ATTENTION, ALL READ ... please.

[Atlantians]

The Supreme Courts job is to define what is and is not constitutional and that is exactly what they did so they in no way overstepped their bounds...

The California Constitution didn't say anything I am aware of about Marriage.

...as you have done by proposing to change the constitution to reflect your own ignorance and bias.

How is a legal and entirely Constitutional action of a Free people in voting into law an issue they feel strongly about in any way stepping over any bounds?

 

[OphidiaPhile]

The California Constitution didn't say anything I am aware of about Marriage.


How is a legal and entirely Constitutional action of a Free people in voting into law an issue they feel strongly about in any way stepping over any bounds?

CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION
ARTICLE 1 DECLARATION OF RIGHTS


SECTION 1. All people are by nature free and independent and have
inalienable rights. Among these are enjoying and defending life and
liberty, acquiring, possessing, and protecting property, and pursuing
and obtaining safety, happiness, and privacy.



You cannot take away a persons civil rights and since Marriage is a civil not religious matter you lose.




Civil and political rights are a class of rights ensuring things such as the protection of peoples' physical integrity; procedural fairness in law; protection from discrimination based on gender, religion, race, sexual orientation, etc; individual freedom of belief, speech, association, and the press; and political participation


Noun
civil rights (uncountable)
(law) Those rights which are considered to be unquestionable; deserved by all people under all circumstances, especially without regard to race, creed, color or gender.

 

[Atlantians]

CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION
ARTICLE 1 DECLARATION OF RIGHTS


SECTION 1. All people are by nature free and independent and have
inalienable rights. Among these are enjoying and defending life and
liberty, acquiring, possessing, and protecting property, and pursuing
and obtaining safety, happiness, and privacy.

You cannot take away a persons civil rights and since Marriage is a civil not religious matter you lose.

Marriage isn't a civil right defined in the Constitution or any law.

It is neither religious exclusively or Civil exclusively.
It is an independent institution.

There is no 'right' to partake in an independent institution with a specific and historic set of parameters.

 

[OphidiaPhile]

Marriage isn't a civil right defined in the Constitution or any law.

It is neither religious exclusively or Civil exclusively.
It is an independent institution.

There is no 'right' to partake in an independent institution with a specific and historic set of parameters.

Only you Christians have tried to set a group of parameters bu the fact is that marriage just as any other social contract is fluid in nature. It is a civil right because you are defining a social group that cannot partake in a social construct at your whim, you have no justification for it and the SC agrees.

 

[katautumn]

The fact remains that you are misrepresented what ocured.

The court overstepped its authority.

The courts also "overstepped its authority" when they abolished slavery, decriminalized interracial marriages, allowed women the right to vote and integrated the schools despite fierce majority opposition.

Invalidate marriages that were invalid anyway because the court overstepped its authority.

Would you be so nonchalant about the issue if it were your marriage being made null and void due to a majority vote in your state?

No, that must be achieved in other ways.

Picking on gays and lesbians was just a fun little distraction then?

Defining it as it has always defined to prevent it from passing into meaninglessness is not 'taking away a right'.

So same-sex couples being on equal footing with a straight married couple makes the heterosexual's marriage "meaningless"?

It did exactly that.

Actually if you guys want to get really nitpicky about "traditional marriage", then you need to make it mandatory that couples are betrothed as some sort of business transaction between two fathers. Oh, and your parents have to watch as you consummate your marriage at the age of, oh say, twelve.

 

[Atlantians]

Only you Christians have tried to set a group of parameters bu the fact is that marriage just as any other social contract is fluid in nature. It is a civil right because you are defining a social group that cannot partake in a social construct at your whim, you have justification for it and the SC agrees.

Define marriage as you think it should be defined.

The courts also "overstepped its authority" when they abolished slavery,

The courts did not. Abraham Lincoln (Executive Branch) declared Slavery abolished in the Emancipation Proclamation as a policy of the Union in order to weaken the Confederacy.

Slavery was abolished in the 13th and 14th Amendments to the United States Constitution. The courts had no part in it.

decriminalized interracial marriages,

There is no basis in history for 'race' being a determining factor in the validity of marriages.

allowed women the right to vote

The 19th Amendment to the United States Constitution did that, not the courts.

and integrated the schools despite fierce majority opposition.

Non-integration was a violation of the 14th Amendment.

Would you be so nonchalant about the issue if it were your marriage being made null and void due to a majority vote in your state?

My future marriage would conform to the historic definition of marriage.

Picking on gays and lesbians was just a fun little distraction then?

How exactly does saying that reducing the divorce rate was not the goal of Prop 8 warrant that viral response?

So same-sex couples being on equal footing with a straight married couple makes the heterosexual's marriage "meaningless"?

Define marriage, as you see it, please.

Actually if you guys want to get really nitpicky about "traditional marriage", then you need to make it mandatory that couples are betrothed as some sort of business transaction between two fathers.

That is a marriage custom which resides far outsid of its definition.

Oh, and your parents have to watch as you consummate your marriage at the age of, oh say, twelve.

No idea where you got that idea from.

 

[OphidiaPhile]

Define marriage as you think it should be defined.


The courts did not. Abraham Lincoln (Executive Branch) declared Slavery abolished in the Emancipation Proclamation as a policy of the Union in order to weaken the Confederacy.

Slavery was abolished in the 13th and 14th Amendments to the United States Constitution. The courts had no part in it.

There is no basis in history for 'race' being a determining factor in the validity of marriages.

The 19th Amendment to the United States Constitution did that, not the courts.

Non-integration was a violation of the 14th Amendment.

My future marriage would conform to the historic definition of marriage.

How exactly does saying that reducing the divorce rate was not the goal of Prop 8 warrant that viral response?

Define marriage, as you see it, please.

That is a marriage custom which resides far outsid of its definition.

No idea where you got that idea from.

Define marriage as you think it should be defined.


Marriage does not need a definition, it a social contract between two people just as a bill of sale is, the definition is up to the couple involved not you or I.

 

[Atlantians]

Define marriage as you think it should be defined.

Marriage does not need a definition, it a social contract between two people just as a bill of sale is, the definition is up to the couple involved not you or I.

By saying it is "a social contract between two people just as a bill of sale is" you are defining it and thus contradicting the point of your sentence. Please try again.

Also, please tell me if you support polygamy.

 

[katautumn]

I support polygamy. I could honestly care less how consenting adults choose to live and take care of one another financially. The only form of polygamy I do not support are situations in which minors are sold off to the highest bidder for the sole reason of producing more children for the husband. It should always be between consenting adults.

 

[WatersMoon110]

The number of reports would be half the number of posts!

Because you would only report half of the rule breaking post you'd see? Why?

The post I just linked breaks four rules alone, and the signature of its poster breaks two more, yet the post--and the poster--still stand!

I'll agree with you that calling the Bible "that cursed book" probably counts as breaking the CF to "respect Christianity". But I don't see any other violations, let alone three others. What do you feel they are?

I do love that instead of reporting your concerns you choose to post them here and whine about how unfair the Mods are. However, I would state that there are plenty of people that feel that the Christians on CF get a "free ride" and aren't reprimanded by the Mods who only punish the Atheists, to convince me that the Mods act fairly.

I think that sometimes people on both "sides" who get their posts changed, deleted or are punished for their actions get upset and would rather blame the Mods of being unfair to them than admit that they made some mistakes and instead try to act better in the future.

Have you considered thinking about what Jesus would do?

 

[stan1980]

Of course, Athene is telling us nothing but nonsense here. She claims, as this post attests, that Proposition 8 supporters such as myself should not be subject to the abuses by the gay community yet we have faced nothing but abuses on this forum by them. "Report their posts!" you say, but we all know that will do no good. The number of reports would be half the number of posts!

I assert that Athene in fact seems to serve the secular community on this message board,a t the expense of the Christian minority. Proof is in the fact that she gave me a 48-hour 'cool off' ban, yet still allows the Christian persecutors to flagrantly violate every stated rule in CF's rulebook, including statements by some posters that the Bible is a "cursed book" as read in this post.
The post I just linked breaks four rules alone, and the signature of its poster breaks two more, yet the post--and the poster--still stand!

That's how Athene is really moderating this forum gentlemen. She is not policing the rules as she should, but is selectively moderating. Post offenses against Christian beliefs and you will be more than welcome, but post anything that the Christian stands for and you will see the 48-hour ban.
This is the only rule we should follow...

Although I think you're a bit out of order sometimes, I wouldn't have personally wanted to get rid of any of your posts, but I can certainly see why the moderators felt the need to. I'm amazed if you can't see why. And just for the record, I've had tonnes of posts deleted, so I don't think it is as one sided as you'd like to think it is.

I think you need to stop crying a bit too.

 

[WatersMoon110]

I've had tonnes of posts deleted, so I don't think it is as all one sided as you'd like to think it is.

But you've been able to deal with it, because you are a Real Man. *grin*

Aren't tonnes lighter than tons? So if a RWAer has had tons of posts deleted, their posts are heavier than yours. *wink*

 

[Gishin]

Cry more.

 

[stan1980]

But you've been able to deal with it, because you are a Real Man. *grin*

Aren't tonnes lighter than tons? So if a RWAer has had tons of posts deleted, their posts are heavier than yours. *wink*

Yes, well I didn't want people to think I was exaggerating or anything!

 

[Sitswithamouse]

Of course, Athene is telling us nothing but nonsense here. She claims, as this post attests, that Proposition 8 supporters such as myself should not be subject to the abuses by the gay community yet we have faced nothing but abuses on this forum by them. "Report their posts!" you say, but we all know that will do no good. The number of reports would be half the number of posts!

I assert that Athene in fact seems to serve the secular community on this message board,a t the expense of the Christian minority. Proof is in the fact that she gave me a 48-hour 'cool off' ban, yet still allows the Christian persecutors to flagrantly violate every stated rule in CF's rulebook, including statements by some posters that the Bible is a "cursed book" as read in this post.
The post I just linked breaks four rules alone, and the signature of its poster breaks two more, yet the post--and the poster--still stand!

That's how Athene is really moderating this forum gentlemen. She is not policing the rules as she should, but is selectively moderating. Post offenses against Christian beliefs and you will be more than welcome, but post anything that the Christian stands for and you will see the 48-hour ban.
This is the only rule we should follow...

I've had warnings for posts I've written and been reported.

You are not the only one.
In all fairness Athene is trying to do her best to abide by the rules and in in no way have I seen any of her posts as being biased towards non christians or christians alike.

In all fairness Athene is doing a great job at moderating in a fair way.

 

[cantata]

I've had warnings for posts I've written and been reported.

You are not the only one.
In all fairness Athene is trying to do her best to abide by the rules and in in no way have I seen any of her posts as being biased towards non christians or christians alike.

In all fairness Athene is doing a great job at moderating in a fair way.

Agree.

 

[Polycarp_fan]

I support polygamy. I could honestly care less how consenting adults choose to live and take care of one another financially. The only form of polygamy I do not support are situations in which minors are sold off to the highest bidder for the sole reason of producing more children for the husband. It should always be between consenting adults.

We already have polygamy of a sort in common practice in society. It's called either: Baby Momma, Baby-Daddy or Playa, now.

One guy with twenty babies from 17 different women. Ever watch Maurie Povich? Or view the lives of Hollywood actors?

But who gets to pay for and raise these babies?

Tax payers that have either no children, or decent families of their own.

Ah progressive morality.

Here we Rome again.

 

[OphidiaPhile]

It is one-sided though! Contrary to popular belief, the non-Christian majority see little moderation on their posting activities, and the more foul the posting from them, the more the Christian minority gets moderated!
Take my situation as an example. Nobody here realistically believes I did anything deserving of a ban, yet I received the ban. The secular majority unrelentingly calls us 'bigots' and 'arrogant', yet they receive little moderation. Since the moderator is a secular heathen, does this not tell you something?
Does it not tell you that we as the Christian minority are being unfairly discriminated against? Yet that <the word 'pervert' removed by F/F> Athene cries discrimination as we cast our vote in favor of Prop 8!!! How dare she cry about a perceived discrimination of legislative matters, then immediately log on here and proceed to voraciously discriminate against the Christians! And on a Christian message board, no less!

A Christian calling the homosexual a "pervert" is somewhat derogatory. Likewise, the homosexual calling a Christian a "bogot" is just as derogatory. The former means "a person who practices sexual perversion", which is the non-heterosexual. Derogatory nonetheless. The latter means "a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices", which is the Christian. Derogatory, nonetheless.
Yet I have had posts removed because it contained the word 'pervert' in it, yet Athene never deletes posts from the secular people when they call Christians 'bigots'!

I am not calling to have this individual removed, I'm just calling on other Administrators and supporting members to have her stripped of her moderator status.

Pervert or perversion are not at all derogatory in fact many of us are very perverted and it has nothing to do with homosexuality.

Deviant would be a derogatory term to use because of someones sexual propensity.

 

[Athene]

Closing thread for review