FanimeCon 2024 Forums

If not to for your own personal reasons, do it for the kids! >:(

But what if your children turn out to be homosexual? You'd be screwing them over with their personal right to love and marry who they'd personally choose. Good job~

Thats fine. I still say vote 8. It's not more on the marriage part more on the teaching the kids about it. They should just wait.

So suddenly its wrong to teach kids about same-sex marriages?
If the kids are not taught about it, they will grow up thinking it's a bad thing (its not, just a choice on how someone want's to live there life), and 'gay' kids in schools will be picked on because there different.
And if they should wait, then I want talk about regular marriage to be postponed as well.

One of my closest friends is a Lesbian, and she has been picked on at school for being one. She used to live in a town where apparently being gay is a sin. She had to hide it all her life untill she moved out of that town, It makes me sick that people think like that, that some people are so closed minded. It makes me sick that kids keep saying gay or queer and picking on someone for being gay.

Honestly marriage isnt taught in schools, But you know thats like saying if we remove sex ed in schools so we should let the kids not know what a penis and a vagina is or that they shouldnt be taught safe sex?

Kids should be taught to treat all equal regardless

Hey the same situation happened with inter-racial marriages and now gay-marriage is the next step up. I want to see equal marriage for everyone regardless of sexual orientation.

I already voted No on 8, my friend says people who vote yes on 8 vote for hate

Edit: funny for someone who has a yaoi-esque avatar for this debate

I smell hypocrite

Quote from: L3sli3_Lov3s_Chu on November 04, 2008, 03:06:57 PM
Thats fine. I still say vote 8. It's not more on the marriage part more on the teaching the kids about it. They should just wait.

Why shouldn't they have the right to know, when children are already exposed to much more outside of homosexuality? If you personally don't want your kids to learn too extensively into these sort of things, then it's YOUR responsibility as a parent to filter out what you think is wrong and teach them what you think is right. It doesn't mean that you should choose to discriminate others by denying their right to marry whomever they love and want to marry.

Let's bring it to a perspective you could possibly understand. You're African-American, but you want to choose to date people outside your own race. What if that was a huge social-taboo and you were discriminated against to the extent that you are denied your right to date them? It was a social taboo, by the way, and at some point, it wasn't allowed until people started realizing that dictating others' lives based on race was wrong.

Shouldn't people be able to marry other people, as long as they love each other regardless of race, gender, sex, and sexual orientation? Why do you feel so strongly about taking away those rights from other people that don't even concern you? Your children aren't in risk of harm by being educated and taught to have a more open mind than you do.

And what ARE they waiting for? For people like you to finally realize that people deserve their right to love and marry one another? I don't understand why that can't happen now, in this generation.


P.S. Isn't your avatar and user title a bit ironic for this sort of debate.

Jun and Kazuko make the point very eloquently. For the longest time in American history, interracial marriage = wrong. People always take the rights that they have for granted, not really understanding the history of why people can do what they can do. If Prop 8 Passes, we might as well make interracial marriage illegal. It's basically the same concept.

*Shrugs*

Yes, they both made really good point. I wish I was able to make good arguments like them.

Quote from: Kazuko on November 04, 2008, 04:15:59 PM
One of my closest friends is a Lesbian, and she has been picked on at school for being one. She used to live in a town where apparently being gay is a sin. She had to hide it all her life untill she moved out of that town, It makes me sick that people think like that, that some people are so closed minded. It makes me sick that kids keep saying gay or queer and picking on someone for being gay.

Honestly marriage isnt taught in schools, But you know thats like saying if we remove sex ed in schools so we should let the kids not know what a penis and a vagina is or that they shouldnt be taught safe sex?

Kids should be taught to treat all equal regardless

Hey the same situation happened with inter-racial marriages and now gay-marriage is the next step up. I want to see equal marriage for everyone regardless of sexual orientation.

I already voted No on 8, my friend says people who vote yes on 8 vote for hate

Edit: funny for someone who has a yaoi-esque avatar for this debate

I smell hypocrite

Hey, I reserve the right to say Gay and any other profanities.

I already voted NO! on 8, but if the prop dose pass you can bet that there will be a law suit.  Oh, and what's this crap about traditional marriage needing protection? It's not going anywhere!  And Gay marriage is not going to change that. Prop 8 will just make gay people be treated like second class citizens.

Yes, I knew someone would make a topic about this.

How does this hurt you? How does this hurt the kids? They'll know about it eventually, it's just like sex. I say the younger you are when you learn about certain things, the better it is. I'm honestly a bit of a homophobe, but I have no problem with gays/lesbians getting married, nor do I think that people should push this aside. It's their right.

Also, I hope this is NOT a troll topic.

I voted NO on 8.
First of all, isn't equality part of what America stands for? Does it not say in the Declaration of Independence

"all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness—That to secure these Rights, Governments are instituted among Men." 


Are gays not people too? Should they not be able to persue happiness simply because YOUR religion is against it? Besides, 8 doesn't force anyone to believe that same sex marriage is right - it just makes it legal.  If your religion is against it then you as an individual can still not recognize the marriage. 

Also, as far as teaching about gay marriage in schools, I hope you know that the children will one day *gasp* find out anyway.  It's just like swearing, you can't stop kids from acquiring knowledge.  Don't be ignorant.

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.

Quote from: L3sli3_Lov3s_Chu on November 04, 2008, 03:06:57 PM
Thats fine. I still say vote 8. It's not more on the marriage part more on the teaching the kids about it. They should just wait.

This is why I hate the majority of people. Ignorance is awesome, and the fact that they regurgitate crap they hear despite not understanding it is, great.

Teaching the kids about... what? How does prop 8 do anything for children?

The basis of prop 8 is that, traditionally, marriage was a joining of man and woman for life. This is what the bible stated right? Here's some things the bible also said about marriage in the same vein. If a woman cheats on her husband, she should be stoned to death, and the person she cheated with, should also be stoned to death. Should we make this a law too? The bible says it... and it's said almost right after how it is a sanctity between a man and a woman. It also says that if the husband dies, then the woman has to pretty much has to live solely for god and that doing anything with anyone else results in death as well.

So divorce = death. Cheating = death. Remarrying=death.

AWESOME... because we totally believe in the sanctity of marriage right? If you really believe in the sanctity of marriage...

You wouldn't be reading "yaoi". You wouldn't be enjoying it, talking about it, reading it, or anything of the sort, because it goes against the sanctity of marriage.

That avatar and caption... yeah, you're belittling homosexuality, which is a sin.

Anyways, the basis of of prop 8 is hypocritical to something else supported by the people that want prop 8 to pass. Right to bear arms anyone? It's God's given right to bear arms, or atleast, that's what they tell us. By banning guns your stripping people of a right to live how they want. OH WAIT... THAT'S WHAT PROP 8 DOES!

In the end, it's just ignorance. The OP is just repeating what she hears on TV, and what her parents are telling her. She really has no concept of what's going on.

As for education. Isn't it obvious? Ignorance is good. That's what prop 8 is all about. It's about forcing kids to be ignorant. Kids are too stupid to learn and to understand things. We shouldn't teach them anything.

We need more people like the OP. Intolerant, ignorant, kids that repeat what their parents tell them.

Totally fer sure.

Quote from: PyronIkari on November 04, 2008, 08:52:17 PM

Quote from: L3sli3_Lov3s_Chu on November 04, 2008, 03:06:57 PM
Thats fine. I still say vote 8. It's not more on the marriage part more on the teaching the kids about it. They should just wait.

This is why I hate the majority of people. Ignorance is awesome, and the fact that they regurgitate crap they hear despite not understanding it is, great.

Teaching the kids about... what? How does prop 8 do anything for children?

The basis of prop 8 is that, traditionally, marriage was a joining of man and woman for life. This is what the bible stated right? Here's some things the bible also said about marriage in the same vein. If a woman cheats on her husband, she should be stoned to death, and the person she cheated with, should also be stoned to death. Should we make this a law too? The bible says it... and it's said almost right after how it is a sanctity between a man and a woman. It also says that if the husband dies, then the woman has to pretty much has to live solely for god and that doing anything with anyone else results in death as well.

So divorce = death. Cheating = death. Remarrying=death.

AWESOME... because we totally believe in the sanctity of marriage right? If you really believe in the sanctity of marriage...

You wouldn't be reading "yaoi". You wouldn't be enjoying it, talking about it, reading it, or anything of the sort, because it goes against the sanctity of marriage.

That avatar and caption... yeah, you're belittling homosexuality, which is a sin.

Anyways, the basis of of prop 8 is hypocritical to something else supported by the people that want prop 8 to pass. Right to bear arms anyone? It's God's given right to bear arms, or atleast, that's what they tell us. By banning guns your stripping people of a right to live how they want. OH WAIT... THAT'S WHAT PROP 8 DOES!

In the end, it's just ignorance. The OP is just repeating what she hears on TV, and what her parents are telling her. She really has no concept of what's going on.

As for education. Isn't it obvious? Ignorance is good. That's what prop 8 is all about. It's about forcing kids to be ignorant. Kids are too stupid to learn and to understand things. We shouldn't teach them anything.

We need more people like the OP. Intolerant, ignorant, kids that repeat what their parents tell them.

Totally fer sure.

Damn mikey, I'm going to have to steal some of that material, it's good stuff.

Quote from: Steve.Young on November 04, 2008, 11:47:43 PM

Damn mikey, I'm going to have to steal some of that material, it's good stuff.

You want some more fun biblical facts?

Not only is that woman who is now a widow not able to remarry... if she didn't have a child SHE HAS TO HAVE SEX WITH THE LATE HUSBANDS BROTHERS... ALL OF THEM(PS this is new testament) until a male child is born.

If a wife EVER touches the genitals of another man, her hand is to be cut off, no matter what. The reason why does not matter, even if she does it to save her husbands life(like if he's going to be stabbed so she punches him in the balls).

If a bride is found out to not be a virgin after marriage, she's sentenced to death as well.

If you want I can find the actual lines these are from, I don't remember them off hand, as these are things from my jr. high days.




Also along the lines of "kids learning about same-sex marriage in school" it's false anyways. Generally they don't even talk about marriage in schools during sex ed. etc. They already take about homosexual sex in a lot of schools. And furthermore, much like any sex-ed class... parents have the right to have their child not attend. There's a law that allows parents to remove their child from ANY CLASS for any reason. Sex-Ed is not a required class so not attending does not harm the child in any way shape or form in terms of their academic record.

I have tons of these, and hundreds of other misconceptions about PROP 8 as well. I kept this rather short though.

It's pretty close vote, 53% for yes, 47% for no. I'm sure it will change later on.

every bay area county EXCEPT Solano has majority voting no on 8.

For weeks now I seen mean spirited Ads and Protesters for Pop.8 tell how it would "protect religious freedom".  How does taking away rights from one group protect anothers rights?
Who would be the next group to have their rights challenged if Prop. 8 goes thru?

Quote from: otakuapprentice on November 05, 2008, 12:23:27 AM
every bay area county EXCEPT Solano has majority voting no on 8.

I bet

Quote from: L3sli3_Lov3s_Chu on November 04, 2008, 03:06:57 PM
Thats fine. I still say vote 8. It's not more on the marriage part more on the teaching the kids about it. They should just wait.

I have nothing to add already that Jun or Pyron didn't say save for:

You're a God damned idiot.

Open up your mind. Do a little research. Perhaps then you wouldn't come off so ignorant. Kids aren't taught about marriage in school. Kids also aren't taught that being gay is or isn't ok. These are things that parents need to start taking responsibility for. Everyone is always so quick to blame someone else before they look inward. It's sickening and when people bandwagon things like this without actually knowing wtf is going on it just adds to the overall stupidity and bigotry of the world.

Adding on with the things mentioned, it's obvious that most of the "pros" to prop 8 are mindless propaganda for closed-minded idiots to eat up, making false points of why people against same-sex marriage should feel threatened with idiotic claims like "Oh no! Your children are going to be corrupted by learning about gay marriage if we don't make it illegal!" or "This goes against my religion so you're denying my right to freedom of religion!" Blah blah blah, BS.

It's funny that you're worried about your children learning about homosexuality, when you're only 17 and you probably have known about it for years without schools educating you about it at all. What difference does it make when it becomes legally acceptable? Well, for one thing, it allows people to finally feel that it's okay to love another person regardless of sex and gender without it feeling dirty and illegal. It takes away the pressure of the law discriminating them and unfairly disallowing them to marry one another. Aren't those positive things?

And what positive outcome comes from denying them of this? Oh, right. So more children can be bred to end up just like you and make these people feel that they're wrong for loving another person because they both have the same sexual organs biologically and that it's their fault that they were born that way.

As for it being a threat to religious freedom... and by this, I mean exclusively Christian faith, exclusively... a lot of things are technically against religious beliefs. Why aren't those banned too? And really, why should the law cater to your religion when not everyone obviously possesses the same beliefs. If you strongly feel that you should maintain your beliefs and apply them to your family, then do so. Not everyone else has to.

I'm all for equal legal rights and all, but man. I'm feeling bitter that people that have plans to breed their children to become discriminating bigots actually have their own right to procreate.

Quote from: Jun-Watarase on November 05, 2008, 02:41:24 AM*clipped*

Damn right, well said.

Just to shed some light on that add about children learning about gay marriage in 2nd grade.

Those pictures weren't about learning gay marriage in second grade. That was an actual wedding of a teacher who happened to be getting married to someone of the same sex. The 2nd grade kids were brought to the wedding as GUESTS WITH THEIR PARENTS. The teacher let the parents know that they were getting married, and the parents CHOSE TO TAKE THEIR CHILDREN TO THE SAME SEX MARRIAGE.

^^

But it's for the kids right? Now parents don't have the choice to take their children to same sex marriages. It's sad to know that even California is filled with ignorant sheep that want to blame homosexuals for their "childrens' mistakes".

has anyone seen the latest polls? I really hope this bull shit proposition got voted down!

o_o Whooooa... I'll just sit back and watch since I can't actually vote. Not sure really what to say, though, but my opinion remains the same. I'm don't think I can, or will, give some long over written opinion on why someone should or should'nt vote on it, but my opinion remians the same. I DID, however find out some very interesting info on the the prop that kinda swayed my opinion, but, -shurgs- I still says vote Yush.

Quote from: Jun-Watarase on November 05, 2008, 02:41:24 AM
Adding on with the things mentioned, it's obvious that most of the "pros" to prop 8 are mindless propaganda for closed-minded idiots to eat up, making false points of why people against same-sex marriage should feel threatened with idiotic claims like "Oh no! Your children are going to be corrupted by learning about gay marriage if we don't make it illegal!" or "This goes against my religion so you're denying my right to freedom of religion!" Blah blah blah, BS.

It's funny that you're worried about your children learning about homosexuality, when you're only 17 and you probably have known about it for years without schools educating you about it at all. What difference does it make when it becomes legally acceptable? Well, for one thing, it allows people to finally feel that it's okay to love another person regardless of sex and gender without it feeling dirty and illegal. It takes away the pressure of the law discriminating them and unfairly disallowing them to marry one another. Aren't those positive things?

And what positive outcome comes from denying them of this? Oh, right. So more children can be bred to end up just like you and make these people feel that they're wrong for loving another person because they both have the same sexual organs biologically and that it's their fault that they were born that way.

As for it being a threat to religious freedom... and by this, I mean exclusively Christian faith, exclusively... a lot of things are technically against religious beliefs. Why aren't those banned too? And really, why should the law cater to your religion when not everyone obviously possesses the same beliefs. If you strongly feel that you should maintain your beliefs and apply them to your family, then do so. Not everyone else has to.

I'm all for equal legal rights and all, but man. I'm feeling bitter that people that have plans to breed their children to become discriminating bigots actually have their own right to procreate.

This is abit much, I just don't want kids to learn about it in schools. I don't think kids will grow up to be bigots or discriminate just because they don't teach it in schools... It's amazing how may folks just blew up over this Prop.

Quote from: Kazuko on November 04, 2008, 04:15:59 PM
One of my closest friends is a Lesbian, and she has been picked on at school for being one. She used to live in a town where apparently being gay is a sin. She had to hide it all her life untill she moved out of that town, It makes me sick that people think like that, that some people are so closed minded. It makes me sick that kids keep saying gay or queer and picking on someone for being gay.

Honestly marriage isnt taught in schools, But you know thats like saying if we remove sex ed in schools so we should let the kids not know what a penis and a vagina is or that they shouldnt be taught safe sex?

Kids should be taught to treat all equal regardless

Hey the same situation happened with inter-racial marriages and now gay-marriage is the next step up. I want to see equal marriage for everyone regardless of sexual orientation.

I already voted No on 8, my friend says people who vote yes on 8 vote for hate

Edit: funny for someone who has a yaoi-esque avatar for this debate

I smell hypocrite

I don't actually have anything against gays and lesbians, and this goes back to my post uptop, I just don't want it to be taught in schools. But, like I said uptop, I did abit of research and found out that they won't ,or so they say, teach it in schools so my opinion has been kinda swayed...

Way to backtrack your post. Maybe next time you should research before you post.

Maaaaaaaaybe.

Quote from: L3sli3_Lov3s_Chu on November 05, 2008, 10:14:01 AM

Quote from: Kazuko on November 04, 2008, 04:15:59 PM
One of my closest friends is a Lesbian, and she has been picked on at school for being one. She used to live in a town where apparently being gay is a sin. She had to hide it all her life untill she moved out of that town, It makes me sick that people think like that, that some people are so closed minded. It makes me sick that kids keep saying gay or queer and picking on someone for being gay.

Honestly marriage isnt taught in schools, But you know thats like saying if we remove sex ed in schools so we should let the kids not know what a penis and a vagina is or that they shouldnt be taught safe sex?

Kids should be taught to treat all equal regardless

Hey the same situation happened with inter-racial marriages and now gay-marriage is the next step up. I want to see equal marriage for everyone regardless of sexual orientation.

I already voted No on 8, my friend says people who vote yes on 8 vote for hate

Edit: funny for someone who has a yaoi-esque avatar for this debate

I smell hypocrite

I don't actually have anything against gays and lesbians, and this goes back to my post uptop, I just don't want it to be taught in schools. But, like I said uptop, I did abit of research and found out that they won't ,or so they say, teach it in schools so my opinion has been kinda swayed...

It isn't. As far as my 14 years of highschool goes, they don't teach about marriage at school....
So what's with people complaining that they will teach about same-sex marriage??
Besides, if they WERE to teach anything about marriage or sex ed, most teachers would send home a letter for the parents to sign that they are letting the teachers teach their kids about sex-ed... If you don't sign it, well your kid doesn't have to learn about it and he/she will just do something else.

I don't understand why you are using kids as an excuse for your own beliefs, you have your rights, gays and lesbians should have theirs.
As far as I'm aware of right now, I have not met a person has given me a valid reason for yes on prop 8.

Looks like stupidity triumphs. I wish the "no on 8" ads would have focused on the civil rights movement from the get go. The fundamentalist had to much control of the momentum. But this isn't the end. The prop didn't pass by a huge majority, so we'll probably hear about this in the next election.(like in two years)

It's being challenged by S.F. I think they'er taking it to court or some crap. I was hopeing this would be over... But it guess the topic was too controvercial.

This is why we can't have good things.

This thread is actually quite helpful, I'm not sorry to use you as the guinea pig of this.

People like you voted for Prop 8. Ignorant, believing what the ads say WITHOUT research. This is what makes me lose faith in humanity, and the american people. This prop will NOT force teachers to teach about gay marriage. Where the hell does it say this? How people are getting people to vote yes on prop 8 is ANCIENT technics, they twist and bend the truth to their will, and it apparently worked.

People blew up over this prop because of the crappy wording it was, the confusing manner of it overall, and the arguments for prop 8. It's dumb, it's bullcrap, and it's standard.

Well, on the flip side, now it's a national ignorance statistic.

If anyone who had a smidge of intelligence sat down and read the actual proposition paragraph, voting No would have been an obvious move because it simply shoves religion down liberty's throat.

~Chun

Quote from: Chun on November 05, 2008, 11:33:17 AM
Well, on the flip side, now it's a national ignorance statistic.

If anyone who had a smidge of intelligence sat down and read the actual proposition paragraph, voting No would have been an obvious move because it simply shoves religion down liberty's throat.

~Chun

If the law suit dosen't get that overturned, then there is a chance that we can get it overturned in the voting booth, this time with the facts strait, some time in the near future.

I'll tell you one thing though, the fact that this bull shit prop got passed, has taken all the euphoria out of the fact that Obama won.

http://www.voterguide.sos.ca.gov/title-sum/prop8-title-sum.htm

Quote from: Official CA StatementELIMINATES RIGHT OF SAME–SEX COUPLES TO MARRY. INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT.

    * Changes the California Constitution to eliminate the right of same-sex couples to marry in California.
    * Provides that only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.

Summary of Legislative Analyst's Estimate of Net State and Local Government Fiscal Impact:

    * Over the next few years, potential revenue loss, mainly from sales taxes, totaling in the several tens of millions of dollars, to state and local governments.
    * In the long run, likely little fiscal impact on state and local governments.

Nowhere does it imply the prevention of children to learn about gay or lesbian relations in their statitues, it is simply banning a right.

This is all most of YES voters had to read to understand what was going on. Instead they took a spoonful of lies.

~Chun

It's so disheartening to see this proposition pass. I had hoped that anyone with a conscious for equality would have seen that Prop 8 is basically legalizing discrimination in a country where supposedly everyone should be treated equally. I'm really hoping the law suit goes well - Prop 8 isn't any different from when biracial marriages were outlawed or when Armenians weren't allowed to live in the Central Valley.

Mikey, we share the same ideas on this, though I believe you put it down better than I ever could have.

From what a friend told me with 8 being passed the Gay and Lesbian groups to fight this in court and have it overturned because it's not equal rights. Then across the country all the other Anti-Gay marriage states will have to do the same and hopefully with some time all of the US with allow Gay Marriage. That's what I he told me.

How come people are getting so mad about the people who are for it, though? How come people can't have the right to just disagree? I understand that this law is discriminating against Gays and Lesbians, and that is wrong. But suppose people did vote No on it all together and there were those few who thought Yes on it but didn't have the discrimination in mind, or just didn't want for vote No for their own reasons, why are they such bad people?
In America people can have their opinions and perspectives, just as I have mine, and thats why I posted this Topic, to see other peoples perspectives and opinions on this Prop, but now as I read these posts and get called all theses names... I notices things about folk. If someone can answer why its so bad to just disagree sometimes.. I think I might just be content. When I put the childish name calling aside, I understand where people are coming from, I think everyone should have the right to do what they want, but I want to know why people can't vote YES on this prop with out coming out as a bad person, or and idiot, or ignorant.

Quote from: L3sli3_Lov3s_Chu on November 05, 2008, 12:57:31 PM
How come people are getting so mad about the people who are for it, though? How come people can't have the right to just disagree? I understand that this law is discriminating against Gays and Lesbians, and that is wrong. But suppose people did vote No on it all together and there were those few who thought Yes on it but didn't have the discrimination in mind, or just didn't want for vote No for their own reasons, why are they such bad people?
In America people can have their opinions and perspectives, just as I have mine, and thats why I posted this Topic, to see other peoples perspectives and opinions on this Prop, but now as I read these posts and get called all theses names... I notices things about folk. If someone can answer why its so bad to just disagree sometimes.. I think I might just be content. When I put the childish name calling aside, I understand where people are coming from, I think everyone should have the right to do what they want, but I want to know why people can't vote YES on this prop with out coming out as a bad person, or and idiot, or ignorant.

Then you should not have told people to vote yes on 8 in this forum.  It's one thing to have or express an opinion about tha topic, but to come right out and tell people how to respond without any explanation is something else.

Quote from: L3sli3_Lov3s_Chu on November 05, 2008, 12:57:31 PM
I understand that this law is discriminating against Gays and Lesbians, and that is wrong.

But suppose people did vote No on it all together and there were those few who thought Yes on it but didn't have the discrimination in mind, or just didn't want for vote No for their own reasons, why are they such bad people?

There is a contradiction in that statement, Your Honor!

Voting yes means that those effective parties ARE discriminating.

EDIT: Sorry, I forgot to realize that if the actual proposal was read this wouldn't have happened.

QuoteIf not to for your own personal reasons, do it for the kids!  >:(

Present evidence which incriminates a No vote on Proposition 8 directly scarring education. I've shown primary-source, direct government evidence against it. Don't link me to a YES ON 8 website.

~Chun

Quote from: L3sli3_Lov3s_Chu on November 05, 2008, 12:57:31 PM
How come people are getting so mad about the people who are for it, though? How come people can't have the right to just disagree? I understand that this law is discriminating against Gays and Lesbians, and that is wrong. But suppose people did vote No on it all together and there were those few who thought Yes on it but didn't have the discrimination in mind, or just didn't want for vote No for their own reasons, why are they such bad people?
In America people can have their opinions and perspectives, just as I have mine, and thats why I posted this Topic, to see other peoples perspectives and opinions on this Prop, but now as I read these posts and get called all theses names... I notices things about folk. If someone can answer why its so bad to just disagree sometimes.. I think I might just be content. When I put the childish name calling aside, I understand where people are coming from, I think everyone should have the right to do what they want, but I want to know why people can't vote YES on this prop with out coming out as a bad person, or and idiot, or ignorant.

AUGH. Honestly, my temper isn't easily tested, but somehow your posts always manage to do it. It's frustrating to know that the majority of people are just as PAINFULLY ignorant. How, in any shape or form is having this proposition NOT discriminating? Really, none of the reasons you posted are even remotely valid or unable to be disproved.

Why is it SO HARD FOR YOU to understand that having this proposition, you're NOT GAINING OR LOSING anything? Why is it SO important to the extent that other people who have nothing to do with you to lose something as meaningful as the right to marry, like the rest of you? Don't blame it on the children, because in all hope children of the future generations will grow up to be more intelligent and understanding than you ignorant f*ckwads.

You don't realize how utterly frustrating it is to know that you nonchalantly decide that you should vote yes without even thinking about all the people that'll be denied their personal rights and being unable to marry just because YOU think you have a valid reason to choose for them. Do you go up to hetero couples and say "HEY, YOU GUYS. DON'T MARRY. I DON'T THINK IT'S RIGHT." or how about a person brought up with discriminating beliefs decides to inquire you and your boyfriend as you're walking down the street, "How come you guys are together? She's black. That's wrong." Don't tell me you don't take this as a personal offense.

I DO take it as a personal offense. Despite currently dating a male-gendered male-sex person, I am both bigendered and bisexual. I've dated or had relations with female-gendered, male-gendered, and transsexual women, and I've undeniably loved the partners that I were and am with despite any of that-- but it is truly unfair and unjust if I were to progress with a woman and be denied the right to ever propose to her and marry her legally. It's even worse for those who are homosexual, without the choice to meet marry without meeting YOUR expectations. People are born with their race, and people are born with their sexuality and how it develops. And even then, you aren't them. You shouldn't be able to choose for them. And chances are, these people who are old enough to even consider marriage are probably more mature than you are. How frustrating is it to have an ignorant know-nothing kid come up and have the power to take that away from them?

And I think these people, despite sex, gender, or sexual orientation DESERVE the change. They deserve others to finally let go of the past, because the past has always been historically, ignorant. That they should finally improve and move onto the future and realize that people should have these rights equally to everyone else. Obama became president-- this is a certain change for American history as is, the very first African-American president DESPITE the fact that African-Americans were considered low class citizens in the past, and are treated equally to the extent that they're even allowed to declare presidency. And all the people who were against having Obama as president primarily on the fact that he's black? Ignorant. How is denying the right to marry for gays and lesbians NOT unfair IF NOT THE SAME FORM of ignorance?

Also, don't tell us that we haven't told you why our reasons are valid, and why we strongly feel that this proposition is blatantly wrong. The "name-calling"? That's deserved on your part. It's a fitting TRUE to your character, and you constantly display it to instigate the same result. So the name calling isn't there because we want to reinforce our point by strengthening it with harsh words, rather, they're comments accurate to your description.

I remember long ago that you made a post on why people bully you, then comes along many a reply telling you that people are only reacting to how you carry yourself and why you keep pushing the common sense to IMPROVE away. It's because you never take it as a heads-up that maybe you're in need of improvement. You didn't even give it a second thought to even wonder if what we're saying is right, and that you ARE discriminating against others. Actually, you've had a history with discriminating others from what I remember. I take it that you haven't learned and haven't improved at all.

Dear OP
Are you happy? because prop 8 passed thanks to ignorant people like you. WHY is it sooo hard for you to grasp what Jun and pretty much all of us Had said. Get some common sense and put more logic in your statements rather thank being all willy nilly, This would have been important day for all of the LGBT community because it is a big Step up in our civil rights but now Way to back track california.

The People who Voted yes WERE discriminating the LGBT community because oh what "someone please think of the children blah blah blah relgion" when INFACT marriage is NEVER taught in schools, Children are pretty understanding than you to be honest. Its personal to me too because of my recentally gay cousin and my future brother in-law's brother would want to get married someday and now the ignorant asshats have decided that OH NOES WE CANTS HAVE GAYS MARRIED ITS SICK ITS AGAINST THE LORD. Oh Shut it this has pissed me off KEEP RELIGION OUT of My politics and my Beliefs I am a Christian and I voted No on Prop 8  because I believe in EQUALITY FOR ALL regardless of Sexual Orientation or the color of our skin.

We might as well take away Inter Racial marriage while were at it...God this makes me so mad But change WILL COME wether you like it or not

I never had a headache reading a post before but DEAR LORD I cant believe how ignorant and contradictory you are

Stickied. This is actually a very important topic that can open people's eyes.

+++++++

I've always known by mom is very stupid, and in some cases, retarded, but when in regards to Prop 8, her stupidity level is at the point were it makes no sense, AT ALL.
Talking to her about prop 8 in the car just 30 minutes ago. I was kind of mad that the Prop passed and talking to her about it. She goes on to say how the world was made with a man and a woman and all that nonsense. I replied that that was not the point, and that, as Americans, ALL of us have the right to peruse happiness, and that voting yes goes against what America stands for, and that it takes homosexuals rights away to peruse that happiness. You know how she relied? She said, with full seriousness, that she has her rights takin away all the time, for instance, her right to get a new car is taken away because she does not have the money to buy it.
WTF!?!
Again, I know my mom is stupid, but how in gods name can anyone be that stupid!?!
After that, I got really mad and started accusing of Neo-Nazi-ism and things to such effects.

And now I will throw her to the wolves.
Please reply back by Quoting this post, as I won't be able to get her to look through this thread unless I get someone insult her personally, and explain to her her ignorance and stupidity.

I'd also like to clear something up:

Ignorance is when someone does not know better.

Stupidity is when they do, but ignore such.


Prop8 was voted on by people of the latter.



Jesus, now I want to go to a protest or something.

well its time to do that! Im not gonna play nice anymore, Its time to educate the ignorant and stupid who believe the lies
and apparently there is a petition to re-open 8! I signed it already, for hope
http://www.petitiononline.com/seg5130/petition.html

Quote from: Kazuko on November 05, 2008, 02:56:40 PM
well its time to do that! Im not gonna play nice anymore, Its time to educate the ignorant and stupid who believe the lies
and apparently there is a petition to re-open 8! I signed it already, for hope
http://www.petitiononline.com/seg5130/petition.html

I will also!
EDIT: Oh yeah, I'm still not 18.
(>_<)

Why has this been made sticky???? (I don't think it should be made sticky)

Also, civil....rights? (I understand, honestly, what they are but... I shall just post this to see how people re-act, seems I don't have to say all that much anyways to stir up folks...)

Lets see what happens.

You know, I almost felt bad about hoping people voted Yes on Prop 8 especially considering the fact that I have gay and lesbian fam., but ney.

As Voltaire once said (or is attributed to saying), "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."

For those who believe that marriage is all about love between two people, regardless of age, ethnicity, religion, or gender, I will defend to the death for people's rights to marry who they want to marry.

The fight for equal rights will go on.

Well, it is going to be challenged so... Maybe they'll vote NO the next time around.

Quote from: L3sli3_Lov3s_Chu on November 05, 2008, 04:49:13 PM
Why has this been made sticky???? (I don't think it should be made sticky)

He's a mod. You're not. It's made into a sticky because of the astounding amount of ignorance and stupidity you've managed to have despite all of the things that were said, and all the replies made against it so that hopefully like-minded people like you can read something that informs them of all the wrong that they're doing in hopes that they're smart enough to logically understand any of it where you failed to do so.

QuoteAlso, civil....rights? (I understand, honestly, what they are but... I shall just post this to see how people re-act, seems I don't have to say all that much anyways to stir up folks...)

Lets see what happens.

You know, I almost felt bad about hoping people voted Yes on Prop 8 especially considering the fact that I have gay and lesbian fam., but ney.

Seriously, what in f*cks sake is wrong with you? Really, you had NOTHING TO LOSE if Prop 8 was unapproved. You GAIN NOTHING by having it passed. You only promote other people to remain stupid f*cks like you. If it were a proposition against interracial marriage, then perhaps you'd be in the position to understand. Actually, it boggles the mind how people can be this painfully stupid.

Can't this country evolve a little faster, please? We came to the point to allow something as wonderful as having a president not be discriminated by ignorant racism, why can't we allow same-sex marriage? We're not corrupting your children, we're not forcing you to be gay-- why shouldn't any of your gay and lesbian family members be able to marry?

I have hope though. The majority has become accepting and understanding of people regardless of race. Hopefully other people will becoming smarter than you are and finally evolve and realize that same-sex marriage is essentially the same thing, and grow to accept it. And it WILL happen one day, whether you like it or not. It's a shame that it hasn't happened yet, but eventually, it will.

See, I'd be more lenient if it were solely a matter of opinion, but in this case, it's selfish retaliation against a false threat, and an astounding display of ignorance and stupidity.

Quote from: Jun-Watarase on November 05, 2008, 05:05:53 PM

Quote from: L3sli3_Lov3s_Chu on November 05, 2008, 04:49:13 PM
Why has this been made sticky???? (I don't think it should be made sticky)

He's a mod. You're not. It's made into a sticky because of the astounding amount of ignorance and stupidity you've managed to have despite all of the things that were said, and all the replies made against it so that hopefully like-minded people like you can read something that informs them of all the wrong that they're doing in hopes that they're smart enough to logically understand any of it where you failed to do so.

QuoteAlso, civil....rights? (I understand, honestly, what they are but... I shall just post this to see how people re-act, seems I don't have to say all that much anyways to stir up folks...)

Lets see what happens.

You know, I almost felt bad about hoping people voted Yes on Prop 8 especially considering the fact that I have gay and lesbian fam., but ney.

Seriously, what in f*cks sake is wrong with you? Really, you had NOTHING TO LOSE if Prop 8 was unapproved. You GAIN NOTHING by having it passed. You only promote other people to remain stupid f*cks like you. If it were a proposition against interracial marriage, then perhaps you'd be in the position to understand. Actually, it boggles the mind how people can be this painfully stupid.

Can't this country evolve a little faster, please? We came to the point to allow something as wonderful as having a president not be discriminated by ignorant racism, why can't we allow same-sex marriage? We're not corrupting your children, we're not forcing you to be gay-- why shouldn't any of your gay and lesbian family members be able to marry?

I have hope though. The majority has become accepting and understanding of people regardless of race. Hopefully other people will becoming smarter than you are and finally evolve and realize that same-sex marriage is essentially the same thing, and grow to accept it. And it WILL happen one day, whether you like it or not. It's a shame that it hasn't happened yet, but eventually, it will.

See, I'd be more lenient if it were solely a matter of opinion, but in this case, it's selfish retaliation against a false threat, and an astounding display of ignorance and stupidity.

All this... Cause I said a little bit of that. And your right, if it were against interracial dating/marriage it most definatly WOULD be a different story. Also, if I frustrate you so much, why not ignore me? You've nothing to loose. Not point in wasting time on meh. It would seem that everytime I'm wrong, you're there. Just ignore me.

Quote from: L3sli3_Lov3s_Chu on November 05, 2008, 05:11:19 PM

Quote from: Jun-Watarase on November 05, 2008, 05:05:53 PM

Quote from: L3sli3_Lov3s_Chu on November 05, 2008, 04:49:13 PM
Why has this been made sticky???? (I don't think it should be made sticky)

He's a mod. You're not. It's made into a sticky because of the astounding amount of ignorance and stupidity you've managed to have despite all of the things that were said, and all the replies made against it so that hopefully like-minded people like you can read something that informs them of all the wrong that they're doing in hopes that they're smart enough to logically understand any of it where you failed to do so.

QuoteAlso, civil....rights? (I understand, honestly, what they are but... I shall just post this to see how people re-act, seems I don't have to say all that much anyways to stir up folks...)

Lets see what happens.

You know, I almost felt bad about hoping people voted Yes on Prop 8 especially considering the fact that I have gay and lesbian fam., but ney.

Seriously, what in f*cks sake is wrong with you? Really, you had NOTHING TO LOSE if Prop 8 was unapproved. You GAIN NOTHING by having it passed. You only promote other people to remain stupid f*cks like you. If it were a proposition against interracial marriage, then perhaps you'd be in the position to understand. Actually, it boggles the mind how people can be this painfully stupid.

Can't this country evolve a little faster, please? We came to the point to allow something as wonderful as having a president not be discriminated by ignorant racism, why can't we allow same-sex marriage? We're not corrupting your children, we're not forcing you to be gay-- why shouldn't any of your gay and lesbian family members be able to marry?

I have hope though. The majority has become accepting and understanding of people regardless of race. Hopefully other people will becoming smarter than you are and finally evolve and realize that same-sex marriage is essentially the same thing, and grow to accept it. And it WILL happen one day, whether you like it or not. It's a shame that it hasn't happened yet, but eventually, it will.

See, I'd be more lenient if it were solely a matter of opinion, but in this case, it's selfish retaliation against a false threat, and an astounding display of ignorance and stupidity.

All this... Cause I said a little bit of that. And your right, if it were against interracial dating/marriage it most definatly WOULD be a different story. Also, if I frustrate you so much, why not ignore me? You've nothing to loose. Not point in wasting time on meh. It would seem that everytime I'm wrong, you're there. Just ignore me.

She talks like my mom talks. To bad my mom is a stupid, stupid, person.

Quote from: TC_X0_Lt_0X on November 05, 2008, 05:20:02 PM

Quote from: L3sli3_Lov3s_Chu on November 05, 2008, 05:11:19 PM

Quote from: Jun-Watarase on November 05, 2008, 05:05:53 PM

Quote from: L3sli3_Lov3s_Chu on November 05, 2008, 04:49:13 PM
Why has this been made sticky???? (I don't think it should be made sticky)

He's a mod. You're not. It's made into a sticky because of the astounding amount of ignorance and stupidity you've managed to have despite all of the things that were said, and all the replies made against it so that hopefully like-minded people like you can read something that informs them of all the wrong that they're doing in hopes that they're smart enough to logically understand any of it where you failed to do so.

QuoteAlso, civil....rights? (I understand, honestly, what they are but... I shall just post this to see how people re-act, seems I don't have to say all that much anyways to stir up folks...)

Lets see what happens.

You know, I almost felt bad about hoping people voted Yes on Prop 8 especially considering the fact that I have gay and lesbian fam., but ney.

Seriously, what in f*cks sake is wrong with you? Really, you had NOTHING TO LOSE if Prop 8 was unapproved. You GAIN NOTHING by having it passed. You only promote other people to remain stupid f*cks like you. If it were a proposition against interracial marriage, then perhaps you'd be in the position to understand. Actually, it boggles the mind how people can be this painfully stupid.

Can't this country evolve a little faster, please? We came to the point to allow something as wonderful as having a president not be discriminated by ignorant racism, why can't we allow same-sex marriage? We're not corrupting your children, we're not forcing you to be gay-- why shouldn't any of your gay and lesbian family members be able to marry?

I have hope though. The majority has become accepting and understanding of people regardless of race. Hopefully other people will becoming smarter than you are and finally evolve and realize that same-sex marriage is essentially the same thing, and grow to accept it. And it WILL happen one day, whether you like it or not. It's a shame that it hasn't happened yet, but eventually, it will.

See, I'd be more lenient if it were solely a matter of opinion, but in this case, it's selfish retaliation against a false threat, and an astounding display of ignorance and stupidity.

All this... Cause I said a little bit of that. And your right, if it were against interracial dating/marriage it most definatly WOULD be a different story. Also, if I frustrate you so much, why not ignore me? You've nothing to loose. Not point in wasting time on meh. It would seem that everytime I'm wrong, you're there. Just ignore me.

She talks like my mom talks. To bad my mom is a stupid, stupid, person.

Yeh, I know, huh.

Quote from: L3sli3_Lov3s_Chu on November 05, 2008, 05:11:19 PM
All this... Cause I said a little bit of that. And your right, if it were against interracial dating/marriage it most definatly WOULD be a different story. Also, if I frustrate you so much, why not ignore me? You've nothing to loose. Not point in wasting time on meh. It would seem that everytime I'm wrong, you're there. Just ignore me.

If you understand that with interracial marriage, why is it that you STILL don't seem to grasp that the rights to same-sex marriage is essentially the same thing? You don't seem to realize how important it'd be to those who want this right. If this were the fight for interracial marriage, you'll realize how important it is for hundreds of people to have the right to marry, whereas the people against it wouldn't be losing a thing. They'd still be able to marry their own race, just as how it's very important to gays, lesbians, TGs, TSs, and TVs, but you're still able to marry the opposite sex regardless.

And for one thing, don't try to start the whole "then just ignore me" sh*t. I think using the ignore function on a public forum is stupid, especially in discussions like this, leaving chunks out of it and missing the discussion's progression just because I don't like what someone else says only makes things unorderly. Plus, this subject is an important matter and I want to voice my opinion, make my point clear and make you realize how stupid you are.

And again, I am ashamed to be of the same age as you. I am at least GRATEFUL that you're still underage and unable to vote. America doesn't need more stupid illogical idiots.

Quote from: L3sli3_Lov3s_Chu on November 05, 2008, 05:11:19 PM

Quote from: Jun-Watarase on November 05, 2008, 05:05:53 PM

Quote from: L3sli3_Lov3s_Chu on November 05, 2008, 04:49:13 PM
Why has this been made sticky???? (I don't think it should be made sticky)

He's a mod. You're not. It's made into a sticky because of the astounding amount of ignorance and stupidity you've managed to have despite all of the things that were said, and all the replies made against it so that hopefully like-minded people like you can read something that informs them of all the wrong that they're doing in hopes that they're smart enough to logically understand any of it where you failed to do so.

QuoteAlso, civil....rights? (I understand, honestly, what they are but... I shall just post this to see how people re-act, seems I don't have to say all that much anyways to stir up folks...)

Lets see what happens.

You know, I almost felt bad about hoping people voted Yes on Prop 8 especially considering the fact that I have gay and lesbian fam., but ney.

Seriously, what in f*cks sake is wrong with you? Really, you had NOTHING TO LOSE if Prop 8 was unapproved. You GAIN NOTHING by having it passed. You only promote other people to remain stupid f*cks like you. If it were a proposition against interracial marriage, then perhaps you'd be in the position to understand. Actually, it boggles the mind how people can be this painfully stupid.

Can't this country evolve a little faster, please? We came to the point to allow something as wonderful as having a president not be discriminated by ignorant racism, why can't we allow same-sex marriage? We're not corrupting your children, we're not forcing you to be gay-- why shouldn't any of your gay and lesbian family members be able to marry?

I have hope though. The majority has become accepting and understanding of people regardless of race. Hopefully other people will becoming smarter than you are and finally evolve and realize that same-sex marriage is essentially the same thing, and grow to accept it. And it WILL happen one day, whether you like it or not. It's a shame that it hasn't happened yet, but eventually, it will.

See, I'd be more lenient if it were solely a matter of opinion, but in this case, it's selfish retaliation against a false threat, and an astounding display of ignorance and stupidity.

All this... Cause I said a little bit of that. And your right, if it were against interracial dating/marriage it most definatly WOULD be a different story. Also, if I frustrate you so much, why not ignore me? You've nothing to loose. Not point in wasting time on meh. It would seem that everytime I'm wrong, you're there. Just ignore me.

Why is he not ignoring you? Because She disagrees with your beliefs, and is arguing against your point of view.  It's called debating, and that's part of what this forum subcategory is about.  Also, the fact that you can't even come up with a truly valid point makes HER the winner, FYI.

Oh, and side comment.  The mayer of San Francisco said that he will continue to allow gay couples to marry until the Court intervenes. :D

Oh, and side comment.  The mayer of San Francisco said that he will continue to allow gay couples to marry until the Court intervenes.

Well, thats nice. Yaaaayz.

I dun wanna lock this topic cuz its importent.... :'(  But this is drainin' meh.

Quote from: questionette on November 05, 2008, 05:23:10 PM
Why is he not ignoring you? Because he disagrees with your beliefs, and is arguing against your point of view.  It's called debating, and that's part of what this forum subcategory is about.  Also, the fact that you can't even come up with a truly valid point makes him the winner, FYI.

Oh, and side comment.  The mayer of San Francisco said that he will continue to allow gay couples to marry until the Court intervenes. :D

Despite being bigendered and male depending on context, I'm actually biologically female. lol

Quote from: L3sli3_Lov3s_Chu on November 05, 2008, 05:27:13 PM

QuoteOh, and side comment.  The mayer of San Francisco said that he will continue to allow gay couples to marry until the Court intervenes.

Well, thats nice. Yaaaayz.

...

... If you can accept this, why are you so strongly against it being applied legally?! ffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffff

LOL ops my bad I thought she was talking about pyron, sry Jun *fix'd*

And leslie, you might as well lock the topic b/c the whole thing is over and the fucktards won.  For now.

Quote from: Jun-Watarase on November 05, 2008, 05:29:44 PM

Quote from: questionette on November 05, 2008, 05:23:10 PM
Why is he not ignoring you? Because he disagrees with your beliefs, and is arguing against your point of view.  It's called debating, and that's part of what this forum subcategory is about.  Also, the fact that you can't even come up with a truly valid point makes him the winner, FYI.

Oh, and side comment.  The mayer of San Francisco said that he will continue to allow gay couples to marry until the Court intervenes. :D

Despite being bigendered and male depending on context, I'm actually biologically female. lol

Quote from: L3sli3_Lov3s_Chu on November 05, 2008, 05:27:13 PM

QuoteOh, and side comment.  The mayer of San Francisco said that he will continue to allow gay couples to marry until the Court intervenes.

Well, thats nice. Yaaaayz.

...

... If you can accept this, why are you so strongly against it being applied legally?! ffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffff

Sar'kazm, meybi?

(User was locked out for this post)

Quote from: questionette on November 05, 2008, 05:30:51 PM
LOL ops my bad I thought she was talking about pyron, sry Jun *fix'd*

And leslie, you might as well lock the topic b/c the whole thing is over and the fucktards won.  For now.

Wtf. I'm hella more awesome than Pyron.

Quote from: L3sli3_Lov3s_Chu on November 05, 2008, 05:33:03 PM
Sar'kazm, meybi?

Hell, it's kind of difficult to determine sarcasm when you type like an idiot on a regular basis.

Quote from: Kazuko on November 05, 2008, 02:56:40 PM
well its time to do that! Im not gonna play nice anymore, Its time to educate the ignorant and stupid who believe the lies
and apparently there is a petition to re-open 8! I signed it already, for hope
http://www.petitiononline.com/seg5130/petition.html

I have just signed the petition.

And also: GO SAN FRANSISCO!!!!

Quote from: L3sli3_Lov3s_Chu on November 05, 2008, 05:33:03 PM

Sar'kazm, meybi?

HUH? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ???

Quote from: Jun-Watarase on November 05, 2008, 05:34:47 PM

Quote from: questionette on November 05, 2008, 05:30:51 PM
LOL ops my bad I thought she was talking about pyron, sry Jun *fix'd*

And leslie, you might as well lock the topic b/c the whole thing is over and the fucktards won.  For now.

Wtf. I'm hella more awesome than Pyron.

Quote from: L3sli3_Lov3s_Chu on November 05, 2008, 05:33:03 PM
Sar'kazm, meybi?

Hell, it's kind of difficult to determine sarcasm when you type like an idiot on a regular basis.

Personal problem?

Quote from: Kazuko on November 05, 2008, 02:56:40 PM
well its time to do that! Im not gonna play nice anymore, Its time to educate the ignorant and stupid who believe the lies
and apparently there is a petition to re-open 8! I signed it already, for hope
http://www.petitiononline.com/seg5130/petition.html

A physical,paper petition would work better. But I signed this one anyway just to be one of the cool kids. XD

Quote from: questionette on November 05, 2008, 05:23:10 PMOh, and side comment.  The mayer of San Francisco said that he will continue to allow gay couples to marry until the Court intervenes. :D

I would take it a step farther and practice Satyagraha (resistance to tyranny through mass civil disobedience) as Gandhi did in India and Martin Luther King Jr. did in the Civil Rights Movement. What is the state going to do, lock them all up?
See, history does have it's uses.

Quote from: L3sli3_Lov3s_Chu on November 05, 2008, 05:29:04 PM
I dun wanna lock this topic cuz its importent.... :'(  But this is drainin' meh.

P.S. I'm still waiting for your evidence.

~Chun

Quote from: Jun-Watarase on November 05, 2008, 05:34:47 PM

Quote from: questionette on November 05, 2008, 05:30:51 PM
LOL ops my bad I thought she was talking about pyron, sry Jun *fix'd*

And leslie, you might as well lock the topic b/c the whole thing is over and the fucktards won.  For now.

Wtf. I'm hella more awesome than Pyron.

Truth.

Ok so I (even though I am a card carring member of the G.O.P) voted NO on 8. Though I am disheartned it passed, a colluage of mine brought up a an intresting point. A point that SFGATE points out here (http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/11/05/BA3B13UM63.DTL)

QuoteOn May 15, the state Supreme Court cleared the way for same-sex marriage. The court voted 4-3 to overturn Prop. 22 and the same-sex marriage ban, ruling that the state Constitution provided a right to marry that extends to same-sex couples. The three dissenting justices argued that it was up to the voters or the Legislature, not the court, to permit same-sex marriage, a view quickly taken up by opponents of the ruling.

"Four judges ignored 4 million voters and imposed same-sex marriage on California," Prop. 8 supporters said in a TV ad. "It's no longer about tolerance. Acceptance of gay marriage is now mandatory."

It was an argument that continued all the way to election day.
But with same-sex marriage legal in California, opponents of Prop. 8 could run a totally different campaign from the type that had lost virtually every election over the issue across the nation.
Rather than arguing for same-sex marriage, opponents took the moral high ground atop the Supreme Court decision and argued that a vote for Prop. 8 was a vote for discrimination. They got another bit of help when state Attorney General Jerry Brown ordered the Prop. 8 ballot language changed to say that it "eliminates the rights of same-sex couples to marry."

Prop. 8 backers charged that politics, not legal rectitude, was behind Brown's decision. They went to court, but lost.

That allowed Prop. 8 opponents, worried that many voters were not enamored with the idea of same-sex marriage, to run a TV campaign that almost never mentioned gays or lesbians or showed them in an ad. Instead, the ads charged that Prop. 8 supporters wanted to take away rights from a single, unnamed group of people, which opponents said was not fair.

Why not just come all out with it? I know what prop 8 was about and so did many others but to just says it is Unfair and wrong... WHAT IS unfair and wrong? IMO you cannot run a campaign of obscurity. If people do not know what they are voting for, what impact it has along with all the facts there of your mission will fail every time.

I'm just hoping this bears some fruit.  Seems this didn't get reviewed by the legislature before going to the ballot.  Whoops...

http://www.aclu.org/lgbt/relationships/37706prs20081105.html

Quote
"Acceptance of gay marriage is now mandatory."

Aha. Ha. Ha.

Seriously.
And that sucks that it got passed, especially since it was like, what 53 to 47? D:<
At least California is attempting to change even if the residents aren't necessarily allowing it.

Quote from: Chiri Kcrinh on November 05, 2008, 07:17:30 PM

Quote
"Acceptance of gay marriage is now mandatory."

Aha. Ha. Ha.

Seriously.
And that sucks that it got passed, especially since it was like, what 53 to 47? D:<
At least California is attempting to change even if the residents aren't necessarily allowing it.

I lol to that too.

The problem right now is that half (well, 1/20 or so) of the people that would vote no on Prop8 are still in High/Middle School (or so i like to think) while most of the people who voted yes on prop8 are older people who grew up thinking it's bad, like my parents and there parents.

Or so i would like to believe. All that is based on imaginary estimates and stereo-typing

Quote from: L3sli3_Lov3s_Chu on November 05, 2008, 05:33:03 PM

Quote from: Jun-Watarase on November 05, 2008, 05:29:44 PM

Quote from: questionette on November 05, 2008, 05:23:10 PM
Why is he not ignoring you? Because he disagrees with your beliefs, and is arguing against your point of view.  It's called debating, and that's part of what this forum subcategory is about.  Also, the fact that you can't even come up with a truly valid point makes him the winner, FYI.

Oh, and side comment.  The mayer of San Francisco said that he will continue to allow gay couples to marry until the Court intervenes. :D

Despite being bigendered and male depending on context, I'm actually biologically female. lol

Quote from: L3sli3_Lov3s_Chu on November 05, 2008, 05:27:13 PM

QuoteOh, and side comment.  The mayer of San Francisco said that he will continue to allow gay couples to marry until the Court intervenes.

Well, thats nice. Yaaaayz.

...

... If you can accept this, why are you so strongly against it being applied legally?! ffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffff

Sar'kazm, meybi?

Okay, This is serious business. If you're using sarcasm SAY IT. I'm tired of this crap, because people can just rewind. I also want you to respond to other people's questions/statements.

*edit*

I forgot to say. THIS IS YOUR FIRST WARNING before I exile you from this section.

Also, I'd like to point out that PROPER ENGLISH is highly recommended to post in this section without me deleting them!

Leslie...I have never met anyone as Ignorant as you it makes me want to facepalm everytime you cannot spell or make a effort to validate your points.
Why the Mod has stickied this is because to prove how ignorant people like you can be and its making me sick inside.

It makes me wonder why people like you procreate

LEARN TO SPELL, this is serious buisness not Byo /b/ for fracks sake so BE SERIOUS
I hope you never have kids *turbo facepalm*

Quote from: deonchan on November 05, 2008, 06:23:31 PM
Why not just come all out with it? I know what prop 8 was about and so did many others but to just says it is Unfair and wrong... WHAT IS unfair and wrong? IMO you cannot run a campaign of obscurity. If people do not know what they are voting for, what impact it has along with all the facts there of your mission will fail every time.

Well, unfortunetly politics is all about being obscure, and misleading, it's an old tactic they use to sway people their way, sometimes these statements include flat out lies that would work only on uneducated people on the topic. I really wish people could be more honest higher up.

Hi, in this post I quote someone from another forum I frequent, the original post was vulgur, and I cleaned it up so if I miss anything, I appologize.

QuoteDear California,
[screw] YOU.

[screw] you for telling me who I can and can't marry

To all those straight people that were able to vote on MY right to choose who I want to marry, [screw] YOU.

To all those religious nuts that say gay marriage goes against the bible, [screw] YOU. If you're all about the [freaking] bible then follow it word for word, don't just pick and choose. Quit eating shellfish and women, quit cutting your hair, assholes. Whoever says this has nothing to do with religion needs to STFU.

To those who didn't vote because they think it's stupid, that their vote doesn't count, or were just lazy, [screw] YOU. Including my best friend who didn't vote because "i never vote" [screw] YOU TOO.

I know other states didn't passed similar bans, but this is [freaking] CALIFORNIA. We have Ahhhhnold as our [freaking] governor, we're more liberal than shit, yet this prop doesn't pass? Seriously California? WTF? [screw] YOU.

You're saying gays are going to break the sanctity that is marriage? I don't even believe in fucking marriage. Marriage is garbage. If it's so awesome, then why do half of all marriages end in divorce? Why are there people going into their 3rd, 4th, 5th marriage? Straight people haven't a very good [freaking] job of making marriage amazing, why do you think we're gonna [screw] it up even more than it already is? And even though I don't believe in marriage, I do believe everyone is entitled to EQUAL [freaking] RIGHTS. We're not asking for anything more than you already have, we're asking for exactly what you have.

Other states, other countries have legalized gay marriage, and they are perfectly fine. Their churches have not been affected, kids in schools have not been converted, and for the [freaking] record, we don't not have a fucking agenda, and much less a fucking quota of people we want to "convert", leave that to the [freaking] mormons.

Speaking of which [screw] YOU mormons for donating $8.4 million towards the "YES ON PROP 8" movement. If you ever fucking come knocking on my door at 6am again, I am going to make out with my boyfriend in front of you until you melt. Who knows, we might even do some [things] in front of you until you implode.

I seriously expected more from you California. You are quite possibly the best state in the US of A, but today California, you have failed me.

Warm Regards,

****

PS [screw] YOU

Quote from: Mizuki on November 05, 2008, 08:34:39 PM
Hi, in this post I quote someone from another forum I frequent, the original post was vulgur, and I cleaned it up so if I miss anything, I appologize.

QuoteDear California,
[screw] YOU.

[screw] you for telling me who I can and can't marry

To all those straight people that were able to vote on MY right to choose who I want to marry, [screw] YOU.

To all those religious nuts that say gay marriage goes against the bible, [screw] YOU. If you're all about the [freaking] bible then follow it word for word, don't just pick and choose. Quit eating shellfish and women, quit cutting your hair, assholes. Whoever says this has nothing to do with religion needs to STFU.

To those who didn't vote because they think it's stupid, that their vote doesn't count, or were just lazy, [screw] YOU. Including my best friend who didn't vote because "i never vote" [screw] YOU TOO.

I know other states didn't passed similar bans, but this is [freaking] CALIFORNIA. We have Ahhhhnold as our [freaking] governor, we're more liberal than shit, yet this prop doesn't pass? Seriously California? WTF? [screw] YOU.

You're saying gays are going to break the sanctity that is marriage? I don't even believe in fucking marriage. Marriage is garbage. If it's so awesome, then why do half of all marriages end in divorce? Why are there people going into their 3rd, 4th, 5th marriage? Straight people haven't a very good [freaking] job of making marriage amazing, why do you think we're gonna [screw] it up even more than it already is? And even though I don't believe in marriage, I do believe everyone is entitled to EQUAL [freaking] RIGHTS. We're not asking for anything more than you already have, we're asking for exactly what you have.

Other states, other countries have legalized gay marriage, and they are perfectly fine. Their churches have not been affected, kids in schools have not been converted, and for the [freaking] record, we don't not have a fucking agenda, and much less a fucking quota of people we want to "convert", leave that to the [freaking] mormons.

Speaking of which [screw] YOU mormons for donating $8.4 million towards the "YES ON PROP 8" movement. If you ever fucking come knocking on my door at 6am again, I am going to make out with my boyfriend in front of you until you melt. Who knows, we might even do some [things] in front of you until you implode.

I seriously expected more from you California. You are quite possibly the best state in the US of A, but today California, you have failed me.

Warm Regards,

****

PS [screw] YOU

you missed a few "Freakings" in the Other states, other countries paragraph. just pointing that out >.>

Quote from: Mizuki on November 05, 2008, 08:34:39 PM
Hi, in this post I quote someone from another forum I frequent, the original post was vulgur, and I cleaned it up so if I miss anything, I appologize.

QuoteDear California,
[screw] YOU.

[screw] you for telling me who I can and can't marry

To all those straight people that were able to vote on MY right to choose who I want to marry, [screw] YOU.

To all those religious nuts that say gay marriage goes against the bible, [screw] YOU. If you're all about the [freaking] bible then follow it word for word, don't just pick and choose. Quit eating shellfish and women, quit cutting your hair, assholes. Whoever says this has nothing to do with religion needs to STFU.

To those who didn't vote because they think it's stupid, that their vote doesn't count, or were just lazy, [screw] YOU. Including my best friend who didn't vote because "i never vote" [screw] YOU TOO.

I know other states didn't passed similar bans, but this is [freaking] CALIFORNIA. We have Ahhhhnold as our [freaking] governor, we're more liberal than shit, yet this prop doesn't pass? Seriously California? WTF? [screw] YOU.

You're saying gays are going to break the sanctity that is marriage? I don't even believe in fucking marriage. Marriage is garbage. If it's so awesome, then why do half of all marriages end in divorce? Why are there people going into their 3rd, 4th, 5th marriage? Straight people haven't a very good [freaking] job of making marriage amazing, why do you think we're gonna [screw] it up even more than it already is? And even though I don't believe in marriage, I do believe everyone is entitled to EQUAL [freaking] RIGHTS. We're not asking for anything more than you already have, we're asking for exactly what you have.

Other states, other countries have legalized gay marriage, and they are perfectly fine. Their churches have not been affected, kids in schools have not been converted, and for the [freaking] record, we don't not have a fucking agenda, and much less a fucking quota of people we want to "convert", leave that to the [freaking] mormons.

Speaking of which [screw] YOU mormons for donating $8.4 million towards the "YES ON PROP 8" movement. If you ever fucking come knocking on my door at 6am again, I am going to make out with my boyfriend in front of you until you melt. Who knows, we might even do some [things] in front of you until you implode.

I seriously expected more from you California. You are quite possibly the best state in the US of A, but today California, you have failed me.

Warm Regards,

****

PS [screw] YOU

It's hard to argue with this.  I don't plan on it, I agree with him 100%  I went to a gay wedding, my friends Robert and Colley got hitch, and I bet that they are feeling roughly the same emotions right now.

Ok this is beating a dead horse now.

OP next time if you want a debate, don't make a topic telling people what they should do, come up with lame "reasons" for why they should (like it should even happen to begin with), and troll the rest of posts you make with three word responses when you don't know how else to rebuttal other posts by people who are were sincerely trying to debate with you. It's insulting.

Just advice for the future... I guess.

This is in no way beating a dead horse. People out there are still like the op, and I encourage everyone who sees this topic to post how they feel, 75% of this thread is what I dreamed of this forum to be.

Quote from: LordKefka on November 05, 2008, 09:15:53 PM
Ok this is beating a dead horse now.

OP next time if you want a debate, don't make a topic telling people what they should do, come up with lame "reasons" for why they should (like it should even happen to begin with), and troll the rest of posts you make with three word responses when you don't know how else to rebuttal other posts by people who are were sincerely trying to debate with you. It's insulting.

Just advice for the future... I guess.

Carry on...

And yet, it's ridiculous that Leslie, who even bothered to create this thread, STILL hasn't even attempted at addressing any of the points mentioned or brought up any valid argument to support herself.

Really, the only thing I've read from her so far is this BS about, "I don't think it's discriminating. I just don't want it taught in schools." when it was already explained that marriage, gay or not, isn't even taught in the average school curriculum.

Seriously, is the fear of kids learning about something they will some day be exposed to really worth taking away the right for an entire demographic to marry?

I've talked to other people too, more traditional and of older age briefly, and those who are strongly held to their own traditions are difficult to sway, but as for the more liberal types of that age group, they don't show much support either, except with "Just be patient. It'll happen eventually anyway." and/or "It doesn't really affect me, since I'm not gay, but I think it's fine either way."

Even though that's far from satisfactory, fact is, America will evolve above ridiculously stupid people like OP and change will happen.

I wrote a post and it disappeared.

Uh well... I'll just summarize.

There is a difference between ignorant and stupid... however there is "choosing to be ignorant". Leslie isn't stupid, she just chooses to be ignorant. Maybe some day when the child starts to grow up she might decide to try and learn something.

Frankly, the mods should ban her for her disrespect to the rules of what this forum represents(Hint... this is the serious forum).

Quotewhile most of the people who voted yes on prop8 are older people who grew up thinking it's bad, like my parents and there parents.

Unfortunatey, most of these people live in the central valley, and all of them hate when you express a different viewpoints. Oh well, I never had much hope for this area anyway.

Have you guys seen the map of the counties that voted on Prop 8? The Bay Area up and down the coast was NO....while the rest of California was YES.

Quote from: Steve.Young on November 05, 2008, 11:11:45 PM
Have you guys seen the map of the counties that voted on Prop 8? The Bay Area up and down the coast was NO....while the rest of California was YES.

Oh the irony. I blame those god damned Asians.

Forgive me for the humor, but I'm half-serious.

EDIT: Wait, nevermind. I came to the realization that most of the Asians that would be for Prop 8 don't even bother voting. =P

Quote from: Steve.Young on November 05, 2008, 11:11:45 PM
Have you guys seen the map of the counties that voted on Prop 8? The Bay Area up and down the coast was NO....while the rest of California was YES.

Religion is a powerful thing.

Quote from: Steve.Young on November 05, 2008, 11:11:45 PM
Have you guys seen the map of the counties that voted on Prop 8? The Bay Area up and down the coast was NO....while the rest of California was YES.

It's almost like the last presidential election, where all the states on the cost lines (east and west) were blue and all the states in between were red.

All the people on the coast have open minds, and all the people inland have closed minds. 

The Coast Line Gives Us BRAAAAAAAAAAAIIIIIIIIIINS (sorry, I couldn't resist)

Quote from: K&K4ever on November 05, 2008, 11:41:24 PM

Quote from: Steve.Young on November 05, 2008, 11:11:45 PM
Have you guys seen the map of the counties that voted on Prop 8? The Bay Area up and down the coast was NO....while the rest of California was YES.

It's almost like the last presidential election, where all the states on the cost lines (east and west) were blue and all the states in between were red.

All the people on the coast have open minds, and all the people inland have closed minds. 

The Coast Line Gives Us BRAAAAAAAAAAAIIIIIIIIIINS (sorry, I couldn't resist)

Yup thats how it is. The valleys are a cespool of ignorance.

Quote from: rude32 on November 05, 2008, 11:43:46 PM

Quote from: K&K4ever on November 05, 2008, 11:41:24 PM

Quote from: Steve.Young on November 05, 2008, 11:11:45 PM
Have you guys seen the map of the counties that voted on Prop 8? The Bay Area up and down the coast was NO....while the rest of California was YES.

It's almost like the last presidential election, where all the states on the cost lines (east and west) were blue and all the states in between were red.

All the people on the coast have open minds, and all the people inland have closed minds. 

The Coast Line Gives Us BRAAAAAAAAAAAIIIIIIIIIINS (sorry, I couldn't resist)

Yup thats how it is. The valleys are a cespool of ignorance.

I would suspect that it's because people living in coast lines are exposed to more things in general. You can't really blame people for being ignorant when they don't have any material to actually learn these things from.

Quote from: rude32 on November 05, 2008, 11:05:28 PM

Quotewhile most of the people who voted yes on prop8 are older people who grew up thinking it's bad, like my parents and there parents.

Unfortunatey, most of these people live in the central valley, and all of them hate when you express a different viewpoints. Oh well, I never had much hope for this area anyway.

My Grandparent's on my dads side.
There Mormon, they think god is law, and they contributed to the 8.4 or so million dollars from Mormons on the yes on 8.
And I know there also racist, they talk badly about everything thats not white.
And don't get me started about my family reunion last summer (in which case, I had to sit in a cabin the middle of nowhere in Utah(go figure), being eaten alive by bugs, and my ear drum got screwed up on the flights, in which case it is still screwed up...).

It's sad to see the older people in society (who supposedly are wise) showing so much stupidity.

Quote from: Jun-Watarase on November 05, 2008, 11:59:11 PM

Quote from: rude32 on November 05, 2008, 11:43:46 PM

Quote from: K&K4ever on November 05, 2008, 11:41:24 PM

Quote from: Steve.Young on November 05, 2008, 11:11:45 PM
Have you guys seen the map of the counties that voted on Prop 8? The Bay Area up and down the coast was NO....while the rest of California was YES.

It's almost like the last presidential election, where all the states on the cost lines (east and west) were blue and all the states in between were red.
All the people on the coast have open minds, and all the people inland have closed minds. 
The Coast Line Gives Us BRAAAAAAAAAAAIIIIIIIIIINS (sorry, I couldn't resist)

Yup thats how it is. The valleys are a cespool of ignorance.

I would suspect that it's because people living in coast lines are exposed to more things in general. You can't really blame people for being ignorant when they don't have any material to actually learn these things from.

Or maybe we get more exposure because of the coast line.  That's where all the ports are and where the imports come in

Quote from: K&K4ever on November 06, 2008, 12:06:17 AM

Quote from: Jun-Watarase on November 05, 2008, 11:59:11 PM

Quote from: rude32 on November 05, 2008, 11:43:46 PM

Quote from: K&K4ever on November 05, 2008, 11:41:24 PM

Quote from: Steve.Young on November 05, 2008, 11:11:45 PM
Have you guys seen the map of the counties that voted on Prop 8? The Bay Area up and down the coast was NO....while the rest of California was YES.

It's almost like the last presidential election, where all the states on the cost lines (east and west) were blue and all the states in between were red.
All the people on the coast have open minds, and all the people inland have closed minds. 
The Coast Line Gives Us BRAAAAAAAAAAAIIIIIIIIIINS (sorry, I couldn't resist)

Yup thats how it is. The valleys are a cespool of ignorance.

I would suspect that it's because people living in coast lines are exposed to more things in general. You can't really blame people for being ignorant when they don't have any material to actually learn these things from.

Or maybe we get more exposure because of the coast line.  That's where all the ports are and where the imports come in

Yeah, that was implied.

Quote from: TC_X0_Lt_0X on November 06, 2008, 12:05:08 AM

Quote from: rude32 on November 05, 2008, 11:05:28 PM

Quotewhile most of the people who voted yes on prop8 are older people who grew up thinking it's bad, like my parents and there parents.

Unfortunatey, most of these people live in the central valley, and all of them hate when you express a different viewpoints. Oh well, I never had much hope for this area anyway.

My Grandparent's on my dads side.
There Mormon, they think god is law, and they contributed to the 8.4 or so million dollars from Mormons on the yes on 8.
And I know there also racist, they talk badly about everything thats not white.
And don't get me started about my family reunion last summer (in which case, I had to sit in a cabin the middle of nowhere in Utah(go figure), being eaten alive by bugs, and my ear drum got screwed up on the flights, in which case it is still screwed up...).

It's sad to see the older people in society (who supposedly are wise) showing so much stupidity.

As condescending as it sounds, it's because of the lack of exposure to things that normally restricts that part of America to evolve. A lot of their ideals and views are outdated and are accepted by sheep who reject anything that is "different" from the majority in fear of whatever threat they supposedly come with.

People on the coast would find a lot of these people "underdeveloped" whereas people within in inner states would find us "crazy and wild". Though, I'm surprised that even the majority of people in the Bay hold this strongly to something so ridiculously stupid.

Quote from: PyronIkari on November 05, 2008, 11:05:10 PM
I wrote a post and it disappeared.

Uh well... I'll just summarize.

There is a difference between ignorant and stupid... however there is "choosing to be ignorant". Leslie isn't stupid, she just chooses to be ignorant. Maybe some day when the child starts to grow up she might decide to try and learn something.

Frankly, the mods should ban her for her disrespect to the rules of what this forum represents(Hint... this is the serious forum).

I thought of banning her, but gave her the warning so she can answer the damn questions people left for her.

p.s. Op has a 24 hours to answer the questions left for her. I hope you can answer them.

Just for the sake of being clear:


The following is based on the LEGAL TEXT, NOT TELEVISION:

All this "protect children" and "forced marriage education" business is not mentioned in the text of the law. In the actual statement made in the California voter guide (Official .gov), there is no mandate requiring ANYTHING to be taught or banned from teaching given the proposition does/does not go through.

In other words, voters assumed if NO was passed on the proposition, a new law would be passed that reforms district teachings (Which is false).

THERE IS NO SUCH CONSEQUENCE. It simply removes the right for homosexual couples to marry. That's it.

There's no such child protection act or banning in schools. In fact, the education system HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH THE PROPOSITION FINE TEXT.

This isn't a matter of tolerance for free speech. This is a matter of Californians failing to actually research what mess they approved.

http://www.voterguide.sos.ca.gov/title-sum/prop8-title-sum.htm

Show me where it protects Children. It does not.

~Chun

I've a new level of respect for Jun and Pyron. Not to mention Chun. Well said, all of you.

Mizuki, also glad you caught the troll doing exactly that after getting hammered on for 4 pages.

Utterly ridiculous.

Maybe that petition will get the numbers it needs and this will all become moot.

Here's to hoping.

Quote from: Chewie on November 06, 2008, 02:22:37 AM
Here's to hoping.

Cheers,

I singed it

Oh, boy... I might get banned?

Not really sure what exactly I can say to that other do what you want. If your going to ban me for THIS then... so be it. Have fun, I guess.

I was actually planning on locking this thread since I didn't really see much of a point to having it open anymore... But I suppose that would be defeating the purpose of even putting it up. Folks can put up their opinions just as I can put up mine.

Quote from: Steve.Young on November 05, 2008, 11:11:45 PM
Have you guys seen the map of the counties that voted on Prop 8? The Bay Area up and down the coast was NO....while the rest of California was YES.

Truth. All bay area counties shot it down except for one (Soloano county)

Quote from: Chewie on November 06, 2008, 02:22:37 AM
I've a new level of respect for Jun and Pyron. Not to mention Chun. Well said, all of you.

Mizuki, also glad you caught the troll doing exactly that after getting hammered on for 4 pages.

Utterly ridiculous.

Maybe that petition will get the numbers it needs and this will all become moot.

Here's to hoping.

Troll? Where?

So it seems the op has no intention of answering open questions. Thread locked.

Thread unlocked. Continue as you please, the OP won't be here to answer any questions you ask, but I encourage to still talk on the topic, as it seems to be still ongoing.

Okay, I wanted to point some things out that I learned when I was in government courses in school, and seem to have been forgotten.


I learned that the 2nd and 11th amendments are very important. For some reason I was told to never forget these two. If one is violated so is the other.
(the 11th is your unenumerated rights, btw)

I feel that prop 8 has violated these 2 amendments and the Government has violated these 2 very important amendments. That being said, I feel that my personal rights are at risk of being taken away. Regardless of the mess having to do homosexual marriage.

Seperation of Church and State.  Another very important matter at hand.
Religious people are usually the ones who push censorship, and influence government decisions. The government should not be making biased decisions based personal religious views. (yet they do, and anyone who disagrees they cry persecution and yell that their rights are violated. (2nd amendment and 11th, btw)

Did you know that marriage isnt religous at all? It's more ancient then the bible.
People where getting married all over the world, and in some places there is a Third Race. In short, transgenders. In countries where being born a male or female is optional. The show Taboo really got into that a while back, and so did the History Channel.

Most of the crap people shove down your throat is from Catholic Persecution of other religions. (The whole reason why people fled Eroupe to come to America)
I am not saying that Catholicism is bad, I am just pointing out things that are over looked until you really delve into the whole picture.

Anyways, this was what I was thinking and mulling over today...and I hope I am not beating a dead horse. It was hard to keep up with all that other stuff.
Also, does anyone else think what I am thinking?

Quote from: L3sli3_Lov3s_Chu on November 05, 2008, 05:33:03 PM
Sar'kazm, meybi?

(User was locked out for this post)

This earns you a month vacation from Serious Business.  You may continue to view and read, but may not post or reply here.

Rest of everyone, please carry on.  I'll lay low.

Quote from: XpHoBiaX on November 06, 2008, 11:08:56 PM
I learned that the 2nd and 11th amendments are very important. For some reason I was told to never forget these two. If one is violated so is the other.
(the 11th is your unenumerated rights, btw)

Are you sure on those numbers?

2nd is Right to Bear Arms.
11th is "States can't be directly sued in federal courts."
9th is unenumerated rights, but that's not really a strong one.
14th is "equal protection", which is probably what will get bandied about.

To be quite honest, most of these have been limited (arguably gutted) over the years, 10, 9, and maybe 2.  [debates on 2 should be in a different topic].  But 1 and 14 are still pretty strong, so we'll see.

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! >:(

This is all I have to say to that: (https://forums.fanime.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffc60.deviantart.com%2Ffs25%2Ff%2F2008%2F165%2F6%2F5%2FA_Fool_by_marshmellowbrains.gif&hash=38af30e000932e7d8a734b5aaeb9b4621209762f)

I'd like to hear someone's opinion who voted "YES" for Prop 8 that was somewhat knowledgeable of the topic and ACTUALLY READ THE BALLOT MEASURE.

Whether it be personal reasons, religious reasons, whatever. I'd like to understand the reasons behind it. Sometimes in the mist of all the drama, we make assumptions on why people do certain things. I don't like assumptions, it makes you look like an ass.

Quote from: Steve.Young on November 07, 2008, 12:31:15 AM
I'd like to hear someone's opinion who voted "YES" for Prop 8 that was somewhat knowledgeable of the topic and ACTUALLY READ THE BALLOT MEASURE.

A discussion from my friend playing devil's advocate told me one of the key points behind the proponent was simply this; in the Christian faith you are taught from the beginning that the existance of homosexuality, and just the existance, is offensive/affronting to your morals. So YES supporters feel that homosexuality was something that never existed in the first place, made as a choice, and the very thought/exposure to them infringes their rights as Christians.

Personally, I think this kind of logic is preposterous as it still forces "my religion says you're horrible", but the expanded strings of thought deviate into faith of a possible higher being and the proponent of faith and why people feel how they feel.

More than enough politics for me for the next two years.

~Chun

Here's one of the protest videos on Prop 8

Link (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XrVgkGej4Ck)

I really find it sad that it passed.

Awhile back my Godfather's (who is Gay) partner died of Stomach Cancer (It was a fast acting Cancer killed him in 2 weeks) and we was born into money and my Godfather couldn't get the money from his Will because of these laws not seeing him as a couple (Not that he was greedy and times where tough).

Quote from: Steve.Young on November 07, 2008, 12:31:15 AM
Whether it be personal reasons, religious reasons, whatever.

If they voted yes for religious reasons, then they are forcing they're religion down other peoples throats.  That's why Barack Obama was against it (HE WAS!)  He may not believe in gay marriage, but he was against a CONSTITUTIONAL ban on gay marriage, because it would be forcing his beliefs down other peoples throats.

I'm going to do a dodge, before this turns into another "religion = bad" thread.

So, I'll ask a question:

A straight man and a straight woman decide to get married solely for benefits.  They wouldn't have sex with each other.  They wouldn't be chaste; in fact, they'd probably sleep with other people on the side.  They are good friends with each other.  Just not "in love".  But they just want all the normal benefits of marriage.
Should this be legal or not?  Why or why not?  Does the answer change if it's two straight men or two gay men?

NB1: I do not consider true gay marriage directly analogous to this example.  This example as presented solely as a thought example.
NB2: I won't disclose how I voted in this election.

Quote from: Steve.Young on November 07, 2008, 12:31:15 AM
I'd like to hear someone's opinion who voted "YES" for Prop 8 that was somewhat knowledgeable of the topic and ACTUALLY READ THE BALLOT MEASURE.

Whether it be personal reasons, religious reasons, whatever. I'd like to understand the reasons behind it. Sometimes in the mist of all the drama, we make assumptions on why people do certain things. I don't like assumptions, it makes you look like an ass.

Ok to play Devil's Advocate (remember Steve you love me mang), here is a post from the owner of another board I frequent. (FWIW he's also a retired *I think* High School teacher from So Cal)

Quote
Nope!

The voters of California have chosen to drive certain animal based agribusinesses out of the state or out of business. If given the choice of investing millions to update their operations and increasing their overhead costs or moving out of state to someplace cheaper to operate that also wants their business, can you guess what they will chose? Be prepared to pay more for some food comodities. Starting in 2015 California stores will be selling eggs from out-of-state and veal will disapear from the supermarket shelves. New Mexico and Texas based agriculture will grow even larger as they are already getting the dairy farms that are being pushed out of California. California's loss (which will be hundreds of millions in revenues) is their gain. 

There has been a concerted effort to rid California of all these dirty agriculture businesses that use up all the states precious water supplies. The people behind this move don't seem to understand that if they succeed there will be no food in the stores, unless you like buying all your food from South America. In other word, forget ever eating any fresh produce again.

The voters of California also choose to protect the sanctity of the family. I don't see it as a vote against homosexual partnerships, but instead protecting what is seen as traditional role of the family. The institution of "marriage" was designed to be a man/women relationship with the idea of procreation and raising a family. If we want a similar institution for same sex unions, then lets create one that is more idealy suited for those circumstances. Call this new institution what ever you want, except the term "marriage" is already taken. I believe the voters would pass this idea overwhelmingly!

I seems to me that those that do not want to honor the will of the people don't really want to live in a democracy. The voters have spoken many times only to have their will overturned on some small technicality.

_________________
Dave S******
Pageantry Webmaster
[\quote]

hmm in fact there are some decent arguments on both side on said forum. Rather and copy paste em all here's a link. Do as you will.

http://tinyurl.com/63xv9z

Quote from: sysadmin on November 07, 2008, 02:09:33 AM
I'm going to do a dodge, before this turns into another "religion = bad" thread.

I'm not saying Religion is bad! Hell, I'm a Methodist Christian.  Anyway, I AM saying, that the Bible AND the constitution in general dose NOT say, "take you your personal beliefs and shove it down everyones throats"

Quote from: sysadmin on November 07, 2008, 02:09:33 AM
I'm going to do a dodge, before this turns into another "religion = bad" thread.

So, I'll ask a question:

A straight man and a straight woman decide to get married solely for benefits.  They wouldn't have sex with each other.  They wouldn't be chaste; in fact, they'd probably sleep with other people on the side.  They are good friends with each other.  Just not "in love".  But they just want all the normal benefits of marriage.
Should this be legal or not?  Why or why not?  Does the answer change if it's two straight men or two gay men?

NB1: I do not consider true gay marriage directly analogous to this example.  This example as presented solely as a thought example.
NB2: I won't disclose how I voted in this election.

This was on Family Guy.

Why is it legal for two people that don't love each other to be married, but two gay people who completely love each other are not allowed to be married?

Those two that don't love each other being married, destroy the sanctity of marriage in every way shape and form that gays supposedly destroy it. Simply it goes against the basis of what Christianity states as being what marriage is about.

I do hate religion, but I don't think people that follow a religion are stupid. But as others said, it's when people force their religion on others; that bothers me.

Honestly, I think marriage is a joke, in many different ways. But if people want to get married, whether they be gay, ot straight, or religious or not... that's their choice as people to do so. If they want to do a silly little ceremony that supposedly means they love each other(go go go divorce rate) then that's their business. Just like if people want to waste their time at church listening to things that are either common sense, or religious preachings that don't mean anything... that's their choice to. I'm not going to try and convince people not to go to church, or that god doesn't exist... well unless they go out of their way to harass me to try and prove god does exist. Then it just becomes me doing it to disprove them.

Now I'm straying. The end result of this is simple. I feel horrible. I feel genuinely sad that my gay friends cannot get married. I feel genuinely sad that their rights as human beings to marry someone they love has been stripped from them. I feel genuinely sad...

...That the majority of voters happily stripped this right away from them.

There were 3 base points as to why most of the yes on prop 8 voters voted how they did. The first was religious reasonings. Even though California is blue as any state can be... it doesn't change that religion is still a huge part of this state. Catholicism, Judaism, and Christians are all taught that homosexuality is bad and it should be banned.

The second, was viral media. Plastering how if prop8 doesn't pass, kids will be taught about homosexuality in 2nd grade. This was actually a huge major point, and this was the deciding factor for a lot of people. The photos of 2nd grade kids in a homosexual situation.

I've already explained the origins of this, but I wanted to mention why this was such a big deal. 2nd graders know that mommy and daddy loved each other and got married. Or Mommy and her boyfriend. Or daddy and his girlfriend.

What ran through the mind of many parents was that "They're going to teach my kid that it's okay to kiss other kids of the same sex, and homosexuality is natural". Kids at that age are usually scared of the opposite sex. Girls have cooties and boys are icky. But if boys are with other boys, and if girls are with other girls... and then they learn that they can love each other like mommy and daddy... WHAT WILL COME OF THIS?!?!??!!?!?

And much like the mentality of the general parental populace. LET'S BLAME SOMETHING ELSE FOR WHAT WE SHOULD BE TEACHING OUR KIDS. It's not that much different than blaming rap music for killing kids, video games for causing kids to kill other kids, and TV for causing kids to be stupid.

Is that all stupid? Of course it is, but thinking from their perspective, it makes sense. It's still stupid regardless though.

But as I said before. This whole thing was baseless. Marriage isn't taught in schools, and this 2nd grade issue was about a teacher that got married. It's sad though when you step-back for a second. Realizing, that something as happy as that teacher's marriage, is a huge reason why prop 8 passed. Photos commemorating one of the happiest moments of that teacher's life is what caused gay marriages to be banned... all because someone took the pictures and completely twisted it around.

The third factor, was simple fear. Sorry, but a good amount of people are still homophobic. Even a lot of my close friends, despite stating that they are okay with homosexuals, they'd never get naked around a homosexual person. They'd never let them hug them. And it's that little fear that is finding a reason to hate them more. So it's easy to lay blame on something else when the simple answer is fear and hatred. 

Quote from: PyronIkari on November 07, 2008, 10:23:04 PM
This was on Family Guy.  

This was on Dr. Katz when it came out.  The question itself, of course, is far older.

Quote from: PyronIkari on November 07, 2008, 10:23:04 PM
Why is it legal for two people that don't love each other to be married, but two gay people who completely love each other are not allowed to be married?

This wasn't the question I asked, but it leads to an interesting point.

How would you define marriage?  Assuming there are no laws or other factors to the contrary, what would you define it as?
Corollary: how would define the terms "husband" and "wife" under the definition?


Yes, I know Prop 8 passed for various reasons.  I felt that the TV commercials on both sides were disingenuous.
I agree that the commercials created fear and that the commercials were misleading. 
That said, most people already made up their minds before the proposition was put on the ballot.

There's a non-trivial portion of the population that chose to define marriage as between "a man and a woman," excluding all other forms.
So, again, I'll ask:  How do you guys define it?   Is marriage important at all?  Should it be?

Quote from: K&K4ever on November 07, 2008, 10:00:23 PM
I'm not saying Religion is bad! Hell, I'm a Methodist Christian.  Anyway, I AM saying, that the Bible AND the constitution in general dose NOT say, "take you your personal beliefs and shove it down everyones throats"

This is fine, and I respect that too.   I respect those who openly dislike religion.

I only hope that there is the same respect for those who are openly religious.

And no, I have no intention of trying to debate religion on the internet.  So I'm just recasting some of the prop 8 debate as a marriage one.

I find marriage pointless. Unless someone can seriously honestly think that they will be together for as long as they live and are willing to keep the marriage going, I'd stand for it. I haven't met anyone like that, aside for those people who are so filled with dopamine that they think they can or that they might have that chance.

Marriage to me (in this system) is just the legal grouping of a man and woman who decide to call each other "husband" and "wife" for any number of reasons so they can take their relationship to the next level.

I've seen so many marriages fail and so many that screw up the kids that I find it totally not worth marriage. Calling each other "husband" and "wife" is fine to me, though the only thing I think marriage does for the common couple is to guilt or obligate each other to stick in the relationship because of the right to the titles, legal bindings and as such, the repercussions esp. divorce and all that unfun jazz.

I can't say if marriage is important because it does serve many purposes in the social world, but... in all honesty, I think it shouldn't be taken so seriously.
[/personal tangent]

Um, just to ask something though, I'd been told when I was uber small that if someone lived with a roommate of the opposite sex lives with that person for a number of years, they're granted the same tax rights as a married couple or something...?

Quote from: Chiri Kcrinh on November 09, 2008, 01:34:16 AM


Um, just to ask something though, I'd been told when I was uber small that if someone lived with a roommate of the opposite sex lives with that person for a number of years, they're granted the same tax rights as a married couple or something...?

I believe it's called a "Common Law Marriage".

Quote from: sysadmin on November 07, 2008, 02:09:33 AM
I'm going to do a dodge, before this turns into another "religion = bad" thread.

So, I'll ask a question:

A straight man and a straight woman decide to get married solely for benefits.  They wouldn't have sex with each other.  They wouldn't be chaste; in fact, they'd probably sleep with other people on the side.  They are good friends with each other.  Just not "in love".  But they just want all the normal benefits of marriage.
Should this be legal or not?  Why or why not?  Does the answer change if it's two straight men or two gay men?

Yes, it should be legal. Love was not a big factor in pre-modern marriage to begin with. Historically, the one common thread uniting the different concepts of marriage over time has been the securing of property rights. It's still like that, in many ways.

Pretty sure under common law there has to be proof that the two were "together", not just roommates.

In California I think it's 5 or 7 years.

Quote from: Chewie on November 09, 2008, 02:13:45 PM
Pretty sure under common law there has to be proof that the two were "together", not just roommates.

In California I think it's 5 or 7 years.

In California, there is no common law marriage. ^^

Maybe not, but you can still sue for palimony. (http://law.jrank.org/pages/3295/Marvin-V-Marvin-Palimony-Suit-1979.html)

Quote from: G.I.R on November 09, 2008, 11:13:46 PM
Maybe not, but you can still sue for palimony. (http://law.jrank.org/pages/3295/Marvin-V-Marvin-Palimony-Suit-1979.html)

This has nothing to do with what we're even talking about, so why are you bringing it up?

Quote from: PyronIkari on November 09, 2008, 09:56:41 PM

Quote from: Chewie on November 09, 2008, 02:13:45 PM
Pretty sure under common law there has to be proof that the two were "together", not just roommates.

In California I think it's 5 or 7 years.

In California, there is no common law marriage. ^^

Well there ya go.

Back on topic. >.>;;

Quote from: PyronIkari on November 10, 2008, 12:47:10 AM

Quote from: G.I.R on November 09, 2008, 11:13:46 PM
Maybe not, but you can still sue for palimony. (http://law.jrank.org/pages/3295/Marvin-V-Marvin-Palimony-Suit-1979.html)

This has nothing to do with what we're even talking about, so why are you bringing it up?

Well if you argue that marriage is really about establishing property rights and things of that nature, then it is somewhat related.

Quote from: Steve.Young on November 10, 2008, 09:44:56 AM

Quote from: PyronIkari on November 10, 2008, 12:47:10 AM

Quote from: G.I.R on November 09, 2008, 11:13:46 PM
Maybe not, but you can still sue for palimony. (http://law.jrank.org/pages/3295/Marvin-V-Marvin-Palimony-Suit-1979.html)

This has nothing to do with what we're even talking about, so why are you bringing it up?

Well if you argue that marriage is really about establishing property rights and things of that nature, then it is somewhat related.

No it's not, because this is dealing with divorce and owed dues. The entire conversation was about the benefits of marriage.

I'd love to reply more substantially, but it's time for work.

Very quickly, I had a number of reasons to vote against 8; one of the biggest is that it amended the state's constitution - recklessly. There are few things worth amending the core documents of the government, and marriage is, ideally, not one of them.

Unfortunately, it's all too easy to amend the state constitution, thus we get results like this.  So, not only do we have to see about fixing the Prop 8 issue, but we also need to fix the whole amendment process so that this doesn't happen again.

Quote from: Stormfalcon on November 11, 2008, 08:35:56 AM
Unfortunately, it's all too easy to amend the state constitution, thus we get results like this.  So, not only do we have to see about fixing the Prop 8 issue, but we also need to fix the whole amendment process so that this doesn't happen again.

Here Here!!

A very good video on this topic.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cVUecPhQPqY

I did a little analysis of Prop 8 last week and I came up with this conclusion based upon statistics gathered from CNN.com.

To sum up what I've found, it seems that gender was close enough to not become a factor in this election. Though a good majority of people between the ages of 18-29 voted NO, the majority of everyone else over 30 voted YES. By race, the majority of White and Asian people were more likely to vote NO, while the majority of African-American and Latino people were more likely to vote YES. Lastly, people who have college degrees or higher were more likely to vote NO.

The way I see it, it's only a matter of time.  Though this election was a setback, it will only be a matter of time before the young will grow old enough to make their own decisions.  Until then, we must continue to fight for equality.

Quote from: Ninj4 on November 11, 2008, 05:05:06 PM


The way I see it, it's only a matter of time.  Though this election was a setback, it will only be a matter of time before the young will grow old enough to make their own decisions.  Until then, we must continue to fight for equality.

Truth.

Case in point

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,450648,00.html

just to add in here from what my american politics class was talking about the other day:
If I'm not mistaken, amendments to the constitution can't be passed by voters - amendments to the constitution have to originate in the legislature. So, technically speaking, I believe this would make Proposition 8 invalid since it originated outside the legislature.
This will probably get brought up in the new court hearings as an argument to overturn Prop8, but I figured people here would be interested in the fact.

Here is something my friend said to me, and everyone in the room busted up laughing so hard.


We were discussing prop 8, gay marriage, and marriage in general. He made a few points about how some of his students (who are like 17) are pregnant for the 4th time. Then he said this...

"If people really wanted to stop gay sex, they should let them get married!"

I nearly fell over in my chair. We were all at dinner and some of us shot our drinks through our noses. Great stuff.

Quote from: Yukari Kaiba on November 13, 2008, 09:43:32 PM
just to add in here from what my american politics class was talking about the other day:
If I'm not mistaken, amendments to the constitution can't be passed by voters - amendments to the constitution have to originate in the legislature. So, technically speaking, I believe this would make Proposition 8 invalid since it originated outside the legislature.
This will probably get brought up in the new court hearings as an argument to overturn Prop8, but I figured people here would be interested in the fact.

You might want to double-check that.  Article 18, Section 3 (http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/.const/.article_18) of the state constitution states "The electors may amend the Constitution by initiative.".  Section 4 goes on to state "A proposed amendment or revision shall be submitted to the electors and if approved by a majority of votes thereon takes effect the day after the election unless the measure provides otherwise.  If provisions of 2 or more measures approved at the same election conflict, those of the measure receiving the highest affirmative vote shall prevail.", majority being 50% + 1 of course.

As for the initiative process itself, Article 2, section 8 covers that (http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/.const/.article_2).

Quote
   (a) The initiative is the power of the electors to propose
statutes and amendments to the Constitution and to adopt or reject
them.
   (b) An initiative measure may be proposed by presenting to the
Secretary of State a petition that sets forth the text of the
proposed statute or amendment to the Constitution and is certified to
have been signed by electors equal in number to 5 percent in the
case of a statute, and 8 percent in the case of an amendment to the
Constitution, of the votes for all candidates for Governor at the
last gubernatorial election.
   (c) The Secretary of State shall then submit the measure at the
next general election held at least 131 days after it qualifies or at
any special statewide election held prior to that general election.
The Governor may call a special statewide election for the measure.

So yeah, amendments can be proposed by the electorate through the initiative process and approved with a simple majority.  Something that should be fixed as far as the simple majority part goes, IMO, but that's how it is.

Quote from: sysadmin on November 08, 2008, 12:56:30 PM
I felt that the TV commercials on both sides were disingenuous.
I agree that the commercials created fear and that the commercials were misleading.

Completely agreed.  The Yes-on-8 campaign was a brilliant piece of psychology, preying on people who just are too unsure of their own intelligence to actually read the proposition they're voting on.  They fabricated just the right fears.  They used a good mix of all the races in some of their ads.  They put warm, happy music at the right moments.  The No-on-8 ad campaign was an utter failure.  The commercials were all guilty-sounding denials of the Yes-on-8 campaign's fabrications.  They never once suggested to anybody to, you know, read the proposition so that people will know that Yes-on-8 is making stuff up.  They never bothered to tell people that the debates were about a mere fourteen words, and all that children stuff was just pulled from thin air.  No-on-8 mostly used white people in their ads, so they probably lost some of the minorities they were counting on.  They used scary images and music in the background when they described the "good" side.  The No-on-8 campaign should've hired someone better to make the TV ads.

QuoteThat said, most people already made up their minds before the proposition was put on the ballot.

True.  Many of the older ones decided 8 years ago when Prop 22 passed.  If we extend the data points, it seems like we get 1% turnover per year, so gay marriage should be accepted in another four years.  It's only a matter of time.

QuoteThere's a non-trivial portion of the population that chose to define marriage as between "a man and a woman," excluding all other forms.
So, again, I'll ask:  How do you guys define it?   Is marriage important at all?  Should it be?

It's a very good question, and I'd like to add, "What about your definition necessitates the government being involved?"

For all the people who say that people in love should have the right to get married, I have to ask you, "Why on earth are we legislating love!?"  Why should the government care whether two consenting adults love each other, have sex with each other, choose to do it with people of the same sex or the opposite sex, or even do it by themselves, with inanimate objects, or with multiple people at once?  It's nobody else's business, and especially not the government's.

I was against Prop 8, but now that it's passed, maybe we should take a good look at heterosexual marriage too.  Heterosexual marriage is a huge problem.  For the people who say that Prop 8 protects "traditional marriage, I have to reply that heterosexual divorces, remarriage, and unmarried parents have already destroyed the sanctity of "traditional marriage" a very long time ago.  In a legal sense, marriage is a joke.  It doesn't give any useful protections to the parties involved in cases of domestic violence, adultery, etc.  Divorces are messy, and lawyers are selling pre-nups and post-nups to make up for the failings of marriage as a government-recognized institution.

Especially now that marriage is defined in bigoted terms, why should government recognize marriage of any form at all?  Why should government be involved in love?  Why should it be involved in religion?  If people want to get married, that's fine.  Leave it up to the religious institutions, the entertainment industry, and the charities.  After all, they're the institutions that are supposed to deal with emotional things like love.  The government has no business legislating love.

Instead, the government should be concerned with legal contracts.  The government shouldn't recognize marriage, but it should recognize and enforce contracts like...

(1) declarations of financial co-dependence / co-mingling / shared resources,
(2) medical and financial power of attorney / proxy declarations,
(3) shared guardianship of minors,
(4) joint ownership of accounts, and
(5) estate and inheritance considerations / designation of beneficiaries.

These should be allowed between any legally competent parties (of sound mind) regardless of love or religion.  For example, I think single caretakers should be able to legally "marry" their siblings.  (I'm picking an incest situation just for the novelty of it, but it could be a friend, roommate, widowed parent, gay partner, boyfriend, etc.)  Life would probably be very difficult for a single mother trying to raise a child and make money at the same time.  It would work better if she could declare her sister as a "spouse" in terms of the five items above.  That way, in case one sister ends up incapacitated in the hospital, the remaining sister would automatically be able to visit, sign medical consent forms if necessary, inherit financial accounts in case of death, and be acknowledged as the child's guardian, etc.  Except for declaring financial co-dependence (I threw that in there to deal with the tax deduction stuff), I believe we already have ways of doing most of these things already.  It just isn't in a convenient package the way marriage is.  So, why not make it one and leave out all the messy undefined stuff that marriage involves?

This is basically what all the Yes-on-8 people are expecting gay people to do, so I think it's only fair that we make the heterosexual people do it too.  All Prop 8 did was make it very clear to me that "traditional marriage" should ideally have no place in the government whatsoever.

At this point it's a matter of time before it gets overturned.  Prop. 8 is discrimination at its most blatant.  It violates so many Constitutional protections, it can't help but get overturned.  Either the CA state supreme does it or the Fed court steps in.  All it will take is enough lawsuits.

I agree, though. The No on 8 campaign was dismally run.  The Yes on 8 relied on fear, bigotry and ignorance to get their point across (gay people are scary).  No on 8 should ahve appealed to peoples' sense of cultural superiority, such as:
                             Vote NO on Prop.8
            Because this is California and we're better than that.

Personally, I voted no.  I am for love in whatever form and guise it chooses, so long as it's between two humans.  Besides, Heterosexuals ruined marriage a long time ago.  My father's been married three times (2x's divorced, 1x widowed) and is looking at #4!  My parents were married.  I didn't see it do them a whole hell of a lot of good.  Wanna get married, get married.  It doesn't hurt me any.  Just don't make me watch you get divorced!

Quote from: Haruka on November 20, 2008, 02:47:57 PM
At this point it's a matter of time before it gets overturned.

Agreed.  Still, I think it's a great opportunity to get people to think about what marriage is, why it's broken, why it's messy, and why should government care about marriage at all.  Whether marriage-the-emotional-bond works for people or not, marriage-the-legal-parts is completely broken as a legal/financial entity.  Just like we separated church and state, I think it's a good idea to separate "love-marriage" and "state-contract-marriage".  I think we should also drop usage of the word "marriage" to refer to "state-contract-marriage" (and call it something like "DP Corp" -- see below).

QuoteI am for love in whatever form and guise it chooses

I completely agree with that.  And, I think people should be able to get church-married or Hawaii-married or Vegas-married, or whatever they want.  I don't even care that it's between two humans, and making sure it stays between "two humans" is actually one of the pro-8 arguments -- see next paragraph.  However, I just don't see why the government should care at all if anybody does any form of "love-marriage" (as opposed to "shared-children-contract" or "shared-power-of-attorney-contract" or "division-of-resources-contract").  The government should only care about protecting minors and about enforcing contracts.  When "spouses" make equivalent income and have no children, division-of-resources-marriage and shared-children-marriage is irrelevant.  The government shouldn't care.  I don't understand why people (and I'm talking about some No-on-8 types) are so hot to have the government legislate love.  I think it would clean up divorces a lot if the government only enforced contract situations and taxable entities.

Quoteso long as it's between two humans

Well, that's a pro-8 argument.  You see, when people allowed interracial marriages, they never thought that they'd pave the way for gays to get married.  This goes back to one of the aspects of "traditional marriage" is that it's a container for biologically breeding and raising children.  Homosexuals can't biologically reproduce.  That's why it breaks "traditional marriage".  By allowing homosexuals to marry, it does fundamentally break many people's perceived definition of marriage (which never existed as anything that's legally clean and enforceable).  It fundamentally breaks one of the main reasons why governments have previously had to recognize marriage (to assign responsibility for minors).  (Children born out of wedlock already broke marriage a long time ago.)  If the definition of marriage is going to merely be "love", well, humans have great capacity for love.  Why can't three people get married if they love each other?  What if we find that some people are genetically coded to "group-bond" rather than "pair-bond"?  If marriage is between only two humans, then it discriminates against people who are genetically disposed to group-bond.  Also, if a researcher manages to learn how to speak a dolphins' language and realize that dolphins (or elephants or humanoid alien or whatever) have as much intelligence and emotion (and legal competence) as humans, why can't the researcher marry a consenting dolphin if the two love each other very much?  The researcher and the dolphin can never have biological children without Sci-Fi levels of DNA splicing techniques, but homosexuals can never have biological children without more advanced technology either.  What if we do develop AI to a degree capable of love?  Why shouldn't people be allowed to marry robots?  And how do you define "human" anyways?  What if evolution takes the next step and some people just born mutatants?  Maybe some people will eventually just be born as "homo ex post sapiens"?  Are they going to be the next minority?  As long any form of "love-marriage" is part of the government, we're just going to have this problem over and over again.  The government has no business legislating love, and there will be problems as long as it tries.

So, I think we should get "marriage" and marriage-related words out of the government and establish something else, like the "DP Corp" (for domestic partnership corporation) for people who want to declare themselves to be financially codependent.  As with any other corporation, any number of people can join, and there are different tax implications for such corporations.  Any money can be paid directly to the DP Corp and get taxed at DP Corp rates, and any money that is supposed to be kept by the individual does not get paid into the DP Corp and gets taxed at individual rates.  This can clean up divorces and limit liability in case of debt problems and such.  People keep their own individual accounts, and the DP Corp assets are split evenly among members when the DP Corp dissolves.  While any member can run up huge debts against the corporation and against his personal account, the debt collectors can't touch the personal accounts of the other members.

QuoteBesides, Heterosexuals ruined marriage a long time ago.

Agreed, and so many other things conspire to break marriage too.  In addition to single parents breaking the shared-children definition of marriage, he financial co-dependence aspect was ruined when economics required many families to have dual incomes.  Actually, going further back, it was broken when people had slaves taking care of their children and when the bread-earning partner stopped properly valuing the home-keeping partner.  Let's say a college graduate decides to keep a home and raise a child instead of getting a job.  Even if they wait until the child goes to college before divorcing, that home-keeping partner does not build up a resume and does not have a salary history, so they've sacrificed a lot of their potential and future earnings for the family, while the bread-earning partner has 18 years of industry experience and probably a lot of industry contacts.  This makes divorces very messy.  If the partners establish ahead of time what that opportunity cost is worth and what the parties are responsible for, then the divorces wouldn't be so bad.

But, well, I think that's why people ran to Prop 22, and now to Prop 8.  They know marriage is very drastically broken and bankrupt on many levels.  But, people got used to running to the government for bailouts to patch things up when things are broken.  Unfortunately, government bailouts don't really fix much.  They relieve symptoms briefly, but unless the underlying reasons get fixed, the issues are going to keep coming up again and again.  The underlying problem is that, right now, there is no separation of the religious/emotional aspects of marriage from the legal/contractual/financial aspects.

QuoteIt doesn't hurt me any.

Are you sure?  Divorces that get messy and go to court take up resources that come out of our tax dollars, and apparently, California law requires a minimum of six months to get divorced.  Also, any tax advantages and disadvantages of marriages affect the amount of money there is for public services.  Maybe some people who voted yes on 8 value families focused on biological children, and they didn't want to pay tax deductions for people who aren't producing biological children.  Of course, I believe that homosexual couples are more likely to end up with a marriage tax penalty than a marriage tax deduction.  Still, I think people should re-evaluate why people are so adamant about the government regulating love like that.

I think we should codify what needs to be incorporated into the legal system and then remove all the emotion-related bits from government.  I think marriage is broken, and I'm a bit aghast that more people want to be part of it now that we have better legal alternatives.  I would like to know if there are any benefits or protections of "traditional marriage" other than the five I listed above plus the purely emotional and religious ones.  The government shouldn't regulate emotions.  We've separated church and state a very long time ago (with questionable degrees of success), and the No-on-8 side seems to still think this separation is a good thing.  They just don't go far enough.

Mostly, I'm utterly appalled that, in this climate of economic uncertainty, people from other states have been contributing to both sides of the Prop 8 campaign.  California is in a very poor financial situation, and we spent $70M on this!?  If they cared so much about what our children might be learning, why aren't they spending money to help our schools instead?  That $70M was just irrational (especially if we believe that most people made up their minds eight years ago during Prop 22).  There are just too many emotions involved in this, and I think it would help everybody concerned if the emotions were separated out.

Quote from: Tony on November 11, 2008, 08:16:26 AM
I'd love to reply more substantially, but it's time for work.

Very quickly, I had a number of reasons to vote against 8; one of the biggest is that it amended the state's constitution - recklessly.

Yet the passing of 8 clashes with our country's constitution. It interferes with peoples rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, and even moreso, it interferes with our right to religious freedom. SO many of the arguments against same-sex marriage are based on peoples' religions. Now, I am not attacking anyone's religion here, but people need to understand that in America, we should NOT use our religion to write the laws. So by using relgious reasoning to pass Prop 8, they are taking away the religious freedoms of anyone whose religion does not disapprove of homosexuality.

This is a matter of equality. Not religion, not even actual 'marriage'....just equality. Equality under the law, a foundation upon which this country was built. The idea that "We hold these truths to be self-evident: That all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness..." Note; it does not specify who that creator is, it is a broad enough term to encompass any belief, so let's not refert back to the religious porton of this argument.

Anyway, as I was saying...this is a civil rights issue. This is a matter of bigotry and human cruelty. I don't think the yes voters really understood exactly what their votes did to thousands of people and their loved ones. I don't think they realized that by checking one thing on a ballot, they were crushing peoples' hearts and souls, taking away their right to be equal, deciding their lives for them. By supporting Proposition 8, they have told a rather large number of people that they are second-class citizens, undeserving of fair and equal treatment. They have told us that we are not worth as much as they are. If people would stop for a minute and take a look at what they've done, how it's affected people, I wonder if they'd change their minds at all?

I unfortunately don't have time to rea through all 7 pages of this thread at the moment so I apologize if this has been restated over and over but I had to say it. I also apologize if this link has already been posted, but I think it's something that needs to be shared. Her words are powerful, eloquent, and moving: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vS2haAKBOEY

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?

Why isn't it enough for happiness for people to be married by their families, their communities, their churches, or maybe some other private, non-government, non-profit organization?  A lot of people say that marriage is about love.  Why do people want the government to regulate love at all?  Why should it make people happier to have the government involved in whether they love someone or not?  In an ideal world, I think the state should stop interfering with everybody's marriage equally and leave love up to the individual people and whatever spiritual and/or community organizations that they want to share their happiness with.

I think taking all marriage out of government entirely is theoretically the best way to give everybody equal pursuit of happiness.  As long as the government is involved in marriage, there will be discrimination.  Even if homosexuals are allowed to marry, what about the polyamorous?  Do we want to say that those who truly love multiple people equally don't have a right to what makes them happy?  What about situations and types of people we can't even conceive of yet?  Do we want to fight this battle every time we discover that the world is more complex than we thought?  I think the root problem that the government should not be involved in regulating love between consenting adults, and as long as the government tries to regulate such love at all, we're going to have problems with lack of equality in the pursuit of happiness.

It would make me happier to not have Uncle Sam, Big Brother, and millions of voters passing their whimsical judgment on whether they think my love for other consenting adults is somehow "legitimate" not.  I think the passage of Proposition 8 points out very drastically what problems happen when people make love subject to the whims of voters and the government at all.

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...

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?

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. 

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.

...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!

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?

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.

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.

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.

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.

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-

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.

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.

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

      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

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.

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.

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.

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? 

...no comment...

Quote from: BumbleB on May 11, 2009, 01:06:06 AM
...no comment...

Why the hell are you posting then? No one gives a crap if you have "no comment." If you did then you wouldn't be posting in here. That's considered spamming, and I don't deal with spammers nicely.

Quote from: Mizuki on May 11, 2009, 01:44:03 AM

Quote from: BumbleB on May 11, 2009, 01:06:06 AM
...no comment...

Why the hell are you posting then? No one gives a crap if you have "no comment." If you did then you wouldn't be posting in here. That's considered spamming, and I don't deal with spammers nicely.

um, lets just say i have confused feelings on this topic...

Quote from: BumbleB on May 11, 2009, 01:46:45 AM

Quote from: Mizuki on May 11, 2009, 01:44:03 AM

Quote from: BumbleB on May 11, 2009, 01:06:06 AM
...no comment...

Why the hell are you posting then? No one gives a crap if you have "no comment." If you did then you wouldn't be posting in here. That's considered spamming, and I don't deal with spammers nicely.

um, lets just say i have confused feelings on this topic...

Well if you have mixed feelings spit it out, like I said no one gives a rat's behind if there is no discussion, and "No comment" is not making the conversation go any further.

Screw it, I'm locking this thread. It's going no where, same thing happens, someone posts spam, or uninformed post, Pyron Ikari repeats same thing he said on last page, and it's just this cycle that's annoying, and quite frankly I don't have the time to deal with it now so it's locked for now.