|
|||||||||||||||
 |
Prop 8 Battle Heads To California Supreme Court |
|
|||||||||||||
|
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||
“Justice denied anywhere diminishes justice everywhere.”
-mlk
“And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.”
-a wise king
Typical of Democrats/liberals of California,if the people speak on an issue and they don’t like the outcome,just send it to the 9th “circus” court packed with fruits,nuts,commies and lesbians to overturn.
“Two Wrongs Don’t Make Right, But Three Do”. – National Lampoon.
While they’re at it, they should also pass an amendment to ban gay teaching in the schools and gay characters on TV. Isn’t it just like the liberals to whine, whine, whine when they lose a bonofide election?
They will overturn this vote, just like similar votes in Colorado and Florida over the last 20 years. I’ve awakened. I know I have no voice. THEY will do whatever THEY want.
That is why we get such lame choices for President every election. Seriously, Barack Obama vs. John McCain? I watched the election closely and could not tell you one positive to electing either. I could find a lot of negatives and placed my vote for the least negative one.
Mark my words, this vote gets set aside, just like every other vote brought about by the people. THEY are the only ones who are allowed to bring up issues. How dare the serfdom assert themselves and usurp THEIR birthright!
It amazes me, even though we have over 50% of heterosexual marriages in the USA ending in divorce that there are still people believing in something called ‘the sanctity of marriage’. Isn’t divorce a sin? Isn’t homosexuality a sin? Is either one a bigger sin than the other? Why are we judging people? Live your own life and let others live theirs. It’s not like the courts would force religious groups to marry gays within the church. Gays just want to gain the same rights as others to get married under the law.
I agree with Bill. Who decides what the bigger sin is? The Christian’s? Jesus gave us a covenant ” Love thy Neighbor as thyself” None of these “Christian” protestors look very neighborly but more importantly, they don’t have the right to judge.
I am tired of churchs becoming involved in politics, it’s not right. Ministers and preachers should spend more time teaching the word of God and how we can overcome adversity, how His love can sustain us and give us the patience to endure but, most of all, to become more tolerant. I will not presume to speak for our Lord, Jesus Christ but, from what I have read about Him, he was pretty tolerant and forgiving.
America…if you are attending a church that preaches intolerance and bigotry, you are going to the wrong church!
Bill,
The “sanctity” of marriage has been cheapened and demeaned over the years in part by the constant attack on the Church and religion as it plays a part in our daily lives. We have lost our “rights” as Christians to practice our beliefs or even mention them in public while the homosexual community has gained rights to infiltrate our schools, television programs, and every other sector of our lives with their “rights”.
You say that the government wouldn’t force the church to marry them? No, they wouldn’t be forced to, they just better be willng to give up their tax-exempt status if they refused. There would be so many law suits, the churches would have to give in or close. I guess that would be worth it to some as long as they can have their “rights”.
Little school kids would be taught that man on man and woman on woman is a natural part of life and that they are wrong to believe otherwise. There is nothing natural about it. If I was born with a sexual attraction to jelly fish, I shouldn’t be able to change the definition of traditional marriage to suit my disorder. But you can bet it’s not far from the future if this vote of the people is overturned.
A gay couple has as many rights as a married couple when registered as domestic partners. Look beyond their agenda. Look to the future of our country. I for one don’t want a gross, anything goes, mentality forced on me or my family. Have you been to one of their “pride” parades? I’m suppose to be proud of that? I’m suppose to support that? No thank you.
The Constitution of the United States says absolutely nothing about marriage. It does, however, say something about equal protection–which is what this is really all about.
If a simple majority vote can remove a right from one group of people or extend an exclusive right to one group of people, this is no longer America.
Marriage is granted certain legal privileges, namely relating to taxes, child custody, and healthcare. The state cannot grant these privileges to one group while denying them to another. That’s the crux of the matter. This case is no different than defining “legal marriage” as between a man and a woman of the same race.
The best solution is to simply call ALL marriages what they truly are in the eyes of the law: CIVIL UNIONS. Gay or straight, allow people to have their relationships legally recognized the same way. “Marriages” are the union of two people in a religious ceremony; “civil unions” are a legal designation applied to a relationship between two people.
Let churches marry people the way they want to marry people. No churches should be forced to allow gay people to get married (which would never happen anyway). Likewise, gay people should not be deprived of the same legal rights as heterosexuals.
Everyone wins–except, of course, the people who are obsessively homophobic which, in the end, says something about those people.
[...] Prop 8 Battle Heads To California Supreme Court Filed Under: Latest News VideoTagged: pcu [...]
AllorNone: Do you believe “marriage” is an exclusively Christian concept? I’m sorry to point this out, but it has existed in many different forms for millennia–far longer than Christianity.
From your post, it seems like you want marriage to be defined as the union of two people in a Christian religious ceremony. If so, which denomination? Methodist? Presbyterian? Episcopalian? Catholic? Views like yours are ridiculous.
No one can sue to be married in a private place of worship. You have no right as a Christian to march into a synagogue and demand the rabbi marry you and someone else. I especially like your jelly fish line–as if jelly fish are sentient creatures who can actually consent to marriage with another individual. Where do you guys come up with these vapid arguments?
Living one’s life the way one sees fit without causing harm to others is the essence of American liberty. You seem threatened by this notion. If so, perhaps you would like Iran or North Korea better. You also seem to believe gays are going to compel others to become homosexual by “infiltrating” society. I think you give gay people too much credit.
See, I’m as sickened as the next red-blooded guy when I think of two men getting together. (I’m just fine with two ladies…) That’s because I’m straight. I’m not worried I’ll somehow be “converted” by it, though, which kind of makes me wonder what’s really going on with all these people like you who are so afraid of gay folk.
================================
=
= BACK TO JUDICIAL TYRANNY
=
= AND LEGISLATION FROM THE BENCH
=
==================================
GB8898,
You’re probably still sickened at the thought of two men together because you weren’t reared with the idea that if you didn’t accept it as normal, then you were somehow a homophobe and bad. I believe that most Gays were born with this disorder, but certainly not all. It’s the cool, hollywood thing to do and try. Great. Go for it. Just don’t tell me that as a business owner, I have to bow to your “rights” as a gay couple when I refuse to have your wedding at my venue because it goes against my religion. There’s one law suit waiting to happen.
I never said that marriage was strictly Christian based. I meant to portray the way marriage has been cheapened over the years by the liberal, anything goes, in your face, you’re hate filled if you disagree with me attitude. Marriage isn’t perfect. It never has been and probably will never be. But to cheapen it further by insisting that I have to agree with the gay agenda infiltrating our culture as normal and natural and wholesome, steps on my rights. I still have those, you know. So do those who voted.
And if you think that the churches who refuse to marry gays won’t be subjected to law suits? Now that’s naive. It would be their “right” to sue. They would do it in the name of “justice”. It’s “discrimination”. Just imagine.
GR8898,
Oh yeah. I’m in love with the jellyfish and it loves me. You’re denying my “rights” to be happy and normal just like you. You’re just down right hateful. I also have my eye on that road side billboard. I think I love it, too.
You CREEPS have a lot of nerve, trying to use JESUS to bolster your arguments in support of homosexuality and marrying of same-sex couples!!!
What HYPOCRITES! You call Jesus a “homo” in one breath, then turn around and quote Scripture to try to pretend that Jesus would SUPPORT the abomination of sodomy!
WHAT LIARS. And you guys/gays want to have “equal rights” and EDUCATE the young to your perverted way of life?
ONLY if the Courts override the WILL OF THE PEOPLE!
People leave their homos*xuality lifestyle, including leaders in the homos*xual movement.
http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=56481
It is not generic and people can restore the heteros*xual nature we are all supposed to have.
And, yes, one man shoving his p*nis into another mans excrement and churning away, is sickening.
If gays took themselves seriously and were “real people,” they would not parade around in the ridiculous, often-iconoclastic get-up that they do, in their so-called “gay pride parades” and their so-called “gay protest marches.”
If so-called “gays” can’t even take themselves seriously and act NORMAL, why would SOCIETY want to do so, and declare them “normal” and “equal” and grant them ANY privileges?
They & their homosexual lifestyle clearly are NOT normal and NOT equal. They are overgrown brats with attitude problems and emotional disorders who love to play “nasty” and “act up.” Society will NEVER “accept” that as “normal”–
whether crammed down our throats (no pun intended) by Courts or not!
So get used to it: “WHETHER YOU LIKE IT OR NOT!”
AllorNone: I shouldn’t even acknowledge this stupid line of thought, but how do you know the jellyfish loves you? Did it tell you?
Next I assume you’ll make the pedophile argument, as if anyone deep down thinks a relationship between two consenting adults is the equivalent of someone molesting a defenseless child.
And if you admit gays are “born that way,” how can you deny them basic rights? People with autism are also “born that way.” I suppose they should just be kept out of sight because their strange behavior is off-putting?
N O Waff: Here’s my problem with people who think homosexuality is a choice. I (probably like you) have a visceral reaction to the thought of two men having sex. It revolts me, most likely because it is biological instinct to feel that way. I couldn’t just overcome that reaction to “switch teams,” and I doubt you could either.
If we acknowledge that fact, it seems very likely that gays are simply born with a genetic trait that governs homosexuality. Either that, or they have incredible will power to overcome biological imperatives, which I highly doubt.
Everyone: If you’re going by the good book to make your arguments, please tell me you also want to outlaw tattoos, shellfish, and pork, too. Also, mowing the lawn on Sunday and women wearing pants. Otherwise you’re just being hypocrites.
Because of these sold-out judges and their fascist “shock-troops” who keep overturning the vote of the citizens of California-we have no voting rights left.They’ve destroyed the Democratic process. 1 corrupt fraud in a dirty robe overriding the will of millions of voters.Gays have civil unions,hate crime laws,anti-discrimination laws,employment rights, etc,etc, but it just isn’t enough-is it? they want to force you to accept them. Hey, it’s just like your grandma and grandpa,turkey-baster babies fathered by the sperm of 40 men-just like your family. These hypocrites rail at churches and “safe” targets but not a word when islamo-fascists hang gays with construction cranes-because they’re cowards. The world is on the verge of nuclear war and all they care about is “anal rights” and “gay weddings”. Tolerance is not acceptance. Don’t compare your “struggle” with those of other minorities like afro-americans (who voted against you).No ones trying to stop you from living your lives because no one cares. You loud-mouth activist gays are an embarassment to decent gay people who just want to be left alone. “The mind that alters-alters all”.
Well, I guess the majority of voters in CA get to find out first hand what it means to bend over and take it up the A–! That should lead to more ‘understanding’ of the other side’s feelings.
I love my country, but I fear my government!
Not Even GAYS…: You know who else acts weird? Minnesota Vikings fans. They paint their bodies purple, put horns on their heads, and wear long blonde braids in their hair.
Is that in any way “normal?”
The Final Punishment Of Gay People
http://vids.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=vids.individual&videoid=44212904
…And The World That Supports Them
http://vids.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=vids.individual&videoid=44094598
“gb8898 November 20th, 2008 – 2:37 pm
The Constitution of the United States says absolutely nothing about marriage. It does, however, say something about equal protection–which is what this is really all about.
If a simple majority vote can remove a right from one group of people or extend an exclusive right to one group of people, this is no longer America”
But you are okay with the courts doing so, right?
Ill take the democratic process over partisan judges anyday
gb8898
I can speak with the jellyfish and it speaks back to me. Really. I can hear it. Can’t you see that it is my “right” to live as I believe? Who are you to think that this jellyfish doesn’t love me back? How do you know? If you have never experienced this, then how can you judge me? It is my true experience. I was born with a sexual desire for jellyfish -some will call it a disorder- and neither you nor anyone else has the right to deny my “truth” based on your out-of-date ideas of what love and marriage is or should be. You are being judgemental and you can’t pass judgement against another based on color, religion, gender or sexual orientation . It isn’t allowed. Now, let me marry my jellyfish or I’ll form a march and protest and sue you for my rights. Or better yet, I’ll have some jellyfish loving judges do it for me.
Oh, I am only attracted to adult jellyfish. I would never mistake true adult love with pedophilia. Those are two different things. However, if I somehow was convinced that the child really loved me in an adult sexual way, then I might consider marching and sueing and forcing my opinions on the world about that as well. It’s my right….Right?
Other: I’m a strict Constitutionalist, so I say this quite often…
THIS IS NOT A DEMOCRACY.
We do not have tyranny of the majority in this country. The Constitution directly restrains the government from depriving citizens of liberty. If 51% of the population votes to forbid women from getting jobs, 51% of the population can look forward to being upset when the judiciary finds the vote unconstitutional.
AllorNone: You’ve lost your jellyfish argument. Get over it.
And as I asked above, anybody want to also outlaw tattoos, shellfish, pork, mowing the lawn on Sunday, and women wearing pants? How about we stone some adulterers?
The will of the People of California be da**ed! Remember Prop 187? Another instance where the will of the people was set aside by a liberal judge. Democracy is dead, welcome to the new fascist state of California and soon the USA.
gb8898
It is you who has lost the argument. If we start redefining the meaning of traditional marriage, then ANYONE can make the argument that they have the right to marry whom ever they choose. Even pedophiles who convince themselves in their sick minds that a child likes what is done to them and therefore should be happy to marry his or her abuser. If a man can marry a man and a woman a woman, then why not a man and a child? Or a woman and a baby? Where does it end? What if the child says “Yes, I am mature enough to make this decision on my own” How young is too young? What or who defines love and marriage? Votes.
Now YOU get over it.
AllorNone: Arguing with people like you is a bit like talking to a brick wall.
ADULT CONSENT. Adult consent is what this is all about. You have no leg to stand on in your argument, because two people must CONSENT to marriage.
Not just one person. That would infringe upon another’s personal liberty.
TWO PEOPLE. It’s a contract agreed upon by two individuals.
This completely overrides any point you try to bring forward, so you resort to ludicrous scenarios involving jellyfish, which only demonstrates how childish your argument truly is.
This is a concept most four-year-olds understand, but you’re having a hell of a time with it. You can’t FORCE your will on another person without depriving that person of liberty.
CONSENT. Please look up the definition.
Good night. Try not to have any homosexual dreams tonight. :)
The right or wrongs of homosexuality or gay marriage are not the issues here. There is a high, more troubling question.
What right does an unelected official, with unlimited powers they can exercise for the rest of their life, have overturning the will of the people of California? This is judicial dictatorship, plain and simple.
gb8898
So you agree that forcing the Gay agenda on the people will infringe on my rights through their law suits. Because there will be many.
You straight man, you.
What a shame. I guess it’ll take the majority of Californians to vote three or four times to protect traditional marriage before the will of the people is followed.
gb8898 said, “Try not to have any homosexual dreams tonight.”
See, that is exactly the kind of CRAP that turns people off to homosexuals! When all else fails, you guys/gays/lesbians INVARIABLY pull some childish stunt like the above–insinuating that the opposition is a closet qu33r or secretly lusts for you!
How narcissistic and stupid! People for the most part are TURNED OFF by your lifestyle and would prefer NOT TO HEAR ABOUT IT. PERIOD. (That’s why ‘DON’T ASK, DON’T TELL’ came about.) (But that’s not good enough for you, because you obviously WANT to TALK about your “gayness” and FLAUNT IT, just to get a “rise” out of those who object to your chosen lifestyle…)
You “gay” people who think that those who oppose you are somehow living in denial of homosexual urges are simply self-deluded. And your assertions of such nonsense only make people HATE you who otherwise could not care less about your lifestyle, if you would just shut up about it.
Had no preconceptions or particular dislike or hatred toward gays until now, but this relentless CRAP of having it “crammed down our throats” is getting old, and yes, beginning to HATE IT and those who are CAUSING IT!
Scroll down to Obama and his birth certificate. You can click on petition to congress there. Good reading also. It is free just to send email but I paid $9.00 to make sure it was delivered by email and by letter to my congressmen.
Check out: http://www.TruthOrFiction.com dated 11/17/08
@ B Scroll down to Obama and his birth certificate. You can click on petition to congress there. Good reading also. It is free just to send email but I paid $9.00 to make sure it was delivered by email and by letter to my congressmen.
Nr,. or Mrs. B,
You’ve been snookered. Hint: Don’t respond to any emails from people claiming to be Nigerian officials trying to move millions of dollars out of their country.
@N@L R!GHTS for the H0M0 oppressed! CIVIL RIGHTS FOR BUT H0LE BABIES! FREE C0L0RECTAL AND AIDS SCREENING! WHERE’S MY STUFF? WHERE’S MY CHANGE? OBAMA! YES WE CAN! CHANGE!
I wish some judge would pass a law that I wouldn’t have to pay taxes or get my driver’s license renewed.
gb8898 wrote:
“If a simple majority vote can remove a right from one group of people or extend an exclusive right to one group of people, this is no longer America.”
Courts, not lawmakers or voters, gave exclusive rights to women to destroy their child without the father’s consent. That’s unconstitutional and un-American. Lawmakers and judges(shouldn’t be) infringe on our rights all the time by imposing laws. I used to be able to drive without a seat belt. Affirmative action is exclusive. Polygamy was made illegal and Mormons had to settle for one wife. I could create a rather large list of examples but I’ll end with this: homosexual marriage is an oxymoron, but not a right. Animal husbandry doesn’t involve two of the same sex. Marriage is not a ‘right’ created by government but a Sacred Christian institution that existed before this country. If you want to nit-pick about words you can refer to all common law marriages as such while referring to homosexual partnerships as civil unions and let it end there.
What nobody’s discussing on this question of gay “marriage”… That there is BIG MONEY to be had, if gay marriage is legislated: Big money for lots of wedding-related and tourism-related businesses, big money for counties who issue marriage licenses (for a fee), big money for churches, ministers, etc. etc. etc. BUT EVEN MORE TO THE POINT: If gay “marriage” is legislated, then gay “spouses” will be legally entitled to all kinds of FRINGE BENEFITS from spouse’s employers AS WELL AS TAX DEDUCTIONS on their state income tax returns. (And possibly deductions on their FEDERAL income tax returns, if “gay marriage” should actually become federal law one day.) There is also the issue of INHERITANCES…
Nobody seems to be mentioning this, but as usual the ALMIGHTY DOLLAR is in large part behind this impetus to legalize “gay marriage.”
Jim68: I despise abortion. I don’t think people should be forced to wear seat belts. I believe affirmative action is wrong. All of these things infringe upon an individual’s personal liberty. You more or less agreed with everything I’ve stated above. “Marriage” in the civic sense is a legal designation by the government, a designation that comes with certain privileges relating to child custody, healthcare, insurance, etc.
“Marriage,” as a word, is a religious concept. Today, however, it has become a legal contract sanctioned by the state. As such, those rights afforded by the state-sanctioned contract cannot be denied to other individuals wishing to enter into such partnerships; it falls under equal protection.
It really is as simple as having each particular religion call “marriage” whatever it thinks is best (and marriage was never an exclusively Christian institution, by the way, so the definition would vary greatly) and using the term “civil union” to apply to legal partnerships between two consenting individuals.
You summed it up best when you said “Marriage is not a ‘right’ created by government.” Exactly. For that reason, we cannot VOTE to have the government “define” it, can we?
Incidentally, as I’ve stated above… I’M NOT GAY. I’m married with three kids. This stuff just happens to drive me nuts. I’m a Republican, although I’m fairly libertarian with many of my beliefs, and what irks me the most about this whole thing is that the argument most people on the right make for outlawing “gay marriage” (that it’s offensive or detrimental to society) is precisely the same argument liberals would make if they wanted to outlaw the preaching of Leviticus as “hate speech.”
Let’s overturn O’s election too.
I don’t like the results.
We can love the sinner but hate the sin. More people hold this attitude toward the whole gay issue than people on either side realize.
Don’t ask, don’t tell.
Does that judge who cast the deciding vote have a lesbian daughter or gay son, or what?
Yala
Post a Comment
|
|||||||||||||||
 |
|
||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||
So the Will of the People will be superseded by the ideological whim of a judge.
What exciting times we live in.