Proposition 8 overturned in California

[Skaloop]

Judge Vaughn Walker Hands Victory to Proposition 8 Opponents -- Daily Intel

Text from the ruling:

"Because Proposition 8 is unconstitutional under both the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses, the court orders entry of judgment permanently enjoining its enforcement; prohibiting the official defendants from applying or enforcing Proposition 8 and directing the official defendants that all persons under their control or supervision shall not apply or enforce Proposition 8.""Because Proposition 8 is unconstitutional under both the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses, the court orders entry of judgment permanently enjoining its enforcement; prohibiting the official defendants from applying or enforcing Proposition 8 and directing the official defendants that all persons under their control or supervision shall not apply or enforce Proposition 8."

Of course, there will be appeals, and this is just the first step towards going all the way to SCOTUS, but it gets the ball rolling.

So, now that it's been overturned and ruled unconstitutional, is it ethical or moral to prevent homosexuals from getting married in the state of California?

 

[suzybeezy]

I believe marriage is a gift from God and thus needs to honor God. I do not feel homosexual marriages are unions that God would join together as one. Since the enemy has such a stronghold on the demise of this world, I'm sure at some point homosexual marriages will be recognized by the states, but I strongly believe they will never be recognized as married in the eyes of the Lord. As the Bible instructs "man shall leave his father and mother and cleave to his wife, and the two shall become one," - it doesn't say man shall leave his mother and father and cleave to his husband and the two shall become one - the Bible is clear, not ambiguous.

The California government will do what they need to do to get votes, not what's right and proper before God, which is a shame, imo.

 

[pgp_protector]

It will not effect my marriage in any way.
But until we outlaw All religions but mine, I don't think I can force others to follow all the Laws & Regulations of my religion.

 

[matthewgar]

By your statement there, should that mean that any marriage not at a Christian church shouldn't be allowed? After all muslims, hindu's, and such don't accept your god, so they arn't accepting his gift, but accepting the gift of a false idol?

 

[Skaloop]

I believe marriage is a gift from God and thus needs to honor God. I do not feel homosexual marriages are unions that God would join together as one. Since the enemy has such a stronghold on the demise of this world, I'm sure at some point homosexual marriages will be recognized by the states, but I strongly believe they will never be recognized as married in the eyes of the Lord. As the Bible instructs "man shall leave his father and mother and cleave to his wife, and the two shall become one," - it doesn't say man shall leave his mother and father and cleave to his husband and the two shall become one - the Bible is clear, not ambiguous.

Not according to all the Christians who disagree with you.

The California government will do what they need to do to get votes, not what's right and proper before God, which is a shame, imo.

This was a federal judge's ruling, and has nothing to do with the California State government, other than them having to abide by it.

And Prop 8 was passed by a majority vote (well, a majority of those who voted), so overturning it would not be a good vote-getting technique.

 

[pgp_protector]

By your statement there, should that mean that any marriage not at a Christian church shouldn't be allowed? After all muslims, hindu's, and such don't accept your god, so they arn't accepting his gift, but accepting the gift of a false idol?

If one wants to use the "Biblical" definition as the only valid definition.

 

[matthewgar]

If one wants to use the "Biblical" definition as the only valid definition.

Sorry that was to Suzy not yours Next time I will use quotes, not sure why I didn't.

 

[Drathnor]

Marriage by the state and marriage by religion really should not be connected, what does God have to do with issues of tax and such that are affected by your relationship status?

 

[pgp_protector]

Marriage by the state and marriage by religion really should not be connected, what does God have to do with issues of tax and such that are affected by your relationship status?

But that's too simple of a solution

 

[Hentenza]

So much for the will of the people.

 

[TheBlueBlurr]

First thing I seen once I turned on the TV.

Made my day.

 

[Jase]

I believe marriage is a gift from God and thus needs to honor God. I do not feel homosexual marriages are unions that God would join together as one. Since the enemy has such a stronghold on the demise of this world, I'm sure at some point homosexual marriages will be recognized by the states, but I strongly believe they will never be recognized as married in the eyes of the Lord. As the Bible instructs "man shall leave his father and mother and cleave to his wife, and the two shall become one," - it doesn't say man shall leave his mother and father and cleave to his husband and the two shall become one - the Bible is clear, not ambiguous.

Where does that verse say that a man shall only cleave to his wife? You're taking a verse, specifically used to give an example of divorce, and applying it as an all out condemnation on any other marriage besides that one. As I've already mentioned, same-sex relationships like we have today did not really exist back then and were not well understood. Jesus would not set out an entire section of his teaching, to make a point to allow any type of marriage besides the majority. If the Bible was written to accomodate every little type of nuance that might develop in the future in social, scientific, etc. circumstances, the Bible would not only be prohibitively long, it would unreadable.

Until you show me the verse where Jesus says "A man shall never cleave to another man", your argument is merely what you want to Bible to say, not what it does say.

 

[Wayte]

So much for the will of the people.

It's always been my understanding that the courts are there to ensure the "will of the people" doesn't extend to denying other people basic rights and such. I'm certain if by some travesty a state had managed to legalize baby punching, you would cheer wholeheartedly for the overturning of that law.

 

[Cute Tink]

This is a predictable result. While I think this is a positive result, I think this method is simply turning off potential supporters.

So much for the will of the people.

If the will of the people was to re-institute slavery, would you support the courts turning a blind eye?

 

[pgp_protector]

So much for the will of the people.

Wasn't it once the will of the people that owning slaves was legal ?
Wasn't it once the will of the people that women couldn't vote ?
Wasn't it once the will of the people that only property owners could vote ?

Do you really want to live by only the "will of the people" ?

 

[Jase]

So much for the will of the people.

You mean tyranny of the majority?

This is not a democracy. You have no right to violate the constitution in order inflict your archaic laws on other people.

 

[Jase]

Do you really want to live by only the "will of the people" ?

I know I don't. The "people" aren't intelligent enough as a collective group to make non emotionally based decisions that don't hurt other people. The fact that 2/3rds of Americans can't even name the 3 branches of government or at least 3 members of the Supreme Court, means they certainly have no business voting to deny other people basic human rights.

 

[BigBadWlf]

So much for the will of the people.

So the majority of voters in a given state should be free to reinstate slavery then?

What about interracial marriage? Or de-segregation? or laws protecting the handicapped?

He rights of people, their freedoms’ and equalities are not subject to be voted away at the whim of special interest groups

 

[Hentenza]

<snip>
Do you really want to live by only the "will of the people" ?

I still read "We the people......" in the beginning of the US constitution. I wonder if it should read 'We the people that are the minority but want to stuff it down the throats of the majority.......".

 

[suzybeezy]

Where does that verse say that a man shall only cleave to his wife? You're taking a verse, specifically used to give an example of divorce, and applying it as an all out condemnation on any other marriage besides that one. As I've already mentioned, same-sex relationships like we have today did not really exist back then and were not well understood. Jesus would not set out an entire section of his teaching, to make a point to allow any type of marriage besides the majority. If the Bible was written to accomodate every little type of nuance that might develop in the future in social, scientific, etc. circumstances, the Bible would not only be prohibitively long, it would unreadable.

Until you show me the verse where Jesus says "A man shall never cleave to another man", your argument is merely what you want to Bible to say, not what it does say.

If we go up a bit we have:

"And He answered and said to them, 'Have you not read that He who made them at the beginning 'made them male and female,'"
—Matthew 19:4 (NKJV)
"But from the beginning of the creation, God 'made them male and female.'"
—Mark 10:6 (NKJV)

When Jesus was asked questions about marriage he went straight back to the defining passages in Genesis that say that marriage is between male and female. He saw the creation accounts in Genesis as authoritative. While Jesus did not specifically teach on homosexuality marriage, His establishment of the Genesis passages as the fundamental passages on marriage (even more fundamental than the Law) leaves no doubt as to the outcome.

I do not deny that many homosexuals feel deeply for their partners; however I do assert that no matter how deep the feelings, what they have is not a marriage in God's sight. God will stand as the sole judge of any society that institutes same sex marriages.