Prop 8 debate

Started by L3sli3_Lov3s_Chu, November 04, 2008, 02:41:14 PM

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Druix

Quote from: Nyxyin on December 17, 2008, 02:34:04 PM
Druix, I generally agree with most of what you said.  I agree that legislation against gay marriages destroy equality.

However, just as a thought exercise, I would like to ask why do people, no matter what their sexual preference is, need marriages to be recognized by the state in order to be happy?



It's a matter of what legal marriage grants. Legal marriage grants roughly five times as many rights to the involved parties as domestic partnerships. Through domestic partnerships, you cannot under any circumstances (work, school, etc.) live under a different roof from your partner, you cannot visit your partner in the hospital or make important decisions when they are in the hospital, you do not receive Social Security, veteran's benefits and pension plan survivor benefits upon death of partner, no family leave to care for them if they are sick, federal tax returns are filed seperately, you are not guaranteed the right to be buried beside your partner, etc.....just to name a few.

If all rights and benefits were equal, then there wouldn't even be a debate because "marriage" would just be a word. And no one can stop you from using a word. I know one couple that shares the most pure and beautiful love I have ever seen in my life, the kind of love that you can see is obviously destined....they got "married" in 2007, and despite the fact that it was not legally recognized then, and isn't legally recognized now, they still call each other "wife" and say they are married. So, no, I really don't think we need it to be deemed "marriage" by the state, we just want equal rights and fair treatment.

Honestly, I agree with your other views. Polyamorous? Go for it. Gay, straight, bi? Have at it. My theory, when I look at other peoples' relationships, is this; if it is making YOU happy and is not hurting OTHERS in any way, there should be NO REASON to stop you. I just wish more people could have more open minds like that...

2010 Cosplays:
~Sasuke Uchiha (Naruto: Shippuuden)
~Katara (Avatar Book 3)
~Monkey D. Luffy (One Piece)
~Cain (Starfighter)
~Sebastian (Kuroshitsuji)

RadioactiveKitty

Fact One- well to be truthful, they CAN NOT teach marriage in school. coz that goes into religion. and we ALL know religion is not ment to be taught in schools.

Fact 2- marriages base is religious. and there ARE religious gay people and religious gay parents. just.... not my parents. they think AND I QUOTE  "homosexuality  is vile and wrong and sins against our savior christ"

Fact 3- I am gay myself i have been since sixth grade when i had my first boyfriend i had been with him for 3 years, actually gave eachother promise rings saying we would soon get married.

So lemme ask you L3sli3_Lov3s_Chu... you are saying that even if i wanted to now a days I can not marry the man i love?

PyronIkari

Quote from: RadioactiveKitty on March 06, 2009, 09:09:58 PM
Fact One- well to be truthful, they CAN NOT teach marriage in school. coz that goes into religion. and we ALL know religion is not ment to be taught in schools.

Fact 2- marriages base is religious. and there ARE religious gay people and religious gay parents. just.... not my parents. they think AND I QUOTE  "homosexuality  is vile and wrong and sins against our savior christ"

Fact 3- I am gay myself i have been since sixth grade when i had my first boyfriend i had been with him for 3 years, actually gave eachother promise rings saying we would soon get married.

So lemme ask you L3sli3_Lov3s_Chu... you are saying that even if i wanted to now a days I can not marry the man i love?

All of your posts irritate the hell outta me. You have no clue what you're talking about, and you use being a homosexual as an excuse to attack things when it's totally off base.

Fact 1- SCHOOLS CAN TEACH AND TALK ABOUT MARRIAGE, BECAUSE MARRIAGE IS NOT PURELY RELIGIOUS. Marriage is part of economics as well. You didn't even bother reading this thread at all before you replied to it did you? They cannot PUSH religious beliefs when discussing marriage, but marriage itself is completely fine.

Fact 2- It's BASE was religious, but no longer is marriage purely religious. Guess what... this was one of the main focuses of the whole prop 8 debate, and one of the MAIN PEDESTALS FOR THE RIGHTS OF GAY MARRIAGE. Once more, you didn't read this thread at all did you? Aww, boohoo, your parents don't approve of your sexuality, why are you even bringing this up in here? Your personal matters and issues about your family has no place in this part of the forum.

Fact 3- WHO CARES IF YOU'RE GAY?!?!?!? I honestly don't give a crap if you're gay or not, because frankly it has no basis and in no way makes what you're saying any more right. IF ANYTHING, it proves a bias in what you are saying because you are gay, and you are using it as an outlet.

Gays like you, give gays a bad name. 

Kanameshito

Amazing that you said every word of the crap I explained to my friends and they display it as nothing.I like your attitude towards things,you have earned my respect immediately.BTW college sucks because everyone there thinks that they know everything and everything is simple,Its so hard to start a club wahhhhh.We just started one and are planning a group trip to fanime.And they dont even accept your kindness,they make me cry everyday.Um omg I am sorry I totally got off subject.You are amazing for saying the exact same word for word ..So I hope we can be friends and I see you at Fanime.
Breathing in the same sequence
While trying to make sense of your situation
What we got ourselves in, two more weeks of one way conversation
She says she's losing interest
I swear that we are best friends till the end
A song that had me listening

Kaura117

...why do people insist on using this subforum as a personal journal sometimes? Seriously - Pyron just went off on a rant about RadioactiveKitty getting off-base in her rather substance-light rebuttal to Leslie. Why repeat her mistake?

Anyhow, to get back on topic, the legal test of Prop 8 is, or has, been argued in the state supreme court. Rather than arguing the merits of the proposition itself, as the majority of the discussion participants have clearly shown a negative response to it, I propose a more general topic: <i>should</i> matters of civil rights be left to majority vote? Is the alternative, letting an effective oligarchy of judicial agents set the precedent for an entire body of people, really any better? If neither options satisfy, what are our alternatives?

Ready... set... debate!

G.I.R

I have to agree with Mikey about RadioactiveKitty. 
1.  RadioactiveKitty's reply was wrong on many levels  (especially about the teaching of marriage, and it being religion based).
2.  By throwing out the whole "I'm Gay" Spiel.  He makes it sound as if the only important part of the issue is a about being gay, and not about rights and freedoms.

And back to the topic: 
Quote from: Kaura117Should matters of civil rights be left to majority vote? Is the alternative, letting an effective oligarchy of judicial agents set the precedent for an entire body of people, really any better? If neither options satisfy, what are our alternatives?

Since when should a majority be able to vote to vote away the rights of any group?


Stormfalcon

Quote from: Kaura117 on March 06, 2009, 10:30:52 PM
...why do people insist on using this subforum as a personal journal sometimes? Seriously - Pyron just went off on a rant about RadioactiveKitty getting off-base in her rather substance-light rebuttal to Leslie. Why repeat her mistake?

Anyhow, to get back on topic, the legal test of Prop 8 is, or has, been argued in the state supreme court. Rather than arguing the merits of the proposition itself, as the majority of the discussion participants have clearly shown a negative response to it, I propose a more general topic: <i>should</i> matters of civil rights be left to majority vote? Is the alternative, letting an effective oligarchy of judicial agents set the precedent for an entire body of people, really any better? If neither options satisfy, what are our alternatives?

Ready... set... debate!

As I pointed out earlier, the civil rights fights of the past century were fought in the courts and by executive orders, not by mob rule, and we're better off that way.  If they weren't, things would still be the way they have been before the civil rights battles by and large because people would be voting similarly on those issues (or worse, in some regions) like they had here and now for Prop 8.

Sometimes, society has to be forced to move forward because it won't on its own.
My Cosplay Photography gallery, including FanimeCon 2001-2014:
http://stormfalcon.smugmug.com/CosplayPhotography

My DeviantArt Page:
http://stormfalcon.deviantart.com

ewu

To the Master Debaters.....no need to criticize peoples opinions or why they do it. Just come to the simple conclusion that you think differently than they do. Understand and register that you may be more developed, mature, or intelligent than they are. But also the thing is when you feel the need to publicly point out their idiocy, you your self become just as undeveloped, immature or simply stupid as they do.

Point out the flaws about their logic, not their personalities.


Back on topic:

Heh people are inherently stupid. This is even more the case as our children are raised by the television rather than their parents. When educational TV is a reality show about wilderness survival and not survival in our plain society. More over us mindless public are notoriously easily swayed by opinion and the media. It is true the judges and politicians are likewise easily swayed, if not by public opinion spurred by media, but but the far more dangerous money and "charitable" donations by interested parties (read: Mormons). But one thing to remember that us as an individual voter is just that, an individual. Politicians and judges have an army of staff and clerks to provide and educated and researched view to help these people make the decisions. More over the staff is paid, so their interest lies in 1) serving their boss and 2) serving the public.

So to close, voters = stupid, judges and politicians still = stupid, but they have the guidance of public servants that are solely devoted to the welfare of the public.
Eric Wu
FanimeCon Chairman
FanimeCon Forums Moderator

ericATfanimeDOTcom

Kaura117

Naturally, I disagree, Ewu. Meta-debates are just as important a part of the discourse as any other - it sets the framework and guidelines for all parties involved. A bad argument should be called out on, rather than treated with equal weight as a valid argument - if done well, it prevents the debate from slipping off the topic too often.

As for the judicial precedence issues, yes - historically, the judicial branch /overall/ has usually been in favor of more civil rights than less. But there are exceptions, and harmful ones as well - CA's state supreme court is actually rather in the minority on their previous ruling in favor for gay marriage, and the national supreme court is staffed by not a few right-wing hardliners as well. Not to mention prior rulings on freedom of speech, rights to privacy (treating corporations as legal individuals? Really?), etc.

My liberal bias is, of course, showing as plain as day here, but given the rather... diverse... makeup of the judicial branch of government, are you folks /certain/ that leaving it in the hands of a few, each with their own political and perhaps personal agendas, our best course of action? Should the rights of individuals really be left at the whim of whatever group of judges hold power at the moment of the legal test?

As for Ewu's arguments about public servants acting as a neutral balance... hahahahahahahahahaha. No. Public Servants is a job title, not a personality description. The best you can hope for is that their competing agendas will cancel each other out sufficiently to come to some semblance of an unbiased decision. Let's not forget that, when a government messes up (and boy howdy has it messed up in recent years), the blame for it applies not just to the individual leaders, but the entire human infrastructure below them too.

ewu

Quote from: Kaura117 on March 07, 2009, 02:43:01 PM
if done well

With this key point, I do fervently agree.:)

Quote from: Kaura117 on March 07, 2009, 02:43:01 PM
As for Ewu's arguments about public servants acting as a neutral balance... hahahahahahahahahaha. No. Public Servants is a job title, not a personality description. The best you can hope for is that their competing agendas will cancel each other out sufficiently to come to some semblance of an unbiased decision. Let's not forget that, when a government messes up (and boy howdy has it messed up in recent years), the blame for it applies not just to the individual leaders, but the entire human infrastructure below them too.

By no means do I think that it is anywhere near an unbiased decision or a neutral balance. The staff and all do have their motivations and rarely is it ever balanced. But my point is that they have many more resources and points of view than the "average" American. I feel that I have rocketed up to the top 10% of Americans when I merely google or wiki a topic to gather more information. I don't like how far too many of us take for granted what we are fed and become manipulated by it. I can't say that I have never been manipulated, but I can say that I have tried to combat it.
Eric Wu
FanimeCon Chairman
FanimeCon Forums Moderator

ericATfanimeDOTcom

RadioactiveKitty

ok so yeah i appologize, for anyone i had pissed off... yeah people ok that was NOT a day i should have been posting, i had just ended a political argument with my friends.

the whole thing where i said i was gay, yeah that just ment to get out there is it saddens me, and i have been all through school. i am a senior, i have YET to been taught marriage. So lets just get this across, we are all from different places. ok, maybe your state, country or even city may have learning of marriage a requirement to learn but i have not been taught that i remember.

To PyronIkari- you know you dont have to be so damn harsh and read this THIS is to you;

About marriage being religious... yeah i guess some may consider it religious, but i come from a fully religious family who believes it is based solely on a religious basis. and i was talking from personal expiriance in my life to share my opinion since when is that a crime? and you DO NOT know me, so dont talk muck about me. and dont say i give gay people a bad name, so maybe you ought to smile and nodd instead of just b*t*hing people you dont know. you dont have to agree with them. no but you dont have to be an a*s about it.

just quit dissing on me it really hurts and yes i take some things to personally-

PyronIkari

Quote from: RadioactiveKitty on March 10, 2009, 01:57:33 PM
ok so yeah i appologize, for anyone i had pissed off... yeah people ok that was NOT a day i should have been posting, i had just ended a political argument with my friends.

the whole thing where i said i was gay, yeah that just ment to get out there is it saddens me, and i have been all through school. i am a senior, i have YET to been taught marriage. So lets just get this across, we are all from different places. ok, maybe your state, country or even city may have learning of marriage a requirement to learn but i have not been taught that i remember.

To PyronIkari- you know you dont have to be so damn harsh and read this THIS is to you;

About marriage being religious... yeah i guess some may consider it religious, but i come from a fully religious family who believes it is based solely on a religious basis. and i was talking from personal expiriance in my life to share my opinion since when is that a crime? and you DO NOT know me, so dont talk muck about me. and dont say i give gay people a bad name, so maybe you ought to smile and nodd instead of just b*t*hing people you dont know. you dont have to agree with them. no but you dont have to be an a*s about it.

just quit dissing on me it really hurts and yes i take some things to personally-

Don't care. Your personal life really has no place in this part of the forum as it's for serious discussion on heavy matters that affect the general populace and informed views and perspectives. Not the rantings of an overly emotional child. If you don't want to be put down, then don't post things that clearly show your short comings in a serious discussion. If you shoot off your mouth and sound ignorant, people will call you out for it. Everyone has opinions, but the point is to have opinions that aren't stupid, and opinions with support.

GUESS WHAT, I grew up in a religious family too, BUT THAT DOESN'T MATTER. Because *my experience* with that, doesn't mean that the rest of the world is exactly the same. If the world ran based on *personal experinces* then your homosexuality problem would be minor compared to the rest of the world's problems.

Either, stop being an ignorant twit or stop posting in this part of the forum.

All you are doing is throwing extremely narrow sighted bias into this conversation, and frankly... it DOES give gays a bad name. I don't have to "know you" as you put it, to know what was said in this thread, or other places you post. Because those are direct reflections of what you wanted to say, and it says a lot about you.

Mizuki

I'm surprised this thread is still going on. Pyron has had every right to post what he posted. If you don't like it, stop posting in the topic, or ignore him. You're going to have to deal with people you don't like in the world, and Pyron could possibly be one of them. Also using personal problems/experience in a forums about debates don't hold so well.

hylian_blooded

Quote from: XpHoBiaX on November 04, 2008, 08:42:30 PM
I voted NO on 8.

I figure, if public schools can teach kids about drugs, sex, and tell them that God is dead, they they can tell kids about gay marriage. If you really think about it, if kids are being tuaght how to put a condom on a zucchini in the 6th grade, it's no worse then explaining why Donna really is a Danny.

And it's not like you're promoting gay marriage. It's awareness. Like sex Ed in the 4th grade explains to little kids how their bodies growing and will function sexually.




i agree with you. a child should know that that is out there, for two reasons;
1-so that they are maybe in the LEAST BIT open minded about it
2-just in case they somehow find out that they are gay themselves.

i mean if a child at say 15 or 16 finds them selves looking at the same sex and finding that attractive, they should know WHY this is so. people should be a bit more open minded about the subject because its out there.

i also agree with XpHoBiaX in the sense that we are taught to put a condom on a zucchini or bananna or another type of vegtable/ fruit that resembles that organ hahahaha.

and i personally never got taught about homosexuality in school, maybe some did. i guess it depends on the schools curriculum, but i think it would be a good idea. again like XpHoBiaX said direct quote "And it's not like you're promoting gay marriage. It's awareness..." just letting them know its out there and that it is a personal choice some people make
The rising sun will eventually set,
A newborn's life will fade.
From sun to moon, moon to sun...
Give peaceful rest to the living dead.

N.E.R.V.agent220

      I have nothing against gays or lesbians but same sex message is a religous violation, I mean tying the knot at the witness of god with 2 men or 2 women is an outrage. Proposition 8 stains a 15th century love where it was Adam and Eve in the garden of eden. Adam the masculine and Eve the feminine. Adam was in love with Eve for beauty that Eve was in love with Adam for stength and courage. They lived happily together loving and charishing one another that they were inseperable.
      Proposition 8 is triggers voters to make a decision to a long religous tradition to a tradition that hasen't been written but plays a big role in society that plays the race or creed factor which is not the case. 
      Vote YES on Proposition 8 and keep a long religous tradition live on

Kaura117

Marriage started out as an economic institute. Uphold tradition, ban marriages for love.

Eve tempted Adam into mankind's fall from grace, robbing us of immortality and freedom from illness and disease. Ban women.

Divorce is a religious violation, severing a contract made under the eyes of God. Ban divorces.

The Treaty of Tripoli, signed by Thomas Jefferson, specifically states in Article 11 that the United States is not a Christian nation. It is but one of three treaties in which the Senate unanimously ratified thus far, with absolutely no evidence of dissent during the period. Ban churches.

You starting to get my drift? Or do you require the infusion of a few stem cells into your cerebral cortex in order to have a high enough IQ to get it when a man's spitting sarcasm at you? Marriage isn't a Christian concept. Love isn't a Christian concept. Tolerance ought to be a Christian concept. Because the concepts of love and marriage do not explicitly and solely fall under Christian conceptual grounds, because even in Christianity there are those that believe that love between two individuals trumps all other considerations, the neutral and therefore jurisdictional ground of the state is to treat gay marriage as functionally and completely equivalent in every way to heterosexual marriage. And therefore privy to the same tax codes and same civil rights as heterosexual marriage.

All your religiously fueled ignorance is doing is further proving that those that did support Prop 8 were all hackneyed idiots that totally missed the historical and political context in which the whole debate is framed in the first place. There is absolutely no way you can argue that Prop 8 isn't discriminatory and bigoted - and that supporting it is exactly the same fucking thing as being a bigot yourself.

Enjoy your shame.

ewu

Quote from: N.E.R.V.agent220 on May 09, 2009, 10:50:40 PM
      I have nothing against gays or lesbians but same sex message is a religous violation, I mean tying the knot at the witness of god with 2 men or 2 women is an outrage. Proposition 8 stains a 15th century love where it was Adam and Eve in the garden of eden. Adam the masculine and Eve the feminine. Adam was in love with Eve for beauty that Eve was in love with Adam for stength and courage. They lived happily together loving and charishing one another that they were inseperable.
      Proposition 8 is triggers voters to make a decision to a long religous tradition to a tradition that hasen't been written but plays a big role in society that plays the race or creed factor which is not the case. 
      Vote YES on Proposition 8 and keep a long religous tradition live on

This is my issue with the bible, its stories, and the lessons it teaches....actually for most if not all religions. We are in the 21st century....those were written for a time long long ago for a society very different from then. Sometimes, the guidance is timeless and still valid....but for may issues they are outdated and impractical to apply for today and now.
Eric Wu
FanimeCon Chairman
FanimeCon Forums Moderator

ericATfanimeDOTcom

PyronIkari

Quote from: N.E.R.V.agent220 on May 09, 2009, 10:50:40 PM
      I have nothing against gays or lesbians but same sex message is a religous violation, I mean tying the knot at the witness of god with 2 men or 2 women is an outrage. Proposition 8 stains a 15th century love where it was Adam and Eve in the garden of eden. Adam the masculine and Eve the feminine. Adam was in love with Eve for beauty that Eve was in love with Adam for stength and courage. They lived happily together loving and charishing one another that they were inseperable.
      Proposition 8 is triggers voters to make a decision to a long religous tradition to a tradition that hasen't been written but plays a big role in society that plays the race or creed factor which is not the case. 
      Vote YES on Proposition 8 and keep a long religous tradition live on

Uhm, the story of Adam and Eve has nothing to do with marriage, you realize that right? The story of Adam and Eve was only about the creation of man and the fall of man. God in no way told Adam to only bang Eve and that they could only marry each other.

Your misinterpretation of the story is kinda nice though, did you hear it in religious class of private school? Because I heard a quite similar rendition in mine back in like.. '92. Only my teacher added on to that, that she truly believed that the love of God was stronger than that. That people love each other for whatever reasons they truly find, and it's up to God to bear witness to that, not the people to say whether or not love is true. You know, the whole... cast the first stone thing? We aren't allowed to judge whether or not two people shouldn't be married, it's up to God to do that. We may not agree, and we should discourage things that may be harmful, but if two fully capable thinking people choose their path, then hope that God sees them through it.

My teacher that said that was the only teacher in that entire school that even GRASPED her religion in the least, and she had so many ideas that went against what most people think is correct. She got fired after that year for just that reason. She didn't try to brainwash kids. She taught them...

Religious people barely know what they're religion says. It's why I hate it when people like you use religion as their stepping stone of debate. All actual discussion of marriage is in the old testament for the most part. In most of the Christian religions, the old testament is not supposed to be used as a literal basis. Well okay, that's not entirely true. Most of it is not supposed to be used, only the convenient ones that the religion wants to used can be used, and the others are ignored. The most common is the eye for an eye passage. The old Testament advocated equality, balance and stability. Women were inferior, men ruled, and any injustice could be matched as punishment. The new Testament advocated turning the other cheek, to be meek and humble, and revenge being wrong. They contradicted, therefore the old Testament is ignored. In cases where things are slightly similar though, or there is no complete contradiction, then the Old Testament is completely true.

Have you ever noticed that the story of Adam and Eve completely contradicts itself in the story of how God created the world? That the contradiction itself in that God created a world in which a creature new of the Good and Evils of the world(the serpent... which God had created) and in turn would cause Eve(and realistically Adam) to listen to such a creature, because they did not know of lies and deceit. See, how could Eve not believe the serpent? She didn't know he could lie, or that he would tell her to do a bad thing, because she had no grasp or understanding. She was a puppet and would do pretty much anything. Hell, she was created solely so Adam wouldn't be bored and sad, she is nothing but a meat puppet for Adam to have his way with.

But religion is great. It says gays shouldn't marry, even though it never says that. The whole "Between a man and women". It could be interpreted in so many ways, but Lewis Black hit it pretty dead on. At the time, people wanted to "marry" anything. Their camel, their sheep, their child, etc. The "man and a women" was to prevent things like that. But some people that claim they are Christians, who have probably never even read the Bible, nor truly tried to understand their religion say it's wrong, so it must be.


G.I.R

I hadn't read this topic in a while, and now there's new post here, so I went back, and read the original post:
Quote from: L3sli3_Lov3s_Chu on November 04, 2008, 02:41:14 PM
If not to for your own personal reasons, do it for the kids! >:(

To anyone that was Pro Prop 8, I have to ask.  What if was a close friend or coworker of yours?  Or what if it was a Family member.  What if it was your son or daughter?   Did you really think it all the way through before you jumped on the bandwagon? 

BumbleB

Yes I can go to Fanime!

Sunday:Shinigami Rukia- Bleach
*proud member of Prop Whores United <3*