 8 gay activists aren’t going to let this one slide and try again, they aren’t going to be happy with whatever rights they currently have and temporarily move on. They are going to cause a huge fuss, and feel like the court is enforcing prejudice.

Either way this is not going to be pretty, in my opinion. We shall see the out come and how it affects California and the nation.


Emphasis mine. This time I agree with you wholeheartedly. Star for you (and now I excuse myself before I get drawn back into this moot argument over rights).

TheRedneck


reply posted on 19-11-2008 @ 06:35 PM by rapinbatsisaltherage
reply to post by AmericanDaughter



I'm also sick of this situation being compared to black history as there is no comparison.

Depends on how you look at it:

The majority being in the wrong due to ignorance, a majority that slowly but surely begins to accept or believe in the minorities justice.

Rights denied to one group that do not lawfully affect another.

Civil Unions currently do not have the same rights, if they did have all of the same state and nation wide “rights” gays are given calling them something other than marriage would still be separate but equal. Since religion is no longer a factor in marriage (you don’t need to be religious to marry, you just need to be of legal age and not married to anyone else) there is no reason for gays to not be legally recognized as married. That is separate but equal, that is the same mentality that decided being African and only being allowed to marry Africans and not whites was equality. Separate but equal is not equality. In a nation where the APA acknowledges that homosexuality from a mental health stand point is not a chosen orientation, can not be changed, and to be a healthy full functioning adult one must accept this orientation it is atrocious that a majority of ignorant people can vote to take away a “right” from this minority when the only good defense they have against gay marriage is religion (not allowed in the law process), and that “right” does not lawfully affect them.

Oppression. Both gays and African Americans are minority groups that have been oppressed in America. Even our own country acknowledges this. Race is a protected class, and sexual orientation is a protected class in some states.


[edit on 19-11-2008 by rapinbatsisaltherage]



reply posted on 19-11-2008 @ 06:48 PM by GamerGal
reply to post by AmericanDaughter



Yes, because the gays aren't being persecuted. They are just being told they aren't equal. Wait, just like the blacks who had to fight for equal rights. You never hear of gays being killed for being... wait, you do just like the black community had to deal with. How are they not the same again? Because the Bible... wait, the Bible was used to tell slaves God wanted them to be slaves...


reply posted on 19-11-2008 @ 08:10 PM by Bhadhidar
Originally posted by TKainZero
Prop. 8 gay marriage ban goes to Supreme Court

We knew this was coming...

Just wait until the Consitutionaly-backed, will of the people is overturned people...


So now it is happening...






You just can't seem to understand, can you TKain?


The ruling said the right to marry is among a set of basic human rights "so integral to an individual's liberty and personal autonomy that they may not be eliminated or abrogated by the legislature or by the electorate through the statutory initiative process."


(Emphasis mine)



Let's try this;



Suppose "Will of the People" (as you put it), through the electorial initiative process, decided that, henceforth


Muslims would no longer be allowed to have "children", as defined under the various statutes and laws applicable.

Children born to Muslim parents would become wards of the State. Their biological progenitors would have no say in their upbringing, and would enjoy only some of the legal or monetary benefits available to the parents of children from other origins.



Various rationalizations would, of course, have been proffered to support the placement and passage of this new law/constitutional amendment.


Muslims, and their various "liberal" supporters, would be up in arms over the law's passage, and would take to the streets in droves to protest.




Would you support the "Constitutionaly-backed "Will of the People" to deny Potential Muslim parents a right "so integral to an individual's liberty and personal autonomy that they may not be eliminated or abrogated by the legislature or by the electorate through the statutory initiative process"?


Or would you, in this case, support the "Fascists" on the State Supreme Court in over-turning the proposition, against the "Will of the People"?



And if you Still can't (or won't) grasp the paralells presented by these issues, then perhaps you neither understand, nor deserve, the "individual liberty and personal autonomy" those "Fascist" Justices were trying to protect.

[edit on 19-11-2008 by Bhadhidar]

Pages:     ^^TOP^^



While we were Distracted with Gay Marriage news This happend today
  Posted 17 days ago with 81 member flags
People are marching in the streets all over Quebec
  Posted 2 days ago with 69 member flags
Breaking: Ron Paul to end active campaigning - cnn
  Posted 13 days ago with 26 member flags
President Obama Affirms His Support for Same Sex Marriage
  Posted 18 days ago with 24 member flags
Anon has released 1.7 GB of files....
  Posted 5 days ago with 24 member flags