NO on Prop 8
- Started
- Last post
- 85 Responses
- 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
- cuke4260
it's not a matter of one crazy church, it's every major conservative christian organization against what they believe to be a major part of their beliefs.
http://newsroom.lds.org/ldsnewsr…the argument won't end with proposition 8 just as abortion arguments didn't end with roe v. wade.
the answer is not to slander and hate, the answer is to elect politicians who represent you and change the laws we live by.
- btw i don't support prop 8 necessarily, BUTcuke426
- I DO think the people should make the decisions and not judges.cuke426
- the people can say what they want, but the judges must provide equal protections to every1. thats the constitutionthreadpost
- 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
- threadpost0
Life is short, find love wherever you can.
- megE0
take 6 mins, watch this - or just listen to it in the background
- brilliant. and truly touching too, I've never heard the argument framed quite so eloquently before.threadpost
- man..
Why is a news reporter saying this? it should be a priest or someone high in church
Meeklo - I'm just glad someone is saying it, and all the better that this guy, unlike a minister, has a million+ person audiencethreadpost
- brilliant. made me tear up a bit.nadanada
- yeah this was powerfulmegE
- omgitsacamera0
Prop 8 resulted into fights between the Polynesians and everyone else, heavy arguments on facebook and an incident where a girl was pushed down onto the street, beaten and SPIT on for her views.
Sounds like Civil Rights 2.0..
- ukit0
I think that's what locustsloth was getting at, what is the moral argument for preventing gays from marrying? There isn't a good one that I can think of.
- calcium0
sounds like california also got rid of the freedom to assembly
- yep, total bullshit. everyone was so peaceful and law abiding and the cops couldnt wait to crack skullthreadpost
- This election was bitter sweet to a lot of people. Overall obviously very happy however :)threadpost
- modern0
Get with the program America, why are you even debating these sort of issues in 2008 when the rest of he civilised world gave equal rights ages ago.
Makes you look so backward, stop letting stupid made up books and borderline cults get in the way freedom
- stem0
Couldn't have said it better modern...
___________________END_OF_THREAD...
- Meeklo0
I didn't know about the mormon church putting all that money in that campaign, that is messed up.
Church should stay away from politics.
Don't they believe that they will be judged and sent to hell if promote discrimination ?Make up your mind, do you want to see paradise or do you want to be in hell.
- designbot0
It seems blatantly obvious to me based on this vote that the majority of people in this country are simply opposed to the legalization of gay marraige. Say what you will, but if this couldn't even pass in California, then the majority vote in other states would be much higher. When you say it's "taking rights away" what exactly does that mean? The people never voted on this, only the supreme court did. Like a true democracy, the people have had a chance to vote this time and it was rejected. Some people in here act like gays have no rights already. They have been able to have civil unions for many years, are able to adopt, and even get tax breaks like married straight couples.
- Except that the same groups who worked to ban marriage will go on to work to revoke those rights as welllocustsloth
- also, like i said earlier, amendments to the constitution are not voted on by people but by legislators and judgesspifflink
- that's the way its done, that's how it was done for the somewhat analogous national reconstruction amendmentsspifflink
- iCanHasQBN0
i hope religion dies and burns in hell.
- akrokdesign0
i think there might be some people who was for it but voted wrong based on the question and the answer. no has a neg. meaning. yes has a positive. these questions should be written clearly and not try to trick people.
i seen yes signs (which are against it) in alhambra, which there mainly asians.
meanwhile in santa monica there was plenty of (no on 8).
by the way, i thought it would passes. (as no on 8)
- I was thinking the same.
They should use "vote NO discrimination"Meeklo
- I was thinking the same.
- Meeklo0
I think it was an error on grammar too, (or at least I want to believe that) Everyone can relate to this, in one way or another we all went to some sort of discrimination, even mormons (oh the irony).
The should be more aggressive and point out, that mormons convinced everyone that people of african descend were marked by the devil and could never enter paradise. Now they are trying to convince you that homosexuals shouldn't have rights.
- janne760
this thread is gay.