Page 34 of 189 FirstFirst ... 2432333435364484134 ... LastLast
Results 331 to 340 of 1882

Thread: California gay marriage ban overturned: report

  1. #331
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Last Seen
    02-16-11 @ 08:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    36,915
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: California gay marriage ban overturned: report

    Quote Originally Posted by digsbe View Post
    You can be left the **** alone. It is illegal for the Mormons to force you and your boyfriend apart. It's illegal for them to harass you or stop you from being gay. What churches are attacking your personal life? What churches are telling you and forcing you to not be gay? They have a right to believe that homosexuality is a sin, but they can't stop people from being gay. However, they do that the right to vote. A Christian's beliefs are equal to a homosexual's beliefs. Each person gets 1 equally valuable vote.
    And that vote does not negate Constitutionally appointed liberties like the equal protection clause. And regardless of whether you maintain this cowardly, half assed defense that this is about persecuting poor wittle Chwistians or not, you haven't had your rights stripped and been demoted to a second class citizen. You are not being told you have to or cannot do something. I am being told I cannot do what you can do. That's where the attack comes from.

    Why can't the homosexual movement leave the churches alone?
    Can you show me where homosexuals are trying to make churches gay marry them?

    Why do they have to have "gay pride" parades and trounce around in thongs and diapers?
    Why do heterosexuals have to have Mardi Gras where they walk around in drunken stupors ****ing in the streets and flashing their tits, hanging beads off their cocks?

    Why can't they sit at home and keep their sexuality private?
    Why can't you keep your sexuality private instead of using it to sell merchandise to little kids and announcing your unions in the paper, etc? Why can't you just sit at home out of the public eye instead of holding hands and kissing in public?

    I know it just burns your ass that we don't act like good little house niggers and stay silent in the kitchen until massa' tells us we can speak. But you're gonna have to get the **** over it, pal. Cuz it ain't never gonna happen, capiche? I don't care how much communion wine you guzzle and how many times Jeebus tells you, it ain't coming to pass.

    Why do they have to call everyone who opposes them "bigots" and force their beliefs on others? I'm so tired of people judging me as a homosexual hater because I believe homosexuality is wrong. I'm tired of being called a bigot and being harassed for simply holding my beliefs. Why can't the social liberals leave me alone and allow me to vote like everyone else? Things go both ways. I am in that position too, and I've been harrased for holding my views. Now I have an entire state saying that my views are illegal in the first place.
    No one is telling you your beliefs are illegal. You can have whatever sorry medieval beliefs you want to have, pal. I don't give a **** and neither does the law. What you cannot do is leverage those dark age beliefs through your vote to impose your beliefs on others, denying them rights that you enjoy (which you incidentally thnk you enjoy because of your beliefs to start with).

    The fact that the two unions are biologically and socially different. An apple and an orange are both fruit, but they aren't the same thing. A homosexual union and marriage are both unions, but neither are the same. It's not wrong to define something that is different differently.
    Except when your definition also include a severe limitation of rights.

    If it's on the ballot then I do have that right. Homosexuals are not second class citizens. How are they? Homosexuality is not like race or religion. It's a sexual orientation just like heterosexuality, bestiality, pansexuality, asexuality, etc. Why is homosexuality superior to bestiality? And I would have a liberal definition of marriage shoved down my throat. So, with the overturn of Prop 8 those who voted for it don't have their rights trampled on for supporting something that is widely regarded by the majority of the nation to be constitutional? Why didn't they decide if it was constitutional before they allowed voters to vote on it?
    OK, so you can vote on it. And then I can take it straight to the court and point out where your mob tried to curb my individuality. And guess what...today the court sided against your vote. Learn to love it because its gonna happen more and more.

    So you don't care about my rights, yet we all need to bow down to what you believe are rights.
    If your rights were being curbed, I would be fighting right along side you to help you get them back or keep them. What I said is that I don't care about your pitiful angst that you didn't get to strip me of mine.

    Cut the persecution crap. Just come on down off that cross and hand over your little crown of plastic thorns. No one is buying that you are the victim here.

  2. #332
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Canada
    Last Seen
    12-26-10 @ 06:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    8,083

    Re: California gay marriage ban overturned: report

    Quote Originally Posted by digsbe View Post
    My right to vote and voice my opinion. My right to have my beliefs put into law when it is presented as a vote to the populous.
    Your right to vote wasn't infringed, which was why Prop 8 initially passed via popular vote. What you fail to understand is that your country is a Democratic Republic. You have three branches of government: the legislature, the courts, and the executive. The people weighed in, but the vote itself violated Equal Protection. Now the court has weighed in. What you call activism is actually just due process. You also forget that it was the people who brought this case to the State Supreme Court's attention. The people represent both sides, the plaintiff and the defense.

    So you had the right to vote. You just lost.

    What part of this is not sinking in? Your rights have not been infringed upon. Your Church is not obligated to perform marriage ceremonies if it doesn't want to. You aren't being forced to accept gays or be put in jail. You aren't being forced to watch gay pride parades.

    You're just upset that your morality can no longer override everyone else's, and you're clinging to flimsy excuses to justify your outrage. Gays are going to have the right to marry, and probably at the Federal level soon too. You can choose to live your life in constant anxiety about this, or you can move on. There is going to be no visible difference in how your life has changed. You are free to go to church and hate gay people. You can even attend hate rallies if you want. No one is stopping you.

    No right has been infringed. Equal protection has been served. Get over it.

  3. #333
    Liberal Fascist For Life!


    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:34 PM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    93,331
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: California gay marriage ban overturned: report

    Digsbe, I see what you are saying, but the right to vote has certain limits, just as everything does. You cannot, for example, vote to make the Catholic church the national church. Ballot issues still must conform to the constitution.
    We became a great nation not because we are a nation of cynics. We became a great nation because we are a nation of believers - Lindsey Graham

    Quote Originally Posted by Fiddytree View Post
    Uh oh Megyn...your vagina witchcraft is about ready to be exposed.

  4. #334
    Global Moderator
    Truth will set you free
    digsbe's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Metro Washington DC
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:14 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    18,984

    Re: California gay marriage ban overturned: report

    Quote Originally Posted by Your Star View Post
    Your right to vote isn't being infringed. You should never be able to vote against someone else's rights.
    I already did in Tennessee. People don't have an inerrant rite to have their choices and lifestyles accepted as legal and moral at the state level. My right to vote was infringed when what I support and what passed as law was ruled to be illegal. As I said before, I would have no objection or problem if Prop 8 was voted against and homosexual marriage was defined as law.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    So you were prevented from voting? If so, then I shall agree. And you're not allowed to speak your mind? If so, then I shall agree.

    You can vote for something all you want, but if what you are voting for violates the rights of others, then it cannot be accepted as valid law. So according to you, if the majority of the people in a State voted for slavery to be reinstated, then the federal government and the courts should have no say in the matter and slavery should once again be legal in that State. But it's a pretty stupid line of thought, especially considering that we are not a direct democracy. We are a Constitutional Republic. Your rights end at the rights of others.
    No, my views and beliefs were prevented from being represented. My right to my sovereign vote was infringed upon. My beliefs were ruled to be illegal, and it was also ruled illegal for me to legally voice my beliefs. If the majority of people voted to legalize contractual slavery (where someone sells themselves as a slave in a contract) then why not? Personally I don't agree with it. By the way, the civil rights movement and the 14th amendment is a stawman in regards to homosexual unions. Isn't the Libertarian position that the government has no right to enforce morality? Would you have a problem with the state enforcing the moral opinion that homosexuality is equal with heterosexual unions? If the government shouldn't legislate morals, then why should they have any right to pass a position on marriage at all (as marriage is a moral and societal issue and construct).
    When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser. -Socrates
    Tired of elections being between the lesser of two evils.

  5. #335
    Sage
    Harry Guerrilla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Not affiliated with other libertarians.
    Last Seen
    09-01-17 @ 02:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    28,955

    Re: California gay marriage ban overturned: report

    Quote Originally Posted by digsbe View Post
    My right to vote and voice my opinion. My right to have my beliefs put into law when it is presented as a vote to the populous.
    You don't have that right sorry.
    It doesn't exist.
    I was discovering that life just simply isn't fair and bask in the unsung glory of knowing that each obstacle overcome along the way only adds to the satisfaction in the end. Nothing great, after all, was ever accomplished by anyone sulking in his or her misery.
    —Adam Shepard

  6. #336
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Redneck Riviera
    Last Seen
    07-09-11 @ 06:11 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,728

    Re: California gay marriage ban overturned: report

    Quote Originally Posted by jallman View Post
    And that vote does not negate Constitutionally appointed liberties like the equal protection clause. And regardless of whether you maintain this cowardly, half assed defense that this is about persecuting poor wittle Chwistians or not, you haven't had your rights stripped and been demoted to a second class citizen. You are not being told you have to or cannot do something. I am being told I cannot do what you can do. That's where the attack comes from.
    I hope this felt as good to write as it did to read. And, I'm happy for y'all.

  7. #337
    Global Moderator
    Truth will set you free
    digsbe's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Metro Washington DC
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:14 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    18,984

    Re: California gay marriage ban overturned: report

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    Digsbe, I see what you are saying, but the right to vote has certain limits, just as everything does. You cannot, for example, vote to make the Catholic church the national church. Ballot issues still must conform to the constitution.
    I can't vote to make the Catholic church a state religion because the Constitution clearly says it can't, and neither would that proposition be placed on a ballot. I agree that ballot issues should conform to the constitution, but as a ballot and within the proposition of putting Prop 8 on the ballot, it was not ruled unconstitutional. I would have no problem if California had a proposition 10 or something that legally defined marriage to include homosexuality. My issue is that it was an issue that was voted on, many states have voted on this. And a gay judge in California said it was unconstitutional. Not only do federal judges disagree with him (In the fact that other state's propositions were found to be legal), but the voters also had their beliefs ruled unconstitutional and illegal to have the government recognize them. Thank you for understanding my position though. I understand the homosexual rights position as well, I just don't agree with it. My beef though in this case is with the court ruling the legal opinions of others to be illegal. Not just that, but I feel there was activist judging that took place in order to trample on the rights of voters to have their opinions and votes put into law. Where was the legal outcry when the Proposition was placed on the ballot?
    Last edited by digsbe; 08-04-10 at 09:00 PM.
    When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser. -Socrates
    Tired of elections being between the lesser of two evils.

  8. #338
    Liberal Fascist For Life!


    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:34 PM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    93,331
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: California gay marriage ban overturned: report

    Quote Originally Posted by digsbe View Post
    I can't vote to make the Catholic church a state religion because the Constitution clearly says it can't, and neither would that proposition be placed on a ballot. I agree that ballot issues should conform to the constitution, but as a ballot and within the proposition of putting Prop 8 on the ballot, it was not ruled unconstitutional. I would have no problem if California had a proposition 10 or something that legally defined marriage to include homosexuality. My issue is that it was an issue that was voted on, many states have voted on this. And a gay judge in California said it was unconstitutional. Not only do federal judges disagree with him (In the fact that other state's propositions were found to be legal), but the voters also had their beliefs ruled unconstitutional and illegal to have the government recognize them.
    Prop 8 was not found to be illegal when it was a ballot measure, but it's legality was not, then tested at this level. It's the process, as laid out in the law of the land.
    We became a great nation not because we are a nation of cynics. We became a great nation because we are a nation of believers - Lindsey Graham

    Quote Originally Posted by Fiddytree View Post
    Uh oh Megyn...your vagina witchcraft is about ready to be exposed.

  9. #339
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Redneck Riviera
    Last Seen
    07-09-11 @ 06:11 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,728

    Re: California gay marriage ban overturned: report

    Quote Originally Posted by digsbe View Post
    Where was the legal outcry when the Proposition was placed on the ballot?
    That's not how our constitutional republic works. Just because a state votes on something doesn't mean it will be found to be legal. Read up on segregation and miscegenation laws sometime. They were passed by a majority of voters in several states, challenged in court, and eventually overturned in the supreme court. That's how the checks and balances of our system work. If a law is passed, it must adhere to the constitution, or the judicial branch can step in and overturn it.

  10. #340
    Outer space potato man

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:13 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    51,830

    Re: California gay marriage ban overturned: report

    Quote Originally Posted by digsbe View Post
    I can't vote to make the Catholic church a state religion because the Constitution clearly says it can't, and neither would that proposition be placed on a ballot. I agree that ballot issues should conform to the constitution, but as a ballot and within the proposition of putting Prop 8 on the ballot, it was not ruled unconstitutional. I would have no problem if California had a proposition 10 or something that legally defined marriage to include homosexuality. My issue is that it was an issue that was voted on, many states have voted on this. And a gay judge in California said it was unconstitutional. Not only do federal judges disagree with him (In the fact that other state's propositions were found to be legal), but the voters also had their beliefs ruled unconstitutional and illegal to have the government recognize them. Thank you for understanding my position though. I understand the homosexual rights position as well, I just don't agree with it. My beef though in this case is with the court ruling the legal opinions of others to be illegal. Not just that, but I feel there was activist judging that took place in order to trample on the rights of voters to have their opinions and votes put into law. Where was the legal outcry when the Proposition was placed on the ballot?
    You can't vote for a state constitutional amendment that violates the federal constitution. (Or, rather, you can, but expect them to be overturned.) The only people qualified to rule on whether that is the case are judges. A judge has ruled that Prop 8 does, in fact, violate the federal constitution. He did so based on the evidence provided, the law, and the consitution.

    Prop 8 was ruled to be procedurally correct, but until now a ruling hadn't been made on its constitutional merits.
    He touched her over her bra and underpants, she says, and guided her hand to touch him over his underwear
    Quote Originally Posted by Lutherf View Post
    We’ll say what? Something like “nothing happened” ... Yeah, we might say something like that.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •