Posts: 11,246
Likes: 230
XKI Generation: The Recession Generation XKI Map Nation Color: Bottom Left XKI NS Join Year: 56 - Wednesday, 29 March 2006 Historical XKI Political Party: TIP - The Islands Party
Post by Anime Daisuki on Nov 2, 2008 17:41:08 GMT -5
The opponents of Prop8 try to make it into a "civil rights" or "discrimination" issue but this is very far from the truth.
Same sex couples, under existing California laws, are already given all the legal rights and protections afforded to traditional couples. See:
California Family Code Section 297.5 a) Registered domestic couples shall have the same rights, protections, and benefits, and shall be subject to the same responsibilities, obligations, and duties under law, whether they derive from statutes, administrative regulations, court rules, government policies, common law, or any other provisions or sources of law, as are granted to or imposed upon spouses.
But what they want to do is to essentially re-define the term "marriage". And the fight over Prop8 is exactly that. Not over individual rights as spinned by the liberal left.
I don't think too many Christian groups are opposed to allowing any two people the same tax codes and whatever... But for some people to argue the definition of a word is discrimination against them?
Here in No. Cal the yes on prop 8 signs all "disappear" within 24 hours usually... but I went into central California this weekend and the signs yes are EVERYWHERE... of course there's usually one farm every 50 miles... but hey...
Last I heard it was probably not going to pass... But some say that because a lot of more rural voters (like the Hispanics) are going to be coming out to vote... from their Roman Catholic or more conservative leanings they may vote for Obama and vote for Prop 8. thus turning the tides...
But we'll see
2 days!
Former Minister of Education and founder of the 10KI Investment Corporation
Posts: 11,246
Likes: 230
XKI Generation: The Recession Generation XKI Map Nation Color: Bottom Left XKI NS Join Year: 56 - Wednesday, 29 March 2006 Historical XKI Political Party: TIP - The Islands Party
Post by Anime Daisuki on Nov 3, 2008 12:15:07 GMT -5
I'm with Obama with this. Even though this proposition will not infringe on gay rights on the surface, it does have consequences. For one thing changing the Constitution is a serious matter. Once it is changed, it will be just one extra step for some religious radical to sue and demand existing law be changed (like the California Family Code stated above). They will have a good case at the Courts because by then it will be "unconstitutional". In a sense you have to see what Prop8 can do in the future, rather than what it will do now.
I am for this proposition. The CA voters already voted a few years back that a marriage should just be between a man and woman. The only reason this is even up for a vote again is that a handful of judges in the CA Supreme Court thought that they would legislate from the judges bench and disregard what the voters had already decided.
No matter what side you are on for civil unions, etc, this bill has nothing to do with that. This proposition simply states that a marriage should only be between a man and a woman. Even if this passes, it does not effect the civil union status.
I urge all CA voters out there to vote yes on this proposition.
Post by Petalumadom on Nov 5, 2008 21:11:51 GMT -5
With 95%+ of precincts reporting in Prop 8 is up with something like 52% of the vote... and is considered passed.
This is a pretty big deal because in a ton of matters California leads the way... and we have to be (as one living close to San Francisco) one of the gayest states in the Union (no pun intended)
The no on 8 people made the case of "Equality for all"
Although there may be consequences from this down the road that aren't so great... and I think since we're a "free" country two people have the right (although if I ran everything they wouldn't necessarily ) to have the same tax code etc. as married people... but to change what "marriage" actually means?
C'mon...
Prop 8 added "Marriage is between a man and a women" to the CA Constitution... To amend the constitution is the only way to overrule a court ruling and the average person in California (who is probably not overly religious) thinks that it should be that way and we have now told our leaders that twice.
Former Minister of Education and founder of the 10KI Investment Corporation
Tax code? Give me a break. Singles get more tax breaks than married people. And I'm a tax man, so please show me where I'm wrong.
Once again, isnt it discriminatory to prohibit 16 year olds from marrying? There's discrimination for a reason. You're not gonna hire me to fix your car. You're discriminating against me because I don't have the background.
Though Never Lovable He is the Most Likable of the 10000 Islands X 5 X 200+
Tax code? Give me a break. Singles get more tax breaks than married people. And I'm a tax man, so please show me where I'm wrong.
Once again, isnt it discriminatory to prohibit 16 year olds from marrying? There's discrimination for a reason. You're not gonna hire me to fix your car. You're discriminating against me because I don't have the background.
I'm not gonna hire you to fix my car any more than anyone else would hire me to do the same because you're not a mechanic. In other words, there's a very good reason-you have no idea what you're doing. Same with me-hire me to do it and I'm going to end up breaking it. But I'm not seeing a parellel, here. There's discrimination for a reason. You wouldn't hire an accountant to fix your car because he's not a mechanic. You wouldn't hire a mechanic to do your taxes because he's not an accountant. You wouldn't send a preacher to the moon because he's not an astronaut, nor would you put John Glenn behind the pulpit. You wouldn't let two men marry because....why?
i am christian and im not gay i just think its discrimination.god gave us free will and they have chosen to do that.i dont agree with itbut it is there right
^ i like what the above poster said - fits very close to what i believe. though i don't believe that "god gave us free will" i simply believe as an intelligent species, we have it. and i think when you look at it as simply people having free will to do what they wish with...it's easier to be okay with and understand what they're doing - or at least why they're doing it.
some people do worse things with their free will.
Last Edit: Dec 5, 2008 16:11:46 GMT -5 by Kulkuriare
I think gay marriage is completely okay. When walking down the street most gay guys aren't going to want to show they're gay so they blend in. Most gay people look and act just like everyone else they just have different...well you get the point, and come on heterosexuals aren't doing so great themselves with the divorce rate being 52% in the US. So maybe legalising gay marriage would give the US a boost so they can lower the divorce rate.
If anyone bases their ideas on marriage and their opposition to gay marriage off of the bible, please explain. Shall we look to the bible for guidance on marriage? Shall we look to Abraham, the great patriarch, who slept with his servant when he discovered his beloved wife Sarah was infertile? Or to Jacob, who fathered children with four different women (two different sisters and their servants)? Abraham, Jacob, David, the kings of Judah and Israel - all these kings and heroes were polygamists. The New Testament model is hardly better. Jesus himself was single. Paul (also single) regarded marriage as an act of last resort for those unable to contain their animal lust. Would any contemporary heterosexual married couple newly married turn to the bible as a how-to script? Of course not, but the debate lingers on. Neither the bible nor Jesus ever explicitly defined marriage as between a man and a woman. Most of us no longer heed Leviticus on haircuts or blood sacrifices. Why should we accept its stance on homosexuality. The Bible gives no good reason to oppose gay marriage. I rest my case.
He that keeps company with wolves will learn to howl.
The bible may not say "gay marriage is bad, mmmmkay"... but it does say homosexuality is wicked... in a few places. So it's hard to say it gives no good reason to oppose gay marriage.
Post by rogernomics on Dec 9, 2008 21:23:16 GMT -5
Personally I consider that there should not be gay marriage and instead we should have civil unions that give the same privileges and rights as married heterosexual couples have. Because marriage is meant to be between a man and a woman, not a man and a man or woman and a woman.
The biblical Jesus preached a radical community of believers, whose bond in God suspended all blood ties. Leave your families, and follow me, Jesus says in the gospels. There will be no marriage in heaven, he says in Matthew. Jesus never condemns homsexuality, but he roundly condemns divorce. The apostle Paul echoed the Christian Lord's lack of interest in matters of the flesh. For him, celibacy was the Christian ideal, but family stability was the best alternative. "Marry if you must," he said, "but do not get divorced."
It goes without saying that the phrase "gay marriage" does not appear in the Bible at all.
So if the bible doesn't give abundant examples of traditional marriage, then what are the gay-marriage opponents REALLY exercised about? Well, homosexuality- specifically, sex between men. Sex between women, even in biblical times, has never raised as much ire. Nowhere in the bible do its authors refer to sex between women. Twice Leviticus refers to sex between men as an, "abomination." But most of us no longer heed Leveticus on haircuts or blood sacrifices; our modern understanding of the world has surpassed its prescriptions. Why would we regard its condemnations with more seriousness than we regard its advice, which is far lengthier, on the best price to pay for a slave?
Religious objections to gay marriage are not rooted in the Bible at all, then, but in custom and tradition (and a personal discomfort with gay sex that transcends theological argument.)
Last Edit: Dec 9, 2008 22:46:32 GMT -5 by Jmarjhah
He that keeps company with wolves will learn to howl.