California Gay Marriage Ban Lifted

Lucifron

New member
Dec 21, 2009
809
0
0
brainslurper said:
honestly, no matter how unconstitutional it is, even if the law supports the murder of babies that was the responsiblility to stop it before it was passed. you cant just say "no that doesent count" even though it was already voted on, wait for the next chance to have it voted in. and i support gay marriage, i just also support democracy
Perhaps you should be able to tell what you are supporting from your own asshole before speaking about it, ey? California has agreed, by virtue of being part of the United States of America, to abide by the US Constitution. Abiding by the US Constitution means that you can't rule against it, regardless of how the ruling is decided, so California has to either secede from the US or campaign for an amendment to the Constitution which says that gay people can be discriminated freely. The people of California are free to do this if they want to. Do you understand?
 

Trilaanus

New member
Jul 18, 2010
98
0
0
Does gay marriage mean there's a better chance of it being a happier and longer-lasting marriage than one might normally find with a hetero couple? After all, it's got the word "gay"* right in there! Ha ha ha ha ha ha

Seriously, though, this is good. Another step in the right direction to reach a truly enlightened form of Humanity.

*In case you didn't know it, the word "gay" used to mean someone/thing was full of happiness.
 

AlphaOmega

New member
Oct 10, 2008
1,732
0
0
congratulations america for coming closer to a modern society regarding everybody's right to live their life.
 

Arkzism

New member
Jan 24, 2008
359
0
0
Konrad Curze said:
Ahh its a dark day for democracy.
Even worse since this already happened and Prop 8 had to come along to fix it.
you know people says its a dark day.. but well people tend to forget the bush gore elections.. gore won the popular vote...
 

Danny Ocean

Master Archivist
Jun 28, 2008
4,148
0
0
zehydra said:
Is unconstitutional.
So? Perhaps the constitution should be changed? Just throwing that out there.


AndyFromMonday said:
One of Many said:
AndyFromMonday said:
A victory for human rights! Hurrah!
But what of the human rights of the majority that voted to live in a state without gay marriage?
But what of the human rights of the people whose rights are taken away? Does the majority have the right to take rights away from the minority? I think not. If it doesn't affect you then you have no right to have a saying on the matter.
I'm not entirely sure, but I don't think anything in the UDHR gives the majority the ability to oppress a minority. In fact, I think it's actually specifically mentioned as such. Lemme check.

Yeah, as I thought, the UDHR actually supports gay marriage. So there you have it.

Article 16.

(1) Men and women of full age, without any limitation due to race, nationality or religion, have the right to marry and to found a family. They are entitled to equal rights as to marriage, during marriage and at its dissolution.
(2) Marriage shall be entered into only with the free and full consent of the intending spouses.
(3) The family is the natural and fundamental group unit of society and is entitled to protection by society and the State.
aquailiz said:
Which has been recently worsened by society. Just because they are gay they should not receive any spotlight or special attention. They should be as good members of society as everyone else is.
What about the far more obvious sexuality expressed by the ancient civilisations like the Greeks? Perhaps it has not been worsened, just allowed to return to its normal level?

And on the second point- yes, they shouldn't receive special treatment. Surely that should encompass negativity as well as positivity, and so advocate gay marriage? It's not special treatment, it's equal treatment, no?
 

Ziadaine_v1legacy

Flamboyant Homosexual
Apr 11, 2009
1,604
0
0
warboss5 said:
[http://s5.photobucket.com/albums/y171/warboss5/?action=view&current=its-a-trap.jpg]
Oh Dear GOD!

Although I'm all the way in Australia, I'm kinda glad they finally lifted the ban for Gay couples over there.
 

dietpeachsnapple

New member
May 27, 2009
1,273
0
0
I listen to conservative radio because it is one of the few stations that the vans at work will pick up. I have come across an argument that I find somewhat perplexing. A supporter of the ban stated that, "Gay marriage raises some very serious national interest issues, and that is what we are concerned about." I am vexed, as it were, as to what are those national interests.

Anyone care to help?

(Oh, and those against the ban basically made a civil rights argument.)
 

Brandon237

New member
Mar 10, 2010
2,959
0
0
Furious Styles said:
Wayneguard said:
The elitism... I can almost taste it.
I just meant that this isn't youtube, no one's going to say "Fukin fagz, marrige is 4 straight peepz" or something else stupid like that.

So yeah, it is a little elitist but that's okay sometimes.
Agreed, and Elitism is always better than ignorance, probably why I'm still here.

I'm personally very glad, tis a good day for equality.
 

Vrex360

Badass Alien
Mar 2, 2009
8,379
0
0
Well I approve of this, it's a good victory for human rights and a sign that society is progressing forward.
 

Tdc2182

New member
May 21, 2009
3,623
0
0
Quite honestly, the fact that we are still in the considering faze of Gay Marriage is insulting and demeaning. This should never have been an issue. The government needs to keep out of marriage.
 

Tdc2182

New member
May 21, 2009
3,623
0
0
MrFluffy-X said:
I believe gay marriage is wrong, that is just my opinion, Its just sounds like an oxymoron to me
I understand that it is your opinion and all, but there are times when you just have to accept the fact that you are wrong. I had to do it with my religion.

Does restricting peoples right to decide to be together with anyone they choose honestly seem fair and righteous to you?

As a wise man once said,"If you still hate gay people you are an ignorant dinosaur"

Its the 21st century. Grow the fuck up.
 

UnmotivatedSlacker

New member
Mar 12, 2010
443
0
0
Good for them finally doing the right thing. Gay people are just like everyone else and deserve to have the same rights. Also anyone who is against gay marriage, I want to you to justify this to me. And it can't boil down to "because god said so" or "I just don't like it." These are horrible reasons to deny people rights.
 

HolyMoogle

New member
Aug 5, 2010
22
0
0
aquailiz said:
This is exactly the view I have on the subject. Personal opinions aside, I believe gay people go out of their way to draw attention on themselves sometimes.

Personal opinions now... I'm also sickened by the many other people who title themselves as superior because their views agree with the current progressive thinking. Not only so, many other people even undermine and denigrate the idea of rejecting gay marriage. Surely, rulings such as these determine progress towards certain viewpoints, however, these viewpoints are not necessarily the most beneficial. Progress towards a direction does not always mean progress towards the correct direction. I believe many people here that post would receive a great deal of moderation if they even dared to call a "bigot" someone who openly supported gay marriage. Nevertheless, gay marriage supporters put down negative comments like these against the "public" that does not support their ideas. I don't believe in conservative and liberal ideologies, certainly, all differing ideas are just that, different.

I am a person who has studied and even given hour-long talks and informational sessions about the concept of homosexuality. I'll have to admit it is quite easy for the public to speculate and generate opinion about the matter by listening to what the media says and what "leading" opinion-makers discourse, gay people included. I would even say the general public does not a concrete, solid idea on what the matter really deals with. I have read probably too many scientific articles and research papers on the matter. I have spoken and conversed with gay people, I have dealt with them and even recently had a gay roommate. I read and studied the works of psychologists, sociologists, and doctors who specialized in defining what homosexuality really is, and I'll have to admit it is easy to spot others who do not have a broad depth of knowledge on the subject.

What I intended with the previous paragraph was to show that I am not just blabbering off with my opinion. I try to keep my thoughts as unbiased as possible on this matter, mostly because some people can be sensitive towards it, and because in order to fully understand a debatable subject, you have to know both sides of the story.

Homosexuality, in my opinion, is not normal. It is natural, if by natural you mean that nature "allows it" and that it occurs in nature. In addition, it is not close to being the majority. From what I have studied, it is a deeply intricate problem of the human psyche; which has been recently worsened by society. Do note that even though a problem does not interfere with a person's ability to perform well in society, this does not mean the problem itself is not there. Of course the APA declared it was not a mental disorder, but the circumstances and history surrounding that council are sketchy at best. In recent times, numerous sociological processes began to exacerbate the condition. It became a statement to be gay. Gay people were persecuted, incriminated, and martyred. However, during the modern era of telecommunications and globalization, these processes were not controlled in the least, but rather exaggerated. It is through society that being gay has become a problem, and because of the kind of society that we live in, it has become a problem to even try to revert it. Now gay people who try to become straight are persecuted! Gay people now hear that they must embrace their condition and accept it; they must flaunt it, even if it is discreetly. If they have homosexual urges, they must be true to themselves and choose to follow them. Of course there is a lot more to this, but that is the main idea.

Basically, to me, someone who considers himself a homosexual is no different as a person as someone who has ADD.

I also find it pointless to declare that gay people are more successful, productive, competitive, safe, open, intelligent, and more beneficial to society. Why? Because nothing less is expected. Just because they are gay they should not receive any spotlight or special attention. They should be as good members of society as everyone else is. They are not crippled in any way, they are not physically ill in any way, they are not handicapped in any way (from being homosexuals), and thus, they should perform as well or better than any other member of society. Many people approach the issue and set up "Gay vs. Straight" comparisons, but I'm sure if they had looked far enough, they would have found even more straight people that perform just as well or better than gay people.

In conclusion, I would have to remind (and thank) any kind reader who actually finished reading my post, that this is my opinion. I think it is an educated opinion due to the amount of background that I have personally studied and dealt with. I would also like to say that this is an issue that deals with more areas than the ones presently discussed. I would also encourage people to educate themselves and study this subject further and deeper before formulating opinions of their own, and to search the truth within this topic rather than listen to the media and society and generate opinions from it.
I think the fundamental problem with this is that you're reducing people's relationships to an academic analysis. Aside from a few vague references to 'conversing' or rooming with gay people, it doesn't appear to me as though you really know or understand any. Your statements about flaunting suggest a predisposition to homosexuality as it is presented by cable news networks; ie, reduced to colorful shots of parades with the underlying menace of an agenda out to draw ever more people into its web.

This post... it almost reminds me early and rudimentary exercises in anthropology where European scholars would analyze 'native tribes' and such from afar, exoticising them and feeling unduly dazzled/threatened/impressed/uncomfortable with any perceived difference. Then, once in a while, one would go off and 'live' with these tribes for a year to understand their ways, oblivious to the fact that they really didn't know the first thing about them.

From the outside looking in, anything can seem strange. Some gay people might 'flaunt', most will not. But beneath such veneers are... ordinary people. Ordinary, boring, wonderful people.
 

MongoBaer

New member
Jun 17, 2010
41
0
0
Ok here's my two cents.

I sure I'll be corrected but what is the leagle differences between tradional (in a church) mariage verses a civil(done by a city clerk/judge)?

I mean their both leagle, right?

IMO this isn't a matter of civil rights but more a case of demaning specifiic benefits under the law. As a point of refernce, I had a pair of straight friends get married in a civil service. It's my understanding that they're just as married as if they did it in a church.

IMO this is a case of the militant gay community DEMANDING recoginition/validation while being able to REJECT the same to others. "You HAVE TO RESPECT me but I DON'T HAVE RESPECT you."