Ok what is prop 8

[JETTAone420]

so on the way back from the meet me and justin were talkin about it and it got in a nice lil debate...

so is it about teaching kids about gay marriage or not? cuz i just googled it and it said it is, but he said its about somthin waaay different

[mike]

It basically is to change the state constitution to define marriage as between one man, and one woman. IMO, we have bigger issues to worry about that should be on the ballot.

[satakal]

prop 8 is a step in the direction of slavery.

It makes discrimination against gays part of the state constitution. Is multi-racial couples that far off? If not, why not?

It benefits the people behind such props for the voters to be ignorant and just polarized into "good" or "bad". The less they know, the easier they are to herd.

I think the text is something deceptively simple like: marriage is only recognized by the state as being between a man and a woman.

[DTolo]

From what I understand, Prop 8 is to remove the recently approved ability for gay couples to be married in the state of California.

Since it is legally recognized in the State, then state funded schools would be expected/required to teach with an unbiased view of marriage. They could not unduly favor male-female marriages and they would be able to tell students that it is OK and "nothing wrong" with marrying the same sex.

It would take the recent ordinances passed in SD county about not using gender specific terms for parents and move it to a whole new level.

I don't ever remember being in school and being taught man-woman marriage was what was right, it just wasn't directly brought up, more just expected. So, I don't see anyone writing into the syllabus that on "this week we are going to talk about gay marriage being ok"...

Hell, my wife's prom king and queen were lesbians. It didn't take any laws one way or the other for them to get voted in, and that was in Brooklyn, NY!

[Kelly Girl]

no, the board of school supervisors and the superintendent of a school would have to approve the subject matter for the year's curriculum before it was allowed to be taught in school:

here should be a non-biased explanation:
http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php?title=California_Proposition_8_(2008)


The case in Massachusetts that the media has been touting is incorrect.
A student in a class, asked what it meant to have gay parents who were married, the teacher explained that it was 2 mommies or 2 daddies. A student went home and told their parents, and BOOM!! Homosexuality & Gary Marriage is being taught in schools.

Don't y'all remember having to take a permission slip home to your parents so that you could learn about sexual education? There are many subjects NOT taught in schools because the school board or PTSA will not approve them.

I'm sure that it would take a long time before a chapter on Homosexuality and Gay Marriage made it into Grade School textbooks.

[DTolo]

Personally, I think the law is being pushed a little beyond it's bounds.

The marriage issue to me seems more like a religious issue than legal... And just like religion, it is not the schools responsibility to push one religion as right or wrong over the other.

It happens in religion all the time, were people are only allowed to marry under certain conditions... sounds like if that condition is whether your partner is opposite sex or not fits right in.



***Edit*** Kelly, you said pretty much what I was trying to as far as will it be in schools or not. You just made it sound better and made me look all scatter brained... well I am... one midterm down, 2 more to go.... TODAY! ugh!!!

[satakal]

any conversation about "teaching our kids that gay is ok" is an attempt to inject fear into those that are influenced by such things. The prop has nothing to with kids. Its marketing does. Those that are motivated by hate have to figure out a way to get people to vote for their ammendment to the state constituion.

[PhätTony]

Seems like prop 8 will pass with all the backers. This one has a shitload of money support behind it. WoW!!! Just looking it over online at Kelly's link and a few more.

[mike]

This proposition alone would be my single reason for voting this year. It was put out by bible thumping religious whackos and people for some reason (they are so far in the closet they are finding Christmas presents) hate gay people. As Satakal said, it has NOTHING to do with teaching or children, it has to do with a bunch of people scared of change. I'm sure this was the same 50 years ago with interracial marriage.

[lordoftheblings]

as i drove past the yes on prop 8 peopel told i gave the finger and called them assholes. so you know my stance.

[mike]

I don't think it will pass, even with the dollars behind it, there are alot of open minded people in this state, coupled with Long Beach, S.F. and S.D. which have some of the largest populations of gay people in the country.

With illegals running amuck, gangs, state budget deficit, failing infrastructure, we have bigger problems then trying to breed hate.

[TOYr32]

Sooo, in summary . . .

If you vote yes on Prop 8, you are voting against Gay Marriages.

All the other stuff you are hearing is the supporters of Prop 8 trying to paint a nasty picture of what America would be if Gays would be allowed marry.

When in doubt vote opposite of mormons!! :D j/k

But seriously, for me, it's a big NO on Prop8!!

[Ivan]

So this is just a ban on homosexual marriage?
Also, it stops the teaching of homosexuality in schools, right?

[Kelly Girl]

no on 8, because a yes vote would set us back to the days of segregation.

the gov't has bigger fish to fry than to keep tabs on who's marrying who...

[satakal]

It writes discrimination into the state constitution. I'm ok with people being wrong. Vote for Obama or Mcain. IMO, you're wrong if you do but thats cool. America is fucking awesome because it's ok be wrong. But hate... There is no place for discrimination and hate in these united states of America.

Within the past 100 year, rights have been given (resotred?) to women and former slaves. In 2008 who wants to remove rights from any group? If its ok to discriminate against gays can we just go back to only white male land owners being the only voters in the state too? Why descriminate against dudes who dig hummers from other dudes? Insufficient reason to change the state constitution.

8 yes = H8 = hate = discrimination
8 no = no H8

[mike]

Vote NO or go back to the 1950's south.

[Kelly Girl]

seriously they'll attack the gays first, then the interracial couples..
the religious right wing is off it's meds

[satakal]

So this is just a ban on homosexual marriage?
Also, it stops the teaching of homosexuality in schools, right?

1. yes.

2. whatever happens in schools was covered in a kelly post. This prop has zero impact on schools. Education and children are in this conversation because fear is a proven tool to motivate easily influenced voters.

[SLOW8vMK4]

prop 8 is barbaric, who in their right mind thinks they are doing this world we live in justice by trying to say who can marry who?! People are crazy, and supporters of prop 8 are only holding or evolution as humans back.

[PhätTony]

You guys are taking this thread way out of context with the segregation. Interracial couples? Okay, can we just keep it along the lines of gay marriage and not 'attempt' to use tooooootally different past circumstances? Myself being a liberal, I'm still looking into all the props and candidates still, but atleast this time voting, I know I will be proud and content in what I supported. So I'm neither against nor with any side till Nov 4th.

[Kelly Girl]

you don't think so...

these platforms are all about reviving historical issues...

segregation (be it based on sexuality or race)

hell, ROE v WADE is even on the table again

[mike]

We aren't taking it of context at all, we are comparing what a certain group of people are doing now, to what has been done in the past and in american history. That is completely relevant to this discussion.

[PhätTony]

question: what about the instance of the lesbian teacher bringing her kids to the SF courthouse to watch her get married and even throw flowers? Marriage is a beautiful thing, but there were a couple parents who sued the school district because the trip was deemed to be educational.

One parents side of it, who is christian, raises their kids a certain way would have a right to be livid. It's their right to raise their children the way they want. So bringing (requiring) a child to attend such said event is unconstitutional in it's own right. I've been searching all these sites and see lies and souped up complaints from both sides. So we don't know what to believe anymore. Alas the search of truth continues.

How say you?

[dylan5990]

No on 8! I'm glad to see we have good people on this forum

[Kelly Girl]

that teacher would have to garner a permit for a FIELD TRIP from the district office, and send permission slips home to her students for approval.

You seem to forget that under 18 years of age, parents have more control over what their kids are exposed to in a public/private school system.

This might not occur in a parochial school, but in San Francisco, i'm sure this would be NO big deal. Nor Cal people are a little more realistic about homosexuality and the city of SF embraces its gay culture.

i've seen kids on Castro Street for the Gay Pride parade

[satakal]

prop 8 is barbaric, who in their right mind thinks they are doing this world we live in justice by trying to say who can marry who?! People are crazy, and supporters of prop 8 are only holding or evolution as humans back.

Ultimately who benefits if this passes? Here's how I see it.

1. any organization that can save a buck by ignoring a couple's legal (not religious) marriage. Insurance companies come to mind.

2. any organization that wants to discriminate against others. Think neo-nazis and white supremacy. Once it's ok to limit the legal rights of gays, who is next? Blacks? Mexicans? Christians? Jews? Redheads? Left handers? VW drivers? Minorities of anysort need to watch out in a culture of legal descrimination.

I don't want to make the leap and say that if you vote yes on H8 you're a skinhead insurance stockholder... but... I'm missing the nuance of why this prop would benefit this state in any way.

[PhätTony]

We aren't taking it of context at all, we are comparing what a certain group of people are doing now, to what has been done in the past and in american history. That is completely relevant to this discussion.

I fiercely disagree with you brother. My family suffered from segregation and slavery since the beginning of this countries formation. I don't see a homosexual man in shackles, a bathroom that says straights only. Do you?...hmmm? Have you ever met a Lesbian woman with a master? Not allowed to learn how to read or write?

I don't like anyone cheapening the fact that this is something that our country has tried and somewhat is still putting behind us, and bringing it up for the sake of supporting a vote. I am deeply offended.

[jwill'sMK4]

question: what about the instance of the lesbian teacher bringing her kids to the SF courthouse to watch her get married and even throw flowers? Marriage is a beautiful thing, but there were a couple parents who sued the school district because the trip was deemed to be educational.

One parents side of it, who is christian, raises their kids a certain way would have a right to be livid. It's their right to raise their children the way they want. So bringing (requiring) a child to attend such said event is unconstitutional in it's own right. I've been searching all these sites and see lies and souped up complaints from both sides. So we don't know what to believe anymore. Alas the search of truth continues.

How say you?

last i checked u need a permision (sp?) slip to take students of campus so how come theres no mention of that i bet the people who r supposedly sueing make a habit of signing things without reading them then complaining afterwards


*edit: damn u kelly and ur fast typing skills*

[Kelly Girl]

your family members, or another generation of your family?

if we're going THERE.. then remember the Holocaust...Tony...

[PhätTony]

that teacher would have to garner a permit for a FIELD TRIP from the district office, and send permission slips home to her students for approval.

You seem to forget that under 18 years of age, parents have more control over what their kids are exposed to in a public/private school system.

This might not occur in a parochial school, but in San Francisco, i'm sure this would be NO big deal. Nor Cal people are a little more realistic about homosexuality and the city of SF embraces its gay culture.

i've seen kids on Castro Street for the Gay Pride parade

You think if there was permits being handed out, a parent would not sue? Due to the fact that he knew beforehand what he was sending his child to? Like I said, still searching on this subject. Too much spin to filter through. I'll find the truth.

[GTIcrazy]

When in doubt vote opposite of mormons!! NO on Prop8!!


You are correct sir.

[PhätTony]

I don't want to make the leap and say that if you vote yes on H8 you're a skinhead insurance stockholder...

sure seems like it

[mike]

This isn't about education Tony, we all know that. Its a political smear campaign by the religious right. Bad choices by one individual, in this case a teacher, doesn't mean that an entire group should be punished. I wouldn't mind if my child attended a gay wedding. Parents can teach their kids whatever they want, thats fine, but it is morally wrong to teach them intolerance, hate, shelter them, etc. No parent should ever teach their child to be close minded. They should teach, "this is what we were taught, what we believe in, go into the world and pick your own values." No one should have anything FORCED on to them.

[Kelly Girl]

*applause*

[mike]

Well if I offended you I'm sorry, shackles or none, masters or none, it is still one group being alienated from society for who they are.

[satakal]

I fiercely disagree with you brother. My family suffered from segregation and slavery since the beginning of this countries formation. I don't see a homosexual man in shackles, a bathroom that says straights only. Do you?...hmmm? Have you ever met a Lesbian woman with a master? Not allowed to learn how to read or write?

I don't like anyone cheapening the fact that this is something that our country has tried and somewhat is still putting behind us, and bringing it up for the sake of supporting a vote. I am deeply offended.

You're inablity to see Yes on H8 as a rollback of civil rights limits your credibility and should limit the volume of your voice in this conversation.

regarding your citation of a SF event...

one individual's right(s) do not include the limiting of rights to other groups.

ex. christian moms ability and right to raise a good christian child does not include taking away rights from gays.

[PhätTony]

You are correct sir.

lol...hey! mormons are good people

[Kelly Girl]

wow, I'm totally impressed by this thread today..
no piss-n-fight, just great convo...

bravo everyone!

and well said satakal

[PhätTony]

You're inablity to see Yes on H8 as a rollback of civil rights limits your credibility and should limit the volume of your voice in this conversation.

regarding your citation of a SF event...

one individual's right(s) do not include the limiting of rights to other groups.

ex. christian moms ability and right to raise a good christian child does not include taking away rights from gays.

I state my opinion and you tell me basically to shut up? Bad on you who ever you are. We all know each other, kelly, mike, and I and at the end of the day we can sit down and have a nice cold beer. You sir, have a one sided mentality. Either its your way or the highway. I say good day!

[Kelly Girl]

be a little more open minded there Tony

[PhätTony]

wow, I'm totally impressed by this thread today..
no piss-n-fight, just great convo...

bravo everyone!

and well said satakal

I think you spoke way too soon.

[mike]

I think what he means if you are going to go out on the racial civil rights limb and say that what was done to your ancestors was wrong, how they were discriminated on from being able to go here or there because of the color of their skin and who they are, yet you think that gays being able to marry isn't right, that you are contradicting yourself.

[satakal]

I state my opinion and you tell me basically to shut up? Bad on you who ever you are. We all know each other, kelly, mike, and I and at the end of the day we can sit down and have a nice cold beer. You sir, have a one sided mentality. Either its your way or the highway. I say good day!

when you quoted me the first time, you omitted the part where I fail to see the reason why a yes on H8 vote is good for this state. Please keep this conversation on topic.

The case of a teacher in SF is not the topic of this thread.

[PhätTony]

I think what he means if you are going to go out on the racial civil rights limb and say that what was done to your ancestors was wrong, how they were discriminated on from being able to go here or there because of the color of their skin and who they are, yet you think that gays being able to marry isn't right, that you are contradicting yourself.

What I'm saying leave what happened in the 50's and 60's....back in the 50's and 60's. Don't bring it up to support a new part of our american history. It deserves that much respect, does it not? I was not the primary one who brung it up, if you look back. Like I said before I am a liberal so I can be swayed, since everyone is on the No side...you know a liberal will sway to the opposite for sake of balancing a thread. It's in my blood as a Libra..lol! good show Mike!

[PhätTony]

when you quoted me the first time, you omitted the part where I fail to see the reason why a yes on H8 vote is good for this state. Please keep this conversation on topic.

The case of a teacher in SF is not the topic of this thread.


??????????

How is it not!? lol... It's all over the news and on the proposition 8 sites. Ballotpedia too. You probably need to look at both YES and NO prop 8 sites to get a good understanding on what both sides are fighting for. Don't be one sided Satakal, please.

[mike]

No, It does deserve respect, it deserves the respect to be remembered for what happened as to not allow anymore people, regardless of race, religion, beliefs to be discriminated against in anyway and apply what we have learned in the past to help keep us from making future mistakes such as this.

I'm Mike and I approve this message.

[PhätTony]

No, It does deserve respect, it deserves the respect to be remembered for what happened as to not allow anymore people, regardless of race, religion, beliefs to be discriminated against in anyway and apply what we have learned in the past to help keep us from making future mistakes such as this.

I'm Mike and I approve this message.

LMAO!!...Actually I knew you would say this, alas I am talking of Prop 8 in history right now. That this time in our history. It deserves to be on it's own platform.

VOTE FOR MIKE!!!! And his Jetta

[xoutofstepx]

I basically agree with whatever Mike said/says. ;)

It won't sway kids into believing being gay is the way. You are born gay, you don't acquire it.

Let there be gay marriage!

[Kelly Girl]

I think someone who is in favor of Prop 8 should speak up.. that way we're fair and balanced.. just like Fox News

[satakal]

??????????

How is it not!? lol... It's all over the news and on the proposition 8 sites. Ballotpedia too. You probably need to look at both YES and NO prop 8 sites to get a good understanding on what both sides are fighting for. Don't be one sided Satakal, please.


You're right. To not pay attention to the hype is not letting in that side of the conversation. But, to pay attention to the hype is of little value imo.

I disagree that I need to look at both sides of propoganda to have an understanding of the implication of a one sentence ballot initiative.

[madajb]

You're inablity to see Yes on H8 as a rollback of civil rights limits your credibility and should limit the volume of your voice in this conversation.

"You disagree with me, therefore you should be quiet".
Really?

-ajb

[PhätTony]

then u sir are bias

[mike]

FYI, both my gay friends are voting for McCain............. HA!

[PhätTony]

FYI, both my gay friends are voting for McCain............. HA!

They must make over 250,000 together....HA!

[satakal]

"You disagree with me, therefore you should be quiet".
Really?

-ajb

In a conversation about 2 + 2, the inability for an individual recognize that we're talking about math should limit that persons voice and credibility.

If we can't agree that yes on H8 is about hate, then help me see otherwise. And... it's ok to tell someone to shut up when they're off topic.

[PhätTony]

I think someone who is in favor of Prop 8 should speak up.. that way we're fair and balanced.. just like Fox News


lmao!!! don't do it! it's a trap!

[mike]

No, they are just scared of Obama........ lesser of the two evils and thats a huge statement, one is a guy, one is a girl, so they are not together!

[Kelly Girl]

lmao!!! don't do it! it's a trap!

unlike you, i'm actually intrigued what the justifications are for supporting such a proposition..

you SAY you want to review both sides of the arguement, but I offer up the possibility BECAUSE the discussion has thus far been amicable... and you censor me?

a little unfair, i say

[PhätTony]

In a conversation about 2 + 2, the inability for an individual recognize that we're talking about math should limit that persons voice and credibility.

If we can't agree that yes on H8 is about hate, then help me see otherwise. And... it's ok to tell someone to shut up when they're off topic.

How can anyone make you see otherwise when you are set in your ways. A wise man told me once (and he was a devoute muslim). Don't ever try to reason with a person who already has his arms crossed.

You've had your arms crossed since 22 passed.

[PhätTony]

unlike you, i'm actually intrigued what the justifications are for supporting such a proposition..

you SAY you want to review both sides of the arguement, but I offer up the possibility BECAUSE the discussion has thus far been amicable... and you censor me?

a little unfair, i say

DUDE! Calm down, It's a joke Kelly...JEEESUSSS...Wait, am I being a bible thumper now?:D

[mike]

I also would love to hear what the upsides of this proposition passing would be, I haven't been able to find any, maybe you have Tony?

[PhätTony]

I also would love to hear what the upsides of this proposition passing would be, I haven't been able to find any, maybe you have Tony?

I believe pretty much, everything goes back to the way it was before prop 22 passed. So everything is just the same as 2 years ago and 10 years ago, and 50 years ago.

[v2rocket]

People are crazy, and supporters of prop 8 are only holding or evolution as humans back.

species cant evolve without procreation...and i cant see 2 men or 2 women procreating between themselves. *taken out of context but still

you probably meant for the human species mental/social evolution.

"You disagree with me, therefore you should be quiet".
Really?

-ajb

x2 you cant let someones voice be smaller simply because they think opposite of you, thats childish.

[satakal]

How can anyone make you see otherwise when you are set in your ways. A wise man told me once (and he was a devoute muslim). Don't ever try to reason with a person who already has his arms crossed.

You've had your arms crossed since 22 passed.

As kelly just stated, there have been no agruments as to why anyone in this thread should consider voting yes on H8. Please... we all recognize you are playing the high ground. And, I'll be happy to let you have it if you keep ontopic.

Additionally, I see no reason why you should think me chaning my views on discrimination are on the table to be swayed.

[PhätTony]

It was never a proposition to gain anything. It was to keep things the way they were and make it to where it could not be changed by just three people for the whole state of CA. That's all it was, and most of the voters would be voting against prop 8 if it wasn't for the CA Supreme Court undermining the voters in the first place. A Californians first though of when his rights as a voter are bypassed in any case for any reason is to know why, wtf!, and how can we fight the man. We're Californians we don't just lay down. Look at all of us in here. I love how we can just state our opinions and not be told we have no right to think a certain way. How our voting one way will turn back the clock and cause an armageddon.

*tear...I've got something............in both my eyes*

[madajb]

In a conversation about 2 + 2, the inability for an individual recognize that we're talking about math should limit that persons voice and credibility.

Politics is rarely so precise. People have a myriad of reasons to choose one side or the other, and you cannot ignore their voice simply because they disagree with your premise, at least, not if you actually want to have a discussion.

-ajb

[PhätTony]

As kelly just stated, there have been no agruments as to why anyone in this thread should consider voting yes on H8. Please... we all recognize you are playing the high ground. And, I'll be happy to let you have it if you keep ontopic.
On topic is anything about prop 8...so pls leave the "off topic" alone... that would be me talking about monkeys eating wild grapes in alaska. now thats off topic

And that is your respected "opinion", but dont speak for mor than 1 +0, or 1x1, or .... yeah..that would still be one.

[mike]

This is what I'm struggling with, if you have a family history of being a victim of hate, why are you having such a hard time with this? Its a group of people that are being discriminated against for their beliefs. Black and white. Just like they use to keep white and black kids segregated, thats all this is going to do, set the clock back to a time when such things were possible, we are going backwards.

No, gay people can't give natural birth to a child, but some of them would make alot better parents then the welfare recipients squirting out kids they can't afford.

[Kelly Girl]

DUDE! Calm down, It's a joke Kelly...JEEESUSSS...Wait, am I being a bible thumper now?:D


Stop putting words in people's mouths...

[madajb]

It was to keep things the way they were and make it to where it could not be changed by just three people for the whole state of CA. That's all it was, and most of the voters would be voting against prop 8 if it wasn't for the CA Supreme Court undermining the voters in the first place.

This is not quite an accurate statement.
Granted, I have not read the entire decision, but as near as I can tell, the decision to toss Prop. 22 was mainly based on California Constitutional grounds.
If you read Article 1, Section 7 (http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/.const/.article_1), it seems fairly clear that the California Constitution would prohibit the denial of a civil right to a specific group of people(regardless of how you define that group).
So, if you accept the premise that marriage is a right (which I personally do not), then it follows fairly logically that you cannot deny it to any random selection of two adults.
Prop. 8 would essentially negate the Constitutional question by placing a marriage definition on the same footing as the "equal protection" definition.

So, yes, the People, were overruled, but I don't think it was a case of judicial activism.

-ajb
(The Fourteenth Amendment, causing trouble since 1868)

[PhätTony]

This is what I'm struggling with, if you have a family history of being a victim of hate, why are you having such a hard time with this? Its a group of people that are being discriminated against for their beliefs. Black and white. Just like they use to keep white and black kids segregated, thats all this is going to do, set the clock back to a time when such things were possible, we are going backwards.

No, gay people can't give natural birth to a child, but some of them would make alot better parents then the welfare recipients squirting out kids they can't afford.

That is behind me and all of the peoples who struggled. I'm not using that at all, so I don't expect anyone else to. So Prop 8 is a new battle, yes. A battle for "change". Because the law to let gays marry was never put in stone. I have friends and some family that have an alternative lifestyle (for lack of a better term), yes. They've never had a problem not being married. Personally I agree with Tom Leykis in this sense. Why get married at all. What does it prove anyways? What do you get out of marriage that you could not get out of just being together? You can't love someone more, it does'nt prolong life, it gives you the sense of security that could have anyways. besides of course the legal privledges. Because marriage 'is' a religious ceremony. Although now it's not because of evolution. So that is why the churches across america are against prop 8.

I'm a liberal and I approve of this message...now go smoke weed on capital hill

[satakal]

Politics is rarely so precise. People have a myriad of reasons to choose one side or the other, and you cannot ignore their voice simply because they disagree with your premise, at least, not if you actually want to have a discussion.

-ajb

I disagree. Not all participants do and should carry equal weight in a discussion.

If we're talking about hitting a change-up, you'd be silly to weigh Tony's opinions equally with those of Tony Gwynn. It's not so much that he disagrees on how to hit a change-up. It's more like he can't differentiate a change-up from a slider. If he's not capable of that distinction, why even have the "discussion".

I say, burden on him to tell me why Yes on H8 is good or bad for us as a state. Otherwise, I'll listen to T Gwynn and tune him out. And, I would recommend everyone else do the same.

[v2rocket]

let the gays marry and let me keep/have my guns.

fair enough?

[PhätTony]

I disagree. Not all participants do and should carry equal weight in a discussion.

If we're talking about hitting a change-up, you'd be silly to weigh Tony's opinions equally with those of Tony Gwynn. It's not so much that he disagrees on how to hit a change-up. It's more like he can't differentiate a change-up from a slider. If he's not capable of that distinction, why even have the "discussion".

I say, burden on him to tell me why Yes on H8 is good or bad for us as a state. Otherwise, I'll listen to T Gwynn and tune him out. And, I would recommend everyone else do the same.

I wouldnt be so coy to think you could sway this sites opinion with such a low post count. Some longevity might be in order in that case. Your completely one sided and we've exposed that (not hard). So have your opinion and be with it. I don't need to prove why I would vote against you and vote yes on prop8. Although you seem to think that your can't be wrong.
Furthermore, attacks against me through someone else won't help but have others shake their heads in shame. Just have an opinion and respect others. Can you do that?
...oh before I forget.. I can differenciate a slider from a change-up... due to the fact that a change up has a slow rise with a highly elevated pitch stance and the slider has a 60 degree angle release on two slip fingers. How bout football? you can try that next if you'd like. Back on topic Tony Gwynn.

[mike]

That is behind me and all of the peoples who struggled. I'm not using that at all, so I don't expect anyone else to. So Prop 8 is a new battle, yes. A battle for "change". Because the law to let gays marry was never put in stone. I have friends and some family that have an alternative lifestyle (for lack of a better term), yes. They've never had a problem not being married. Personally I agree with Tom Leykis in this sense. Why get married at all. What does it prove anyways? What do you get out of marriage that you could not get out of just being together? You can't love someone more, it does'nt prolong life, it gives you the sense of security that could have anyways. besides of course the legal privledges. Because marriage 'is' a religious ceremony. Although now it's not because of evolution. So that is why the churches across america are against prop 8.

I'm a liberal and I approve of this message...now go smoke weed on capital hill

Why marry? That up to each individual as their choice. A choice they should be given. Tom Leykis is entertaining to say the least, but hardly a person I would take life advice from. If "god" didn't want homosexuals, why are they here? God also is supposed to have a love for you greater then a mothers love for her child. My mom wouldn't inflict me with a disease or let me starve in a mud puddle. Religion is what people did for entertainment before the world was developed.

[PhätTony]

Why marry? That up to each individual as their choice. A choice they should be given. Tom Leykis is entertaining to say the least, but hardly a person I would take life advice from. If "god" didn't want homosexuals, why are they here? God also is supposed to have a love for you greater then a mothers love for her child. My mom wouldn't inflict me with a disease or let me starve in a mud puddle. Religion is what people did for entertainment before the world was developed.

I can accept your opinion on what religion is... although, just because you can't see the devil. Doesn't mean he don't exist. That's the smartest thing he did is make the world believe that.

[slowjet]

...

[mike]

So this is more about a religious thing for you Tony as the bible defines marriage as between one man and one woman?

[madajb]

If he's not capable of that distinction, why even have the "discussion".

It's still tying to frame the discussion in your terms.
Essentially you are saying, "If you don't agree with my assertion that Prop. 8 is a rollback of civil rights and a fountainhead of hate, then I will not listen to you"
It is certainly your prerogative to do that, but it's not the best way to sway an undecided to your side.

Otherwise, I'll listen to T Gwynn and tune him out. And, I would recommend everyone else do the same.
Democracy in action...

-ajb

[PhätTony]

So this is more about a religious thing for you Tony as the bible defines marriage as between one man and one woman?


Meeeh, not really... I was battling a personal war with that one. I don't thin that it's that way with me. I really don't, but I'd be honest if it did effect me.

[mike]

Smart people don't argue with Alan. He is on his game as far as facts and research, you can't win. LOL, seriously though.

[mike]

Meeeh, not really... I was battling a personal war with that one. I don't thin that it's that way with me. I really don't, but I'd be honest if it did affect me.

Then what do you care what someone does?

[TOYr32]

They must make over 250,000 together....HA!


I do and that's a pretty good reason to vote for Mccain!!! :D j/k

Seriously, on the 3 seperate topics this thread has covered.

As for the interacial, same race, blah blah blah. I think the group was just trying to show examples of what supported of prop 8 are doing. Prop 8 has nothing to do with schools, but a big argument for them is there will to not have their brainwashed religious children exposed to more open education.

Plain and simple it has to do with Gay marriage, yes means no, and no means yes!! Their campaign signs and slogans are meant to confuse you. Supporters that vote Yes will be preventing future Gay Marriages, while oppositions that votes NO will allow Gay Marriages to continue.

======
As for the Teacher that brought her students to witness her Same Sex Marriage. No matter how you spin it, it was wrong. It made it worse because Same Sex anything is such a volatile subject. Had it been a traditional wedding, it would still have been wrong, but I doubt there would have been such a huge fuss. In this day in age you are seeing kids books with same sex references that are subject to disapproval.

The point being, parents have the right to know and approve what is being taught to their children, but, to a point, the school has been put into a position where they can do what they want. It's very convenient for a Parent to sue a school for this and that when it comes to something they disagree with, yet it always comes down to a parent not wanting to accept responsibility for raising their own children, vs. allowing the school system to teach them right and wrong. One thing is for sure, the school system will always be the more equal and less partial to the broader ways of life.

=====
Obama's plan would increase taxes for people making over 200k, while Mccain's would not.

If that were my understanding of the plain black and white, then yes it would make sense to vote for Mccain, why would I want to be taxed more?

But, between the lines there is a greater issue than taxes. Last year from property tax and i think federali paid out of pocket almost $20k. That sux, no matter how much you make, that sux! So why would I want to pay more?

Here's why . . .

Right now, my dollar goes nowhere, and if my dollar goes nowhere, I can't bare to imagine what it's like on a single income in some of the major cities. How can someone live off of 25k in san diego? With Mccains plan, not much would change for the under $150k range, life would still kind of suck. But as I understand it, under Obama's plan, the economy would bounce back a little quicker and people 200k and below will benefit greatly, while $200k and above would hurt a little.

Well, my feeling is that even if both plans work. My money will do more for me under Obama's plan. Under Mccains plan, everyone would be able to rebound, but the wealthy would get to keep their wealth, but in the end, the wealthies dollar would not gain anything.

While under Obama's plan, the medium income will rebound faster and if that happenes, even though the wealthey are getting taxed higher, their dollar is now going to go much further in a better economy.


. . . . . and I'm spent!

[DTolo]

There are certain privliges that come with being legally married. That is the difference between a life partner and a legal spouse.

[madajb]

======
As for the Teacher that brought her students to witness her Same Sex Marriage. No matter how you spin it, it was wrong. It made it worse because Same Sex anything is such a volatile subject. Had it been a traditional wedding, it would still have been wrong, but I doubt there would have been such a huge fuss. In this day in age you are seeing kids books with same sex references that are subject to disapproval.


The thing I don't understand about this, and I admit to not really knowing the story, is how this is appropriate in any form, be it same sex or any other type of marriage.
When I was in school(tm), teachers were asexual, they could have been married, divorced, gay, whatever, and it just never came up. A teacher's private life was their own business.
It seems that a lot of "controversy" could be avoided simply by people keeping their personal lives to themselves.

-ajb

[audiracer2002]

They've never had a problem not being married. Personally I agree with Tom Leykis in this sense. Why get married at all. What does it prove anyways? What do you get out of marriage that you could not get out of just being together? You can't love someone more, it does'nt prolong life, it gives you the sense of security that could have anyways. besides of course the legal privledges. Because marriage 'is' a religious ceremony. Although now it's not because of evolution. So that is why the churches across america are against prop 8.

I'm a liberal and I approve of this message...now go smoke weed on capital hill

OK, so are you really that ignorant that you don't know what else there is to gain by being married? Let's start with a simple example. If I were gay and my partner was critically injured and in the ICU, I wouldn't be allowed to visit since I'm not recognized as family. Lets also then get into joint insurance benefits and any number of other simple rights that you and your wife would take for granted. There is a lot more to gain that just being able to say you are married.

As for marriage, it has nothing to do with being a religious ceremony. Are you saying that since I don't believe in God, that I can't get married? Lets not even get into the history of what marriage was/is as we've had that discussion in another thread.

I believe pretty much, everything goes back to the way it was before prop 22 passed. So everything is just the same as 2 years ago and 10 years ago, and 50 years ago.

You also state that all passing this propostion will do will put it back to how it was before. That's completely wrong. Before it wasn't written specifically into the constitution that marriage was between an man and a woman only. This won't just roll the clock back a couple of years, it will make it much harder to move forward in the future. Also, 50 years ago we were still dealing with segregation and it really hadn't been that long that women had been allowed to vote. Is looking backwards the direction society really wants to go?

[TOYr32]

The thing I don't understand about this, and I admit to not really knowing the story, is how this is appropriate in any form, be it same sex or any other type of marriage.
When I was in school(tm), teachers were asexual, they could have been married, divorced, gay, whatever, and it just never came up. A teacher's private life was their own business.
It seems that a lot of "controversy" could be avoided simply by people keeping their personal lives to themselves.

-ajb

I agree, i don't think the whole thing should have even happened. But the school approved the trip, and the parents signed the forms. So who is really at fault? As I understand it, the parents that sued lost. But I agree, it should have never been suggested.

[TOYr32]

Ballotpedia!!!! Kind of nice!

http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php?title=California_Proposition_8_(2008) (http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php?title=California_Proposition_8_%282008%2 9)

[mike]

And marriage in some countries means how many goats you get in trade for the wife... LOL

[madajb]

I agree, i don't think the whole thing should have even happened. But the school approved the trip, and the parents signed the forms. So who is really at fault?
The school for approving such a frivolous trip to begin with.
The parents for not reading what they are signing.
The teacher for thinking this was an "educational opportunity"
The students for being snot nosed brats.

There's enough blame to go around for everyone. heh.

-ajb

[madajb]

And marriage in some countries means how many goats you get in trade for the wife... LOL

Man, I got totally ripped off!

-ajb

[mike]

Me too, all her family gave me was a pain in the ass.

[madajb]

On a not complete unrelated note, I would find this extremely disturbing if I were a PG&E customer.
http://weblog.signonsandiego.com/news/breaking/2008/07/pge_joins_fight_against_propos.html
-ajb

[madajb]

The case in Massachusetts that the media has been touting is incorrect.
A student in a class, asked what it meant to have gay parents who were married, the teacher explained that it was 2 mommies or 2 daddies. A student went home and told their parents, and BOOM!! Homosexuality & Gary Marriage is being taught in schools.

The relevant portion of the education code that the ads are touting seems to be this:
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cacodes/edc/51890-51891.html
51890(D)

Don't y'all remember having to take a permission slip home to your parents so that you could learn about sexual education?

No, I lived in a rational school district. heh.

-ajb

[PhätTony]

OK, so are you really that ignorant that you don't know what else there is to gain by being married? Let's start with a simple example. If I were gay and my partner was critically injured and in the ICU, I wouldn't be allowed to visit since I'm not recognized as family. Lets also then get into joint insurance benefits and any number of other simple rights that you and your wife would take for granted. There is a lot more to gain that just being able to say you are married.

You pretty much higlighted what you wanted right there. Although you didnt highlight the most important part that would put your paragraph to rest. I said "Besides legal privledges". Everything you just stated were legal privledges. Proves my point and Mr. Leykis' point, marriage is a contract between two corperations to better or worsen their output/input. A merger is what it is.

What I was wanting to know, AudiRacer was what privledges does it give you outside the legal aspect. That is the question I asked. Now please answer that.

As for marriage, it has nothing to do with being a religious ceremony. Are you saying that since I don't believe in God, that I can't get married?

I didnt say that......you just did. Would you like to look up the history of marriage? or should I?


You also state that all passing this propostion will do will put it back to how it was before. That's completely wrong. Before it wasn't written specifically into the constitution that marriage was between an man and a woman only. This won't just roll the clock back a couple of years, it will make it much harder to move forward in the future. Also, 50 years ago we were still dealing with segregation and it really hadn't been that long that women had been allowed to vote. Is looking backwards the direction society really wants to go?

IT-WILL-MAKE-IT-TO-WHERE-GAY-MARRIAGES-ARE-NOT-LEGAL-....

that's what I meant. And that is true. Once again, can we get off the segregation issues, you really have to read back in this thread about that.

[PhätTony]

Note to all thread newcomers: This has gotten pretty in depth and a great thread! So it would greatly benefit each poster to read the entire thread from beginning to end before making any statements. IMO and I think a few.

[satakal]

It's still tying to frame the discussion in your terms.
Essentially you are saying, "If you don't agree with my assertion that Prop. 8 is a rollback of civil rights and a fountainhead of hate, then I will not listen to you"
It is certainly your prerogative to do that, but it's not the best way to sway an undecided to your side.

-ajb

we have fact and opinion. I'm not objecting his facts because he has brought no relavent ones to the table. His opinions, or my evaluation of his opinions are based on what I see of his critical thinking.

same sex couples can be married this week. If prop H8 should pass, they won't be allowed to marry legally. That would be rolling back a right. To not address and/or not see that something is being taken from someone heavily clouds my views of his words.

So, I guess you're right? I don't need an idividuals opinions to be inline with mine before a conversation can happen. I need for us to be talking about the same thing for a conversation to happen.

[PhätTony]

You still there AudiRacer?

[mike]

I don't think he has a government job where we pay him to sit infront of a computer all day and chat on the internet like you. :D ;)

[PhätTony]

I don't think he has a government job where we pay him to sit infront of a computer all day and chat on the internet like you. :D ;)


I know, the nerve of him! answer me damnit!!! lmao. Wait, I just got really busy now. Be back in 3 minutes.

[PhätTony]

Sorry, I had to check my fantasy football scores. I went 4-6 in my leagues.

[madajb]

same sex couples can be married this week. If prop H8 should pass, they won't be allowed to marry legally. That would be rolling back a right. To not address and/or not see that something is being taken from someone heavily clouds my views of his words.

Interesting.
Setting aside the assumption that marriage is a right:
PhätTony, do you accept satakal's assertion that the passage of Proposition 8 will make something that is currently legal illegal?
And if so, do you feel that this is a valid use of State power, or is it a codification of discrimination?

-ajb

[TOYr32]

Check out these Video Game Costumes!!

http://news.bigdownload.com/photos/video-game-cosplay/

[PhätTony]

Interesting.
Setting aside the assumption that marriage is a right:
PhätTony, do you accept satakal's assertion that the passage of Proposition 8 will make something that is currently legal illegal?
And if so, do you feel that this is a valid use of State power, or is it a codification of discrimination?

-ajb

My sentiments are that that 3 judges making gay marriage legal for that time being was illegal in the first place. By bypassing and underminding the democratic voting process and the good people of CA. A process in what our country is based upon. Therefore gay marriage was never legal in the first place. It was not voted on to be accepted, but overturned therefore not accepted and that is why it is up on a ballot again. How are we supposed to be swayed to go out and vote if three hippies with power who have personal agendas can overthrow our vote?

Discrimination: It's only what you make it to be. So to each it's own. Hows that?

Too many people cry wolf and when the real wolf comes around it's way too late and your credidation is way too diminished.

[Kelly Girl]

Meeeh, not really... I was battling a personal war with that one [marriage as defined between one man and one woman]. I don't think that it's that way with me. I really don't, but I'd be honest if it did effect me.


so who's the lucky guy?

[PhätTony]

so who's the lucky guy?

Meeeh, not really... I was battling a personal war with that one. I don't thin that it's that way with me. I really don't, but I'd be honest if it did effect me.
__________________

thanks for the post modification... ever wonder where your George was those nights he said he went for gas and came back 2 hours later?:D

[madajb]

My sentiments are that that 3 judges making gay marriage legal for that time being was illegal in the first place.

Assuming that you are talking about overturning Prop. 22, the vote was 4-3 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_Re_Marriage_Cases).

By bypassing and underminding the democratic voting process and the good people of CA. A process in what our country is based upon.

A feature of our current system of government is that the people cannot vote something into law that is not allowed under the Constitution.
As I said upthread, I did not read the entire decision, but it seems well-grounded in California Constitutional precedent. I think even the "defense of marriage" folks realized this eventually, which is why this proposition amends the California Constitution.

Several of the dissenters felt the same way you did, advocating that the decision be stayed until the voters decided in November.

-ajb

[Kelly Girl]

thanks for the post modification... ever wonder where your George was those nights he said he went for gas and came back 2 hours later?:D

what happens in your household is not necessarily representative of mine

[PhätTony]

what happens in your household is not necessarily representative of mine

necessarily...

[gtiador]

first off, i have to say wow. for being posted only 4 hours ago, this thread has really taken off. normally i'd read the first page and then scroll down here and type in my 2 cents, but then i saw that there were 6 pages of info. someone try finding a thread on vortex this productive :p

anyways, i already know i'll be voting no on prop 8, simply because i believe that everyone should have the right to marry whomever they choose. i was raised in a liberal family and household, albeit it was full of moral codes. i plan to raise kids the same way someday.

i don't have much to say to counter the yes-on-8 crowd, simply because anything i could say against their views could be countered back on me just as easily. this is why issues like gay marriage, abortion, gun control, etc are so touchy in our society. human nature drives people to pick a side, especially in our democratic forum.

i agree with mike and kelly regarding that prop 8 has nothing to do whatsoever with education. the yes campaigners only cite it as a way that voting no on 8 has the potential (totally unrealistic far-fetched potential) to become commonplace in classroom discussions. it has to do only with whether or not the voting public of the state wants to keep gay marriage legal or not.

and if any no-on-8 people are still a little worried in general, let me reassure you. for every no-on-8 sign or commercial i've seen, there have been 3 or 4 yes-on-8 signs or other ads. this only means the the pro 8 campaigners are worried about losing, thus they publicize it more.

and for a brief personal prop 8 related experience...
sunday i was heading over to my buddy's place in orange. since i'm over there often, i'd began noticing the "yes on 8" signs stuck in his neighbor's bushes (they live diagonally from him across the intersection, both are corner houses). i'd see them and think "nice..." and then continue doing what i was doing. however, as i parked and got out of my car on sunday, i see their two kids out in front of their house holding the signs, smiling and waving to cars. the kids are 12 and 9. they probably don't even know what they're doing. i know i wouldn't give them a hard time, but i was just waiting for an asshole much more liberal and insensitive than myself to drive by and yell something that would scare or confuse them. it's stuff like that that really get to me.. their parents should have had them in the house rather than letting them dance around with signs advocating discrimination..

and there's my say.

[lordoftheblings]

I can accept your opinion on what religion is... although, just because you can't see the devil. Doesn't mean he don't exist. That's the smartest thing he did is make the world believe that.

What about dragons? Unicorns, Yeti and Sasquatch?

[TOYr32]

Haven't seen too many Westboro Baptists Lately, figured they would be all over this one!!

[PhätTony]

Haven't seen too many Westboro Baptists Lately, figured they would be all over this one!!

OMG Yeah!!! That was crazy

[PhätTony]

What about dragons? Unicorns, Yeti and Sasquatch?

Your religious humor seizes to amuse:(

[Kelly Girl]

i dunno 'bout you tony, but i attend services at the United Union of Dragons, Unicorns, Yeti, and Sasquatch

[xoutofstepx]

i dunno 'bout you tony, but i attend services at the United Union of Dragons, Unicorns, Yeti, and Sasquatch

I attend the Church of Skatin!

[audiracer2002]

You're right. I do have work to do.

I don't get why you keep getting so offended about people relating this to the past. In my opinion it's very relevant. Year after year society has strived for more equality and less hate and prejudice. This is a huge slap in the face to that movement. Also, by changing the constitution they way it will, it will also make progress more difficult. It doesn't just simply make gay marriage illegal.

If this passes, what's to stop others from trying to get religion back in school, bring back some sort of segregation, any number of other items? It may not be able to happen on a state level, but it could certainly be possible to begin in a small town. Racism and hate are alive and well in this country.

Anywho, I have work to do.

[TOYr32]

You're right. I do have work to do.

I don't get why you keep getting so offended about people relating this to the past. In my opinion it's very relevant. Year after year society has strived for more equality and less hate and prejudice. This is a huge slap in the face to that movement. Also, by changing the constitution they way it will, it will also make progress more difficult. It doesn't just simply make gay marriage illegal.

If this passes, what's to stop others from trying to get religion back in school, bring back some sort of segregation, any number of other items? It may not be able to happen on a state level, but it could certainly be possible to begin in a small town. Racism and hate are alive and well in this country.

Anywho, I have work to do.


I agree, luckily, this is only a CA vote . . . if it were national, it would definitely go the religious side due to the bible belt and all. How do you think Bush got his second term? So at least we have that going for us.

[PhätTony]

If this passes, what's to stop others from trying to get religion back in school, bring back some sort of segregation, any number of other items? It may not be able to happen on a state level, but it could certainly be possible to begin in a small town. Racism and hate are alive and well in this country.

And this is how the No8 voters put fear into the people. tit for tat

thanks for changing the subject

[PhätTony]

i dunno 'bout you tony, but i attend services at the United Union of Dragons, Unicorns, Yeti, and Sasquatch

I attend the Church of Skatin!

Your guys religious intolerance never seizes to amaze me either :(

[Kelly Girl]

intolerance?

i'm Jewish / Presbytarian... and i go to Catholic Mass

[xoutofstepx]

Your guys religious intolerance never seizes to amaze me either :(

Your belief in God never ceases to amaze me. We are all entitled to what we do and don't believe in. ;)

[v2rocket]

[tangent]
when it comes to religion i personally see no use for it at all. but i wont stop people from wanting to follow it as long as it doesnt get in my way of life or threaten me.

i see religion as a limiting factor to human existence, if anything we should try and strive for longer life/pseudo immortality. lets allow cloning and look into researching brain transplants and prevent mental degredation. alot i have seen from religion are alot of rules for things we cant do because someones book says so.

want morals? go follow aesops fables.

sorry if i insulted anyone/thing these are my views and my opinions and were not meant to be directed at anyone only to join in the random tangent this thread had started to go in.

[\tangent]

now back on topic....

im voting no on prop 8.

[mike]

I dont think anyone here is religiously intolerant, I think its nothing more then a legal fraud scam, selling people acceptance and forgiveness out of a dusty old book for 10% of their annual income (and the church will always do your taxes for free to make sure they are getting that 10%). Who's to say the bible wasn't written as a joke, or the ramblings of some insane prisoner from thousands of years ago? Scientology started out as a bet between L Ron Hubbard and a friend in 1920's hollywood over who could start a religion first. It is the laughing stock of "religions". In 2000 years, it will just be another religion people follow and start wars over. I'm tolerant of whatever religious creed you or anyone follows, as long as you don't push it on me or it interferes with my existence we're good.

[Kelly Girl]

politics AND religion! oh MY!!!!!!!

[lordoftheblings]

Your guys religious intolerance never seizes to amaze me either :(


ironic you'd say that in a issue regarding religious intolerance over another humans civil liberties isnt it.

Kinda liek the yes on 8 people i saw on the news whining about how someone stole their signs and it was a violation of their rights, oh really violation of your rights? Hmmmm Kinda funny youd mention that you bigoted homophobe (I meant the erson on TV and not at you tony)

[xoutofstepx]

I guess Saddleback Church sent them out in force. Kristen saw a ton of the "Yes on 8" dummies on her way home from work. She saw someone flip them off. Was that you again Corey?! ;)

[lordoftheblings]

i was driving giving them the finger again today. fuck those dooshbags

[xoutofstepx]

Good stuff. You make me proud. Check your pm's.

...clear your box!

...nevermind haha

[DanT1.8T]

IMO, we have bigger issues to worry about that should be on the ballot.


'nuff said. :tup2:

[Batrugger]

The question I have is this:

Prop 22 was overturned by the court, this gets voted into law by the election in Nov, so what stops it from being overturned again. I mean if there was a prop that said that marriage was only for people of one race (white and white, black and black, etc) and it was voted in by the people, it would be overturned as a violation of civil rights. I don't see how this is any different. Oh and believe it or not, thanks to the huge influx of out of state money supporting this prop, it is looking like it will pass at this time. Hell, 22 passed , so why do you think this will be different.

[madajb]

The question I have is this:

Prop 22 was overturned by the court, this gets voted into law by the election in Nov, so what stops it from being overturned again.
This is an amendment to the California Constitution, and thus cannot be overturned by a California court.
The Feds on the other hand...

-ajb

[Batrugger]

This is an amendment to the California Constitution, and thus cannot be overturned by a California court.
The Feds on the other hand...

-ajb

Yes I know that, but if California voted on and passed an amendment to the Constitution that said ( I know this is extreme, but it makes a point) that murder was now legal, do you really think that it would be enacted? My point here is that the courts have already said that it is illegal to deny people the right to marry.

[SoCal_GLI]

prop 8 is a step in the direction of slavery.

It makes discrimination against gays part of the state constitution. Is multi-racial couples that far off? If not, why not?

It benefits the people behind such props for the voters to be ignorant and just polarized into "good" or "bad". The less they know, the easier they are to herd.

I think the text is something deceptively simple like: marriage is only recognized by the state as being between a man and a woman.


you couldnt be more wrong....
look at it this way.
marriage is a religious act. there isnt a religion on the planet that approves of gay marriage

[SoCal_GLI]

intolerance?

i'm Jewish / Presbytarian... and i go to Catholic Mass

so your sacrilegious?

[Batrugger]

you couldnt be more wrong....
look at it this way.
marriage is a religious act.
I don't think so. Marriage is a civil ceremony that can also be a religious ceremony. Just because you have a minister, pastor, whatever conduct the ceremony, doesn't make it legal. It is the license and the certificate filed at the court that make it a legal marriage. I went online and got ordained so now I can legally perform marriages. That has nothing to do with religion.

[satakal]

you couldnt be more wrong....
look at it this way.
marriage is a religious act. there isnt a religion on the planet that approves of gay marriage

prop H8 has zero to do with children and schools and religion.

marriage as recognized and proposed banned in the state constitution is not a religious act.

[kyyle_m]

im sorry but it should be Adam and eve not Adam and Steve..
that is my opinion and my belifes but everyone has a diffrent opinion i just dont want it to come down to it where when i have a child and they come home from school saying i saw billys dad and dad kissing today!!
or
we learned that sex is a part of life and men having sex in the butt is okay too..
i know there is gunna always be gays but really what they decided to do with their lifes i dont care but when they make a "scene" as i call it its just fucking wrong!
keep it at home do what you wanna do thats what makes this america but dont go try and changing the schools to teach gay sex/marriage is okay..

my opinion!
and i am voting yes on 8!

[PhätTony]

This is an amendment to the California Constitution, and thus cannot be overturned by a California court.
The Feds on the other hand...

-ajb

Doubt that would ever come to head. But, people have too much time on their hands so...

[PhätTony]

Yes I know that, but if California voted on and passed an amendment to the Constitution that said ( I know this is extreme, but it makes a point) that murder was now legal, do you really think that it would be enacted? My point here is that the courts have already said that it is illegal to deny people the right to marry.

The court cannot have a say over the State Constitution. In this case the people end up winning the battle over the legal system in the end.

-Proposition 22
-People vote for it, law passes
-Court overrules that vote since it's just a prop to change a law
-People get mad since their vote was ignored and just overruled
-Petition for a proposition which would be 8 (H8 to some of you)
-2008 Ballot, Prop 8


-People vote yes/no
-If yes, than the courts of CA can no longer change the peoples vote since it literally is in the constitution (ca).
-In cometh the Federal, but no time this century I think. More important things like the war to worry about.
-McCain is FOR prop 8, Obama is Against it

[Kelly Girl]

im sorry but it should be Adam and eve not Adam and Steve..
that is my opinion and my belifes but everyone has a diffrent opinion i just dont want it to come down to it where when i have a child and they come home from school saying i saw billys dad and dad kissing today!!
or
we learned that sex is a part of life and men having sex in the butt is okay too..
i know there is gunna always be gays but really what they decided to do with their lifes i dont care but when they make a "scene" as i call it its just fucking wrong!
keep it at home do what you wanna do thats what makes this america but dont go try and changing the schools to teach gay sex/marriage is okay..

my opinion!
and i am voting yes on 8!

ironic that some homosexuals would be equally "grossed out" by your PDA with your girlfriend.

good manners is just good manners no matter what your sexual preference is.
now i doubt many of you males would pitch a fit if you witness 2 lesbians in a PDA..

[PhätTony]

I don't think so. Marriage is a civil ceremony that can also be a religious ceremony. Just because you have a minister, pastor, whatever conduct the ceremony, doesn't make it legal. It is the license and the certificate filed at the court that make it a legal marriage. I went online and got ordained so now I can legally perform marriages. That has nothing to do with religion.

Yes you are partly right, Marriage can be both, religious or civil. Seeing of course that you take the civil side since you are H8 and not Pro8. That is exactly why you said "Marriage is a civil ceremony that can also be a religious ceremony." As if it "could" be, saying to me that you in fact believe the civil aspect of marriage is the true beggining of the event. Kinda bias if you ask me.

So I have done extensive research and H8 people seem to want to go back to prehistoric neanderthal times to get the ammo that they need. Sell a goat, get a wife... nothing to it. Yeah, that did happen but wait, then you enter into the B.C. times, Noah, Moses... when it was a religious ceremony. So it goes both ways man. We agree to call that argument neutral?

[mike]

ironic that some homosexuals would be equally "grossed out" by your PDA with your girlfriend.

good manners is just good manners no matter what your sexual preference is.
now i doubt many of you males would pitch a fit if you witness 2 lesbians in a PDA..

As long as they are hot and not bus driving dykes.......................... LOL :D

If your kid came home and said that, then you need to explain to them America and freedom of choice, or take your family and move to Saudi Arabia where such things would get you killed.

[audiracer2002]

im sorry but it should be Adam and eve not Adam and Steve..
that is my opinion and my belifes but everyone has a diffrent opinion i just dont want it to come down to it where when i have a child and they come home from school saying i saw billys dad and dad kissing today!!
or
we learned that sex is a part of life and men having sex in the butt is okay too..
i know there is gunna always be gays but really what they decided to do with their lifes i dont care but when they make a "scene" as i call it its just fucking wrong!
keep it at home do what you wanna do thats what makes this america but dont go try and changing the schools to teach gay sex/marriage is okay..

my opinion!
and i am voting yes on 8!


So you haven't read any of this thread, have you? You are entitled to be as ignorant and narrow minded as you choose, that is your right, but this has nothing to do with schools and what you kids may be taught.

What are you going to do if your kid turns out to be gay?

[PhätTony]

So you haven't read any of this thread, have you? You are entitled to be as ignorant and narrow minded as you choose, that is your right, but this has nothing to do with schools and what you kids may be taught.

What are you going to do if your kid turns out to be gay?

It's the man's opinion, let him have it. Kinda like someone calling a radio station with his mind set. He's not a bad guy for saying what he feels. I like syrup on my pancakes! I confess... now hang me audiracer. It's not gonna end your life.

Although Kyle you should read the whole thread, it's quite entertaining and just about Legendary worthy.

[audiracer2002]

So I have done extensive research and H8 people seem to want to go back to prehistoric neanderthal times to get the ammo that they need. Sell a goat, get a wife... nothing to it. Yeah, that did happen but wait, then you enter into the B.C. times, Noah, Moses... when it was a religious ceremony. So it goes both ways man. We agree to call that argument neutral?

You forget, Noah, Moses... they are characters. The bible was a story thus the library files under fiction.

[mike]

you forget, noah, moses... They are characters. The bible was a story thus the library files under fiction.

+++++rep!!!!!!!!!!

[PhätTony]

You forget, Noah, Moses... they are characters. The bible was a story thus the library files under fiction.


Oh dear!... look I strongly believe that there is a god, there is a heaven and your so called "characters" I take offense in. I was making a point in a time period. Don't start religion bashing and offending people okay. Because your the one who will be not only be narrow minded... that just makes you a hypocrite. Let's leave the religion bashing out of this. I don't preach so you don't act ignorant on purpose.

[audiracer2002]

I'm not bashing religion. I respect peoples rights to believe what they want, but that includes me. I don't believe in God and think that for the most part, religion is a huge hipocrisy. You were the one who used your statement as fact to say that marriage had become a religious affair and all I'm saying is that is your opinion, not fact.

[PhätTony]

I'm not bashing religion. I respect peoples rights to believe what they want, but that includes me. I don't believe in God and think that for the most part, religion is a huge hipocrisy. You were the one who used your statement as fact to say that marriage had become a religious affair and all I'm saying is that is your opinion, not fact.

Marriage has become a religious affair. Have you not been out of your house in the past...um....century or two or three?

[mike]

Marriage has become a religious affair. Have you not been out of your house in the past...um....century or two or three?

Thats what it means to you, what it means to people who don't believe in god and can tell the difference between right and wrong without a dusty old book and think freely is something else. We are all entitled to think and live freely.

There are SO many religions out there, different variations of one religion, etc. All of them believe they are the one "True" religion, so either they are all right, or all wrong. You pick.

[Monster8V]

Marriage has become a religious affair. Have you not been out of your house in the past...um....century or two or three?


It HAS? Really? What was that GREAT church in Vegas I got married in again........

Correction, it WAS a religeous affair taken over by politicians.

[audiracer2002]

Marriage has become a religious affair. Have you not been out of your house in the past...um....century or two or three?

Maybe it the peoples weddings you go to. We have plenty of friends whose weddings had nothing to do with religion. They did a ceremony to bring them together in union etc, but no mention of God. Maybe its you who needs to get with the times!

[madajb]

Yes I know that, but if California voted on and passed an amendment to the Constitution that said ( I know this is extreme, but it makes a point) that murder was now legal, do you really think that it would be enacted? My point here is that the courts have already said that it is illegal to deny people the right to marry.

In theory, California would be perfectly within its rights to have murder be legal.

However, you are slightly mistaken, the Court did _not_ say it was illegal for gays to marry, it said it was unconstitutional thus Prop. 22 was null and void, which is an entirely different thing.
This Proposition corrects that issue.

-ajb

[madajb]

Doubt that would ever come to head. But, people have too much time on their hands so...

It's an interesting question. Thus far, the Feds have had a hands off approach, since marriage has traditionally been a State matter.
Given the amount of money being poured into this Proposition, I wouldn't be terribly surprised to see a Federal suit if it passes.

-ajb

[PhätTony]

Maybe it the peoples weddings you go to. We have plenty of friends whose weddings had nothing to do with religion. They did a ceremony to bring them together in union etc, but no mention of God. Maybe its you who needs to get with the times!

So Catholic style weddings don't exist?
Indian Style weddings don't exist?
Mormon Style weddings don't exist
Hari Crishna, Christian, etc etc? Those are all just made up?

My point is that it has become a religious thing. Not that is is only a religous thing. You assume way too much.

[PhätTony]

It HAS? Really? What was that GREAT church in Vegas I got married in again........

A Joke


....that just so happened to give you 20 bucks in chips and a keychain afterwards

lmfao

[TOYr32]

im sorry but it should be Adam and eve not Adam and Steve..
that is my opinion and my belifes but everyone has a diffrent opinion i just dont want it to come down to it where when i have a child and they come home from school saying i saw billys dad and dad kissing today!!
or
we learned that sex is a part of life and men having sex in the butt is okay too..
i know there is gunna always be gays but really what they decided to do with their lifes i dont care but when they make a "scene" as i call it its just fucking wrong!
keep it at home do what you wanna do thats what makes this america but dont go try and changing the schools to teach gay sex/marriage is okay..

my opinion!
and i am voting yes on 8!

ironic that some homosexuals would be equally "grossed out" by your PDA with your girlfriend.

good manners is just good manners no matter what your sexual preference is.
now i doubt many of you males would pitch a fit if you witness 2 lesbians in a PDA..

As long as they are hot and not bus driving dykes.......................... LOL :D

If your kid came home and said that, then you need to explain to them America and freedom of choice, or take your family and move to Saudi Arabia where such things would get you killed.

:D

Doesn't upset me one bit . . .

http://apudgeisasandwich.files.wordpress.com/2007/08/girls-kissing.jpg

[PhätTony]

There are SO many religions out there, different variations of one religion, etc. All of them believe they are the one "True" religion, so either they are all right, or all wrong. You pick.

We're not talking about religious beliefs Mike, we talking about the history of Matrimony. Be it civil or religious. This isn't God or No God.

[Kelly Girl]

I beg to differ, Marriage is not so much a religious thing.. Just because you have to have an ordained religious figure preside over the ceremony...

and catholic "style" weddings are more like sports events anyway

stand up! sit down! fight fight fight!!!

[madajb]

and catholic "style" weddings are more like sports events anyway

stand up! sit down! fight fight fight!!!

You forgot the kneeling....
heh.

-ajb
(not fit enough to be Catholic)

[Kelly Girl]

and the hail marys

[madajb]

and the hail marys

And freaking First Corinthians, though that particular virus seems to have spread lately.

-ajb

[PhätTony]

I beg to differ, Marriage is not so much a religious thing.. Just because you have to have an ordained religious figure preside over the ceremony...

and catholic "style" weddings are more like sports events anyway

stand up! sit down! fight fight fight!!!

LOL...Yeah, they do hurt the thighs a bit.

[mike]

We're not talking about religious beliefs Mike, we talking about the history of Matrimony. Be it civil or religious. This isn't God or No God.

We are talking about the history of marriage as civil or religious yes? Well then that brings religion into it, ergo "god". If god doesn't exist, then there can't be any true "religion" behind marriage as we are discussing thus it is completely relevant to the topic at hand.

[Kelly Girl]

may i vote for a continued separation of church and state PLEASE!?!?!?!

[PhätTony]

We are talking about the history of marriage as civil or religious yes? Well then that brings religion into it, ergo "god". If god doesn't exist, then there can't be any true "religion" behind marriage as we are discussing thus it is completely relevant to the topic at hand.

but it's either a yes or not question. It's sounds like your making an excuse to make this an all out religious debate, seeing that a good majority of this site is athiest.

[Kelly Girl]

i doubt Mike is trying to make this a religious debate.
TOny, you really need to stop putting words in people's mouths...

[kyyle_m]

So you haven't read any of this thread, have you? You are entitled to be as ignorant and narrow minded as you choose, that is your right, but this has nothing to do with schools and what you kids may be taught.

What are you going to do if your kid turns out to be gay?

i have read it most of the first few pages and decided to post.
and im just simply stating that it could happen if it passes. and i dont want it to happen.
as for if my kid turns out to be gay.. i wouldnt support it one bit and i want to make sure that if someday down the road it is being taught in schools that it is not acceptable.
i have no problem with gays being together i think its not acceptable for them to get married. as it has been stated since the country was started marriage is for a man and a women. and not anything else.
i am open for be whom you want to be do what you wanna do. but getting married is wrong.

[mike]

Why would I do that? YOU drug religion into it on a basis of "faith based" marriage, now its fair game for discussion. If I wanted to, I could just make a "God V No God" thread. You know I like you, but you can dig yourself in a pretty deep hole sometimes.

[mike]

i have read it most of the first few pages and decided to post.
and im just simply stating that it could happen if it passes. and i dont want it to happen.
as for if my kid turns out to be gay.. i wouldnt support it one bit and i want to make sure that if someday down the road it is being taught in schools that it is not acceptable.
i have no problem with gays being together i think its not acceptable for them to get married. as it has been stated since the country was started marriage is for a man and a women. and not anything else.
i am open for be whom you want to be do what you wanna do. but getting married is wrong.

With that attitude your almost setting yourself up for it. How old are you? Don't you remember as a kid doing exactly what your parents didn't want?

[Kelly Girl]

Mike, KYLE is a KID. . .

[kyyle_m]

You forget, Noah, Moses... they are characters. The bible was a story thus the library files under fiction.
+++++rep!!!!!!!!!!

its funny how you think that the bible is fiction.. in your opinion it might be... and on the other hand you are the bmw jesus??
dont get it i thought you believe that the bible is fiction??

can i get some rep points now!! :]

[Kelly Girl]

funny? funny how, like a clown? do i amuse you?

[kyyle_m]

Mike, KYLE is a KID. . .

a kid okay still im a registared voter who pays taxes every year like everyone else and still have an opinion.
you call me narrow minded but my mind is very wide open to everyones beliefs.
as for old i am im 18 with a very good understanding of the world
and i did not always do what my parents told me as most "kids" dont!
that has nothing to do what i said. if my kids turns gay power to him
i just wont support the fact that he is.

[kyyle_m]

funny? funny how, like a clown? do i amuse you?

haha yes a clown.. :headspin:

[PhätTony]

Why would I do that? YOU drug religion into it on a basis of "faith based" marriage, now its fair game for discussion. If I wanted to, I could just make a "God V No God" thread. You know I like you, but you can dig yourself in a pretty deep hole sometimes.

Your a good guy, maybe you should make that thread. Although we both dig ourselves in holes just like anyone who disagrees with anyones beliefs, be it political or religious, ethical or moral. Am I not right that I fight a losing battle with people who are set in their ways being a liberal? What I mean is the majority of posters on this thread are H8. I am neutral but I have to take a side, and the side that is less supported. Coming into this thread I knew I would get hounded if I took the Pro8 side. I simply love debating with you guys, cause we can have a beer or food afterwards and get back to what matters most to all of us on here. The reason why we are here.... DAS AUTO's.

I have a question for you, How do you feel about your candidate McCain (no pun intended), being Pro8?

[kyyle_m]

i love heated debates!!
this one by far

[madajb]

What I mean is the majority of posters on this thread are H8.

I assuming this means anti-Prop 8?
Either way, I wouldn't draw conclusions about the readership based on the posters.
Most folks are reluctant to jump into a thread where the tide is clearly in one direction.

-ajb

[Kelly Girl]

a kid okay still im a registared voter who pays taxes every year like everyone else and still have an opinion.
you call me narrow minded but my mind is very wide open to everyones beliefs.
as for old i am im 18 with a very good understanding of the world
and i did not always do what my parents told me as most "kids" dont!
that has nothing to do what i said. if my kids turns gay power to him
i just wont support the fact that he is.


so you'll turn out your own child if he/she turns out gay..

that's epic fail

[PhätTony]

I assuming this means anti-Prop 8?
Either way, I wouldn't draw conclusions about the readership based on the posters.
Most folks are reluctant to jump into a thread where the tide is clearly in one direction.

-ajb

yessir.

I based it on the posters on this thread. 1 for one have mostly been defending the Pro8 side, but I've only seen 1 instance maybe 2 of any other support. I guess the Pro8'ers let their vote be louder than their voice. Fair enough, I'll keep my flame retardant gear on. *lowers mask*

[v2rocket]

its come down to this!

Test your might.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xWnJyKQACXA
Mortal Kombat!!!!

[mike]

Your a good guy, maybe you should make that thread. Although we both dig ourselves in holes just like anyone who disagrees with anyones beliefs, be it political or religious, ethical or moral. Am I not right that I fight a losing battle with people who are set in their ways being a liberal? What I mean is the majority of posters on this thread are H8. I am neutral but I have to take a side, and the side that is less supported. Coming into this thread I knew I would get hounded if I took the Pro8 side. I simply love debating with you guys, cause we can have a beer or food afterwards and get back to what matters most to all of us on here. The reason why we are here.... DAS AUTO's.

I have a question for you, How do you feel about your candidate McCain (no pun intended), being Pro8?

Difference in our dug holes so to speak, mine have a way out.

As far as McCains stance on 8, do I like it, no, but we can't have everything we want, I would like to keep most of my pay check and guns and my liberties.

Kyle, you need to be a little more open minded when it comes to life in general, there are lots of views besides yours, and lots of information out there, I have studied many religions, enough to take them all with a grain of salt as a farce that have no proof of existence and theories full of holes and gaps. There are lots of religions and different interpretations that have there own following within each one that believe they are the "true" religion. So either everyone is right, or everyone is wrong.

As far as Jesus in my title, it had " " wrapped around it in mockery, they are gone, looks like I will have to put them back on for people who don't get it.

Live your own life as YOU see fit, leave other people to make their own choices and teach your OWN family values.

[madajb]

. I guess the Pro8'ers let their vote be louder than their voice.
As with most issues like this, there isn't much middle ground. It's clearly evident in this thread which tactics the anti-Prop 8 contingent have adopted and there aren't many (as far as I know) "gays are going to burn in hell" folks on here.
So anyone lukewarm on the pro-8 side is going to take one look into this thread and say "Yeah...not so much".
No sense in volunteering to be called a bigot.

-ajb

[PhätTony]

Live your own life as YOU see fit, leave other people to make their own choices and teach your OWN family values.

So true!! So Kyle if/when you have children. You raise them the way you wan't. Your family values to not condone homosexualism is your own choice. Not gonna ping you for it, that is totally your God given right to think what you wan't. :tup:

[Kelly Girl]

honestly i'm curious as to what a Pro8 opinion is...

*promises NOT to counter any Pro 8 arguements

[PhätTony]

*promises NOT to counter any Pro 8 arguements

I so bet you A SUPER NACHO at Fuddruckers that you can't resist...oh I'm gonna win this one BIIIIIG!!!

[madajb]

honestly i'm curious as to what a Pro8 opinion is...

*promises NOT to counter any Pro 8 arguements

From wikipedia:
Arguments in favor of Prop. 8

Notable arguments in favor of Prop. 8 include:

* "Proposition 8 is about preserving marriage; it’s not an attack on the gay lifestyle. Proposition 8 doesn’t take away any rights or benefits of gay or lesbian domestic partnerships."
* Prop. 8 "restores the definition of marriage to what the vast majority of California voters already approved and human history has understood marriage to be."
* "It overturns the outrageous decision of four activist Supreme Court judges who ignored the will of the people."
* "It protects our children from being taught in public schools that “same-sex marriage” is the same as traditional marriage."[16],[17]
* "Proposition 8 will protect religious universities, adoption providers, psychologists, doctors, and photographers from prosecution for practicing their religious convictions." [18]

-ajb

[Kelly Girl]

STFU Tony.. seriously..

i can resist, unlike your ignorant ass, i'm open minded to BOTH sides of a discussion/debate as long as the protagonist's platform extends furhter than "because it's wrong" arguement.

there, the white flag is out.. pro 8 supporters discuss...
how can we learn anything if we're not analyzing both sides

[Kelly Girl]

From wikipedia:
Arguments in favor of Prop. 8

Notable arguments in favor of Prop. 8 include:

* "Proposition 8 is about preserving marriage; it’s not an attack on the gay lifestyle. Proposition 8 doesn’t take away any rights or benefits of gay or lesbian domestic partnerships."
* Prop. 8 "restores the definition of marriage to what the vast majority of California voters already approved and human history has understood marriage to be."
* "It overturns the outrageous decision of four activist Supreme Court judges who ignored the will of the people."
* "It protects our children from being taught in public schools that “same-sex marriage” is the same as traditional marriage."[16],[17]
* "Proposition 8 will protect religious universities, adoption providers, psychologists, doctors, and photographers from prosecution for practicing their religious convictions." [18]

-ajb


and I need to clarify, I define OPINION as not copy/paste from WIKI...

[madajb]

and I need to clarify, I define OPINION as not copy/paste from WIKI...

Can't help you there.

-ajb

[Kelly Girl]

no worries, just want SCE peeps to chat it out

[madajb]

Should have put a poll up at the top, see what the distribution really is.

-ajb

[PhätTony]

Do it!

oh, and I'm serious too

[satakal]

the issue is... a spouse is afforded legal rights. Under what circumstances does the state deny rights to one couple while granting them to another?

[PhätTony]

This would be the big one here:

"Proposition 8 will protect religious universities, adoption providers, psychologists, doctors, and photographers from prosecution for practicing their religious convictions."

Due to the fact that they could be sued for what they believe in.

[Monster8V]

the issue is... a spouse is afforded legal rights. Under what circumstances does the state deny rights to one couple while granting them to another?


So are "life partners". Live with someone for more than 3 years its all community property. Write your will to leave everything to your life partner and whats the problem?

Even still. If I die and without a will, the state can claim my property to which my spouse can have no legal claim. Believe that.

[Monster8V]

go to the top of the page for the poll...

[Kelly Girl]

fence sitter

[PhätTony]

So are "life partners". Live with someone for more than 3 years its all community property. Write your will to leave everything to your life partner and whats the problem?

Even still. If I die and without a will, the state can claim my property to which my spouse can have no legal claim. Believe that.

Exactly, they should just write a will, power of attorney. Just like I have to do.

[Kelly Girl]

I phattony being of sound mind and body
do bequeth my dignity to shawn meze
my audi to SoCalEuro. . .

[Monster8V]

face sitter


fixed!!