Hundreds of Prop 8 protesters take to L.A. streets

[drift freaq]

it comes down to this Separation of Church and State . Its big part of the Constitution. What the people who put Prop 8 on the ballot did was basically a violation of that. There commercials to vote yes were based on their own religious beliefs and not on facts.
They not only violated peoples civil rights with it but the violated the Constitution of the U.S. as well.
I hope it goes to the Supreme Court because its a Constitutional issue.

Either we are going to stick to the Constitution or we are lost.

Oh and RJF it was already legal here. These people that created the Prop and the Campaign to vote yes on it are just straight up bigots and religious zealots .

[Mi Beardo es Loco]

Originally Posted by RJF

So, would you rather have a judge "legislate" from the bench and make a ruling/law or what just happened, where people had the opportunity to vote on the issue and decide for themselves.

the main commercial here in Ca showed children coming home to their mom and handing them a "king and king" book. Then saying that gay marriage WILL be taught in schools and it has already started in Mass.
That's the stupidest thing I've ever heard, really. When did we EVER "learn" about marriage in school? You know why? because a LOT of kids don't have a parent or parents. Simple answer. You'll seriously harm a child if you outcast them by saying in a "normal" house is where a mommy and daddy live when that's clearly not the case in every house.

It's just another scare tactic that if there is gay marriage they'll rob your house and rape your children.

[RJF]

Originally Posted by drift freaq

it comes down to this Separation of Church and State . Its big part of the Constitution. What the people who put Prop 8 on the ballot did was basically a violation of that. There commercials to vote yes were based on their own religious beliefs and not on facts.
They not only violated peoples civil rights with it but the violated the Constitution of the U.S. as well.
I hope it goes to the Supreme Court because its a Constitutional issue.

Either we are going to stick to the Constitution or we are lost.

Wrong. It is not a separation of church and state issue.

It is a separation of powers issue. The Judicial branch cannot make laws which must come from the legislative branch. If they want to pass a law that says it is ok, then it would be fine, but they will have to answer to their constituents.

[Rey of Spots]

Can't we all just get along? Group hug.

[Mi Beardo es Loco]

Originally Posted by Rey of Spots

Can't we all just get along? Group hug.

no















































that's gay!

[Rey of Spots]

Originally Posted by Mi Beardo es Loco

no















































that's gay!

Discrimination! I'm going to protest.

[drift freaq]

Originally Posted by RJF

Wrong. It is not a separation of church and state issue.

It is a separation of powers issue. The Judicial branch cannot make laws which must come from the legislative branch. If they want to pass a law that says it is ok, then it would be fine, but they will have to answer to their constituents.

If it is taken to court and goes to the Supreme Court then its constitutional issue and guess what Roe VS Wade . Right to an abortion.

Same exact thing happened with abortion. Abortion got approved in some places and then there was a political ballot campaign against it with a a lot of religious overtones, just like in this campaign. It wound up going to the Supreme Court and they made a constitutional decision.

Really RJF, not all constitutional issues are soley decided by the general public.
The Supreme Court among other things determine the Constitutionality of issues.
The Supreme Court upheld the Constitution in Roe VS Wade hence why abortion became legal.

Anytime people in the Country start pushing laws based on Religious beliefs it is a Constitutional issue, because Church is becoming involved in matters of state.
As long as we have civil marriage by law, marriage between two gays should be legal because its a non religious situation.

Now if you want to strike down all civil marriage as answer to not letting gays get married that's truly the only real legal ave that would have a Constitutional chance. Of course again you violate that Constitution because then people would need to go a a Church to get married thereby blurring the lines again between separation of Church and state.

Give it up your fighting a losing battle here. What I stated above is Constitutionally correct. Plus your from Colorado why should you care this is California?
Of course you might care now because it will probably go to the Supreme Court.

[ronmcdon]

Originally Posted by drift freaq

it comes down to this Separation of Church and State . Its big part of the Constitution. What the people who put Prop 8 on the ballot did was basically a violation of that. There commercials to vote yes were based on their own religious beliefs and not on facts.
They not only violated peoples civil rights with it but the violated the Constitution of the U.S. as well.
I hope it goes to the Supreme Court because its a Constitutional issue.

Either we are going to stick to the Constitution or we are lost.

Oh and RJF it was already legal here. These people that created the Prop and the Campaign to vote yes on it are just straight up bigots and religious zealots .

Agreed completely. the argument FOR Prop 8 was extremely flawed to begin with, and they foolishly had announce their Christian-Catholic agendas. If the supporters of Prop 8 had seriously wanted any chance of gay marriage to be banned, they should have just left that part about religion out. It had set itself up for failure to begin with.

For the same reason, I'm fairly certain it'll be thrown out of the courts, even if the Supreme Court right now is slightly right leaning. Realistically, I very much doubt Prop 8 will pass in courts. That fact that it got passed in CA is of little consequence since it'll get thrown out in courts anyhow. Everything else is no more than a publicity stunt.

Not sure about what you mean by bigotry, but I agree about Religious Zealotry.
Self-Righteousness (not just the bible thumpers) here in CA is also never in short supply.

[usdm180sx]

Originally Posted by Matej

Non-religious people get married. People of different religions all over the world get married.

The Bible is not the authority on marriage.

While I don't have a strong opinion on gay marriage leaning either way, I think it's ridiculous to outlaw it based on a purely religious argument, especially in a country where there's supposed to be a freedom of religion.

People need to find a better argument against it.

Well, last time I checked, the United States was "one nation under God" wasn't it?

[Mi Beardo es Loco]

Originally Posted by usdm180sx

Well, last time I checked, the United States was "one nation under God" wasn't it?

hahahahaha horrible example. "under god" was added a half century ago to distinguish itself from the Soviets.

[ThatGuy]

Originally Posted by usdm180sx

Well, last time I checked, the United States was "one nation under God" wasn't it?

Nope.

It is "One nation, Indivisible".

"One Nation, Under God" wasn't respectful towards other religions. So it was changed or just not said at all.

[Jeremiel]

this thread makes me LOL haha

interesting points in this thread... my opinion doesn't matter, but i think history repeats itself just like what happened to the roman empire...

[cc4usmc]

Originally Posted by ThatGuy

"One Nation, Under God" wasn't respectful towards other religions. So it was changed or just not said at all.

I love how we change things just to accommodate others.

Not.

If it's not broke, don't fix it. But we keep fixing it, and in my opinion it's getting worse.
(That goes for everything)

The end. Which means I'm not going to post anymore so don't quote my post and try to prove me wrong.

[ThatGuy]

Originally Posted by Jeremiel

this thread makes me LOL haha

interesting points in this thread... my opinion doesn't matter, but i think history repeats itself just like what happened to the roman empire...

Wow, great job keeping your opinion to yourself with that cryptic repsonse.

No one will have any idea what you are talking about.



If you're going to keep your opinion to yourself, then do so.
If you're going to join the discussion, then push yourself away from the kiddie table and add something to the conversation.

[Mi Beardo es Loco]

Originally Posted by cc4usmc

I love how we change things just to accommodate others.

Not.

If it's not broke, don't fix it. But we keep fixing it, and in my opinion it's getting worse. The end.

well we added "under god" in the mid 20th century to please others. so what's your point?

Originally Posted by ThatGuy

Wow, great job keeping your opinion to yourself with that cryptic repsonse.

No one will have any idea what you are talking about.

The glass is ALWAYS half empty. And didn't the Roman Empire rule for like 1100 years? So that gives us a long ways to go.

[Fonix36]

i new if i went online i would see this posted...
i meet to beautiful lesbian girls yesterday(i tried to hook up with one of them) and they were ever disappointed in the outcome but where still willing to do whatever it took to change the decision... this spirit is why the decision should be changed if it wasn't a big deal there wouldn't be a reason to care.

[Agamemnon]

Can someone provide me the documentation that shows marriage is a right?

I know the US signed the The Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948 defining marriages rights, but i dont see it in the US constitution. any help. I've been searching for awhile now.

[usdm180sx]

Damn, where have I been? I know where, spending too much time on zilvia. Times have changed!

[drift freaq]

Originally Posted by Agamemnon

Can someone provide me the documentation that shows marriage is a right?

I know the US signed the The Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948 defining marriages rights, but i dont see it in the US constitution. any help. I've been searching for awhile now.

In reality, at this point it does not matter, if you can find it in the constitution. What has happened, is the writers and backers of Prop 8 managed to turn it into a constitutional issue. Due to the fact that they were doing it based on religious reasons and stated that fact.
Therefore a a Religious doctrine is trying to create laws of the state. That's a violation of the separation of Church and State.

Its the same deal with Abortion, before Roe VS Wade and the Constitutional amendment made on the Supreme Court decision there was nothing in the Constitution about the rights of women to choose to abort a child.

Most people who opposed abortion before did it on stated religious reasons. Most people who oppose abortion now, do it on religious reasons. As long as they state that in their fight against it, they will always lose constitutionally.

Because these people have managed to connect there prop to a Religious organization and promote that fact that it was backed by them, even though it has passed it would fall in court. Due to what I and others have stated in this thread already.

Please read, how many times do we have to post this fact?
Had they not tied it to a religious organization, had they not promoted and backed it for religious reasons? It would hold up in court constitutionally. They failed, it fails. It will fall if it goes to court, which it probably will.

Regardless of if you agree with it or no?t Purely based on facts it was fucked from beginning and will be overturned.

[C. Senor]

that's jacked. i didn't know they didnt get all those rights by going through civil union.

but, you have to face the fact that most people now, as when the constitution was written, are religious. so the morals of religion will prevail when faced with the state.

i somehow see this staying as is, but with a lot of fighting to follow.

don't get me wrong, i'm all for equality, but if you're truly a follower of some religion (christianity/judaism/muslim) then you can't really argue for equality in this case. if you don't pertain to a certain religion, then i can grasp where you're coming from.

i think if the people against prop 8, just informed better, they might've got better support to negate the prop. the supporter of prop, just played the hand better and they won. all there is to politics. just appeal to the people more and you win.

[ESmorz]

WIENERS!!!!!

If you voted yes, I hope your kids turn out to be gay.

[Agamemnon]

Originally Posted by drift freaq

What has happened, is the writers and backers of Prop 8 managed to turn it into a constitutional issue. Due to the fact that they were doing it based on religious reasons and stated that fact.

Can you supply the source for this info. Do have the link to the info that quotes backers of prop 8 saying in a court that the reason they wanted to ban same-sex marriage was due to religious reasons?

[drift freaq]

Originally Posted by C. Senor

that's jacked. i didn't know they didnt get all those rights by going through civil union.

but, you have to face the fact that most people now, as when the constitution was written, are religious. so the morals of religion will prevail when faced with the state.

i somehow see this staying as is, but with a lot of fighting to follow.

don't get me wrong, i'm all for equality, but if you're truly a follower of some religion (christianity/judaism/muslim) then you can't really argue for equality in this case. if you don't pertain to a certain religion, then i can grasp where you're coming from.

i think if the people against prop 8, just informed better, they might've got better support to negate the prop. the supporter of prop, just played the hand better and they won. all there is to politics. just appeal to the people more and you win.

hate to say this, no take that back I don't hate to say this. What you have written above is ignorance in the name of Religion. It does not make it right.
Just because people are religious does not take precedent over constitutional law either. It never did and the minute it does the country we know as the United States will disappear into a Religious Oligarchy.

To many Religions and people of Religious belief today take judgement into their own hands.

If you believe in Christ and God you believe in acceptance and that its not your place to judge. It does not say that you can make laws against people due to your religious belief.

If you do judge? Which these people are doing, then you shall be judged, according to your own beliefs.

I just love, how the religious right manages to violate, the very scriptures they are trying to uphold in the name of God. That with their own actions in the name of God.

I.E. you may feel it is wrong, you may feel God believes it wrong. Though its not your place to judge. If you do then your playing the role of God.

[drift freaq]

Originally Posted by Agamemnon

Can you supply the source for this info. Do have the link to the info that quotes backers of prop 8 saying in a court that the reason they wanted to ban same-sex marriage was due to religious reasons?

It was in the ads themselves(among other things) at the end because per law the people backing the ad have to state they did the ad. It has not gone to court yet;

The prop itself was written by religious organizations, the vote yes campaign was advertised by religious organizations.
I used the examples of Roe VS Wade for the constitutionality of this situation. If you seriously do not understand that then you need to stop discussing this right here.

Now I have a question for you?
Why are you so intent on trying to disprove what these people actually did? I seriously think you need to step back and realize this has nothing to do with your state.
Unless you want to see it become a National issue(Supreme Court) and have something to do with your state.

In fact because of what has happened, it just might become a Supreme Court issue. So in other words its already backfired on the supporters of Prop 8.

[jimmytango00]

Originally Posted by drift freaq

hate to say this, no take that back I don't hate to say this. What you have written above is ignorance in the name of Religion. It does not make it right.
Just because people are religious does not take precedent over constitutional law either. It never did and the minute it does the country we know as the United States will disappear into a Religious Oligarchy.

To many Religions and people of Religious belief today take judgement into their own hands.

If you believe in Christ and God you believe in acceptance and that its not your place to judge. It does not say that you can make laws against people due to your religious belief.

If you do judge? Which these people are doing, then you shall be judged, according to your own beliefs.

I just love, how the religious right manages to violate, the very scriptures they are trying to uphold in the name of God. That with their own actions in the name of God.

I.E. you may feel it is wrong, you may feel God believes it wrong. Though its not your place to judge. If you do then your playing the role of God.

+1

its really interesting reading this, considering im gay....Its scary to think there are really people out there who think this way....

sad.....

I really hope some of your kids come out gay, im sure some of you guys will be singing a to a whole different tune.

Also, i hate to break it to some of you guys but gays are born gay... you dont "catch gay" so no matter what your kids get taught in school or if they read the "king and king" book, if your kids are gay their fucking gay no matter what they learn.

[mRclARK1]

Let them get married if they want... On two conditions that are not negotiable.

1) People have a right to disagree with it, as long as their disagreement does not enroach on the freedom of those they disagree with.

2) Religious persons of authority (IE: Priests, those in public office who hold religious faith) cannot be forced to take part in or perform marriage ceremonies, or other religiously significant matters to their particular faith, for or with a homosexual couple if they so choose.

So if I'm a priest and I believe that in good conscience and keeping to my religious beliefs, I cannot marry them, I have every legal right to refuse to do so. They'll have to find someone else. It's not discrimination... It's no different than someone being refused for a job because of a physical limitation. For them it is NOT possible to do this. No need to be nasty or mean or preachy... A simple polite decline is all that's needed.

If I was presented with a option to vote on gay marriage, I simply would not vote. I may have religious beliefs, but that doesn't mean they extend in there expectations of behavior (as far as my judgement or authority is concerned) beyond myself.

[ESmorz]

Fucking Canadians, I love you bitches.

[S14DB]

Originally Posted by Rey of Spots

I'm not married either, but what do I know...

Honest question: If they allow gay marriage now, what's there to
stop something worse off in the future, such as incest being accepted?
I know that's a bit extreme, but I'm sure back then, people thought
homosexualism would never be acceppted, but look at it now.

Or even marrying animals...

Help this country.

SLIPPERY SLOPE!!!


Anti-miscegenation laws - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[HyperTek]

sorry guys, didnt mean for this to become another prop 8 debate, just wanted to talk about the current actions, i wasnt expecting the protesting to go this far. I do understand that these are people just like you and me, who also have feelings, and this is a very emotional thing for them, so i now change my views upon it and would say no *before i was yes*.

Not allowing it will probably just make it worse... but dam, a brother cant get a job, and these people are skipping work just to protest.. grrrrrrrrrrrrr


on a lighter note - one day this will make the history books... hundred years from now in a classroom far far away lol "during the 21st century, there was the gay movement, which started by gaining acceptance from protesters and media coverage, your xxth president was gay and introduced the first man-man relationship into the white house..."

[drift freaq]

Originally Posted by mRclARK1

Let them get married if they want... On two conditions that are not negotiable.

1) People have a right to disagree with it, as long as their disagreement does not enroach on the freedom of those they disagree with.

2) Religious persons of authority (IE: Priests, those in public office who hold religious faith) cannot be forced to take part in or perform marriage ceremonies, or other religiously significant matters to their particular faith, for or with a homosexual couple if they so choose.

So if I'm a priest and I believe that in good conscience and keeping to my religious beliefs, I cannot marry them, I have every legal right to refuse to do so. They'll have to find someone else. It's not discrimination... It's no different than someone being refused for a job because of a physical limitation. For them it is NOT possible to do this. No need to be nasty or mean or preachy... A simple polite decline is all that's needed.

If I was presented with a option to vote on gay marriage, I simply would not vote. I may have religious beliefs, but that doesn't mean they extend in there expectations of behavior (as far as my judgement or authority is concerned) beyond myself.

This is absolutely fine. I see this as the proper attitude. Unfortunately most people cannot seem to separate their beliefs from discrimination and zealotry.

A Truly rightous person indeed would not judge anyone, regardless of agreeing or disagreeing.