Judge overturns CA Proposition 8

[skydivr]

Judge overturns Calif. gay marriage ban - U.S. news - Life - msnbc.com

Heading for appeals court and, most likely, the Supreme Court.

No offense to any members who may be gay, but I'm sorry I take the 'marriage' term very seriously and believe it's solely between a man and a woman.

 

[TDawg]

I agree 100%.

 

[m_ridgeway]

I'm not gay, nor do i believe its right. i tell my son its wrong to be that way. but at the end of the day i dont feel its ok to tell someone i dont know, what they can and cannot do when it has absolutely 0 bearing on my life in any way whatsoever.

 

[kromdom]

oh dear...can we talk about OIL instead?lease:

 

[Acehole]

where's that dang tip toe emoticon?

 

[skydivr]

I'm not gay, nor do i believe its right. i tell my son its wrong to be that way. but at the end of the day i dont feel its ok to tell someone i dont know, what they can and cannot do when it has absolutely 0 bearing on my life in any way whatsoever.

I would tend to agree. However, it's the point where it's "0 bearing on your live in any way whatsever" that causes my issue. I don't mind 'civil union' but I believe the sacrement of marriage should be special and the difference retained.

 

[skydivr]

where's that dang tip toe emoticon?

I am aware Ace that this is controversial and I've tried to be as respectful of other's differing opinions as possible in my posting. If you feel it's too controversial that taking it down to keep the peace is certainly an option.

 

[RussellJ]

Im just tired of arguing with people how its wrong and why the hell they need to raise such big hell about them needing to be married. I think its just for attention on them. Lovely liberal army backing them

 

[Busa1166]

I would tend to agree. However, it's the point where it's "0 bearing on your live in any way whatsever" that causes my issue. I don't mind 'civil union' but I believe the sacrement of marriage should be special and the difference retained.

Don't understand you mean it should be ok for them to get married as long as it's in a courthouse not a church???

I think they should be able to get married why should us hetro's should be the only ones to suffer Let em have it after a few horrible divorces they will ban it an we can get rid of it all together for everyone no more alimony for anyone

Legal or not I don't see them getting married in a catholic church

Outside the federal courthouse in San Francisco, a cheer went up among a group of about 70 same-sex marriage supporters carrying small U.S. flags, as a large rainbow-striped flag — the symbol of the gay rights movement — waved overhead.

140 people thats it??? In San Francisco???

 

[Blckbrd]

If and when it gets to the US Supreme Court, I wonder how our (disdainfully anticipated) newest appointee will interpret our Constitution? Traditionally or transformationally? Liberal female lesbian Kagan ... hmmmm?

What ever happened to state sovereignty? Oh yeah - Lincoln.

 

[m_ridgeway]

Don't understand you mean it should be ok for them to get married as long as it's in a courthouse not a church???

I think they should be able to get married why should us hetro's should be the only ones to suffer Let em have it after a few horrible divorces they will ban it an we can get rid of it all together for everyone no more alimony for anyone

Legal or not I don't see them getting married in a catholic church

x2

 

[skydivr]

Don't understand you mean it should be ok for them to get married as long as it's in a courthouse not a church???

I think they should be able to get married why should us hetro's should be the only ones to suffer Let em have it after a few horrible divorces they will ban it an we can get rid of it all together for everyone no more alimony for anyone

Legal or not I don't see them getting married in a catholic church




140 people thats it??? In San Francisco???

What I mean is that if they want to be together, and have some document that says they've made that committment, so be it, but I don't think it should carry the term or legal/moral weight of the sacrament of marriage.

 

[m_ridgeway]

What I mean is that if they want to be together, and have some document that says they've made that committment, so be it, but I don't think it should carry the term or legal/moral weight of the sacrament of marriage.

but thats the problem its just your belief. you want everyone else to believe like you.

 

[skydivr]

but thats the problem its just your belief. you want everyone else to believe like you.

Sure, what's the problem?

Seriously, not just my belief's, but the belief system this country was founded upon and has done pretty good with.

 

[RussellJ]

but thats the problem its just your belief. you want everyone else to believe like you.

Its the homosexual side of wanting to change what has always been. Who are they to change it? Why should everyone else believe what they do? Make their own country if they want to make all the rules and change things

 

[m_ridgeway]

i dont really care enough to know all the specific of the laws on it, but i believe it was legal until made illegal in a court decision right? so we are the ones that changed it.

this country wasnt founded on a religous belief system nor a sexuality one. neither are the topic at hand since nothing on which this country was founded on is implemented today.

if anything this country was founded so you could believe whatever you wanted and not worry about persecution.

this is another case of when people get offended and get all mad. thats all its about is hurt feelings. thats it. us making a big deal about it are really doing the same thing we are accusing the gay crowd of doing. live your own life and quit worrying about what everyone else is doing.

 

[skydivr]

I just wonder how far someone else's civil rights goes before it impinges upon mine...I believe a 'civil union' is a fair balance.

 

[m_ridgeway]

thats the single funniest defense ive ever heard.

how does this affect your civil rights?

 

[theskaz]

We can fix all of this by removing marriage from the govt. Marriage is a religious ceremony.... regardless of the specific religion.


Hell we should get rid of marriage as a species. lets get primal up in here.

 

[PandaNin]

My $.03

1) What bothers me is not the subject of the legislation but that a single individual, who happens to be a judge, can overturn the will of the people. Judge didn't like it so he writes his opinion to vacate a law passed by the voting people. This irks me to no end. One person who was appointed by the President at the time (Reagan), has his job for life and cannot be removed by the people.

2) I also feel marriage is a religious ideology. The government should recognize "civil union" and all couples who declare their intent to be together should file certificates of civil union with the government to get access to those certain benefits afforded appropriately. "Marriage" being a religious institution should continue to be so. If you want to get married in church, great, go for it. But to get access to government benefits (spousal rights, tax deductions, etc.) you have to file civil union. It's not a permit mind you, it's a declaration.

3) The people who stand to benefit the most from this are lawyers. They just increased their pool of divorce opportunity. If you went with my suggestion for civil union the lawyers would still make out good.