NO on Prop 8
- Started
- Last post
- 85 Responses
- ukit0
Forgive my ignorance, but what's the relationship between gay marriage and ability to adopt kids? Is there any?
- relationship? not sure there is one. Gay/Straight, Single/Married can all adopt if they're suitable parents.threadpost
- akoni0
http://www.flickr.com/photos/age… photos from Jonathan
- Llyod0
I think 'mos should be able to marry. That way they can adopt the thousands of orphans in this country.
- threadpost0
It's not just a matter of the will of the california voters, it was a misleading and dishonest campaign to pass prop 8. Since the vote was so close, I dare say that the margin with which the prop passed could have very easily gone the other way had the mormon church kept their millions of dollars out of the campaign and if the initiative were written more clearly and without the deliberate ambiguity.
However, even if a clear majority vote to remove rights from a minority, it doesnt make it right. Our entire constitutional foundation is based on this idea of protecting the minority from the will of the majority. Making laws to take rights away from people is just plain and simple unconstitutional. The 14th amendment to the bill of rights clearly states that everyone has equal protections under the law. Meaning, if a state sanctioned marriage is ok for some, then it must by definition be ok for all.
I am all for redefining the word marriage. I believe marriage to be a primarily religious institution and civil unions to be a governmental one. So then, since I'm not a religious person, I would be happy with being civilly married or unioned.
- Meeklo0
In the end, I think this is just a small temporary thing, eventually it has to pass and history will point at the mormon church as being for discrimination for eternity. Future generations will see this with the same eyes we now see segregation and slavery.
- yes, thats exactly the point I was making on the prev page. give it 30 yrsthreadpost
- eventually it will just be "known" to be fundamentally wrong. just as womens suffrage, black rights etcthreadpost
- lol banning homosexual marriage = slaverya_iver
- fusionpixel0
Wow, how can you put slavery and gay marriage at the same level? Are gays being transported miles away from their land of origin to work as slaves for some one else?
- no, but they're forced to redecorate!Llyod
- oh yeah, that is the same.fusionpixel
- not slavery. more like civil rights.sofakingbanned
- threadpost0
^^nobody put them on the same level genius. Its a matter of equal protections under the law for all people.
- exactamenteMeeklo
- que exactamente ni que nada, 'ta loco. Mira q' exactamente...fusionpixel
- Meeklo0
I was referring to the principle of discrimination, and the fact that both were stripped from their rights to be treated as equals.
- epete220
+100 for over turning the law
- fusionpixel0
^^
"Future generations will see this with the same eyes we now see segregation and slavery."well if future generations are going to see this with the same eyes, then I must see them at the same level.
- locustsloth0
Maybe fusionpixel and epete can give us some perspective as to why people would want to ban homosexuals from being married. Is it purely a religious reason? If not, what is it?
- check, check... is this thing on?locustsloth
- because it's dysfunctional? because i believe it'll continue to erode American morals.a_iver
- for other people too, not just homosexualsa_iver
- Meeklo0
^
They are entitled to be against it. For whatever their reasons may be.
To deny their right to freedom of speech, would be to lower ourselves to the church's level.
- omgitsacamera0
My AP Euro teacher, his dad's only rationale for voting yes:
"I can't imagine two guys having sex."
- oh I agree there, I don't want to imagine them either. but its not about that. its about their rights.Meeklo
- that means, he is thinking about it! lol.akrokdesign
- fusionpixel0
^ everyone is entitled to freedom of speech as you pointed out. But what makes you think that only the church is opposed to this idea? Yes the church is a great contributor because they want to help but what makes you think they are the ONLY ones not liking the idea?
And as it was mentioned earlier, if this bill is mean to pass (which most likely will since the new appointed president supports homosexual union) then there is nothing to worry about. Just wait and all your wildest dreams will come true.
- the newly ELECTED president. get your story straight before committing it to the interwebthreadpost
- and what makes you think, that I only think the church is opposing the idea?Meeklo
- not to mention the only influence the pres has on the issue, is to nominate judges. pres has no direct influencethreadpost
- oh excuse me, i said appointed instead of Elected. I am so sorry if I offended you.fusionpixel
- the difference is huge. just trying to point out that you are failing to grasp the nuances of this debate.threadpost
- threadpost0
Of course. Everyone is entitled to an opinion on the matter. I understand how contentious homosexuals are still to a lot of people. Many still think of it as a choice of lifestyle vs a genetic or congenital predisposition (this is the view I hold, I dont believe anyone "chooses" their sexuality, its just who they are). And everyone gets to speak their mind freely on the matter.
The worrisome part to me, even as a straight person, is that we are crafting laws to take rights AWAY from people. When the constitution clearly defines that if the state passes a law, it must apply to everyone without exception. So if it is a state sanctioned marriage, there can be no distinction between who is getting married.
And despite what others say, this is the very definition of a civil rights issue. It is different than other civil rights issues for sure, but nonetheless we are essentially saying that because of who you are, different laws apply to you. That is wrong, and will eventually be seen as such.
- fusionpixel0
^ Identical twins should have the same "Homosexual" gene, and this is not the case. just FYI
- threadpost0
as with everything that make us who we are, everything is a mixture of environment and genes. people can smoke all their lives and never get cancer. people can die of cancer at the age of 20. everything is environment and genes.
Also, I would be really curious to read the scientific studies that prove that identical twins dont share the same homosexual gene. please point me to the academic articles, vetted by their peer academic community and held up to scrutiny under the scientific method as "accepted theory". kthxbye- ok that wasnt the most eloquent post I've ever made, but I stand by the gist of it.threadpost
- no worries, I get your point and it is valid. No one is here to tell you what to think or what to believe. I personally only expressing my point of view and you can read the link i posted in your previous post.fusionpixel
- 2cents0
This thread is lacking JazX.
- no, no it isn't. you want it to completely derail into elementary school recess? that dude is worthless. ignore button plz?threadpost
- Sorry, I should have added // before my post.2cents
- i agree3point14159
- ukit0
Needs more shouting and personal insults.
- spifflink0
i don't recall a constitutional amendment ever being voted on by the public, except this one. odd. maybe they should have done it right and put it to the state legislature? maybe because the yes on 8 guys knew it wouldn't have a chance? so ridiculous! separate but equals works sooooo well ya know?
- it wasnt an amendment but rather a state proposition in Ca.threadpost
- yes a proposition to amend the state constitutionspifflink