Proposition 8 in California must pass!

[The Madcap]

One of the reasons it's hard for kids to have homosexual parents is because of the horrible prejudice people have towards homosexuals. The proposition will do nothing to eliminate this wrong prejudice.

(In my opinion) Never once has a good reason for why gay marriage should be banned has been put out there. That's because all of these reasons are a rationalization to cover up the prejudice people have towards gay people. All of the reasons are just to cover up how ****ed up someone is that they don't want someone to have their rights because of prejudice.

I'm sure a lot of you are thinking "Well, marriage is by definition between a man and a woman."

First off, that wrongly assumes that there is one rock solid semantic definition of marriage. There isn't. Marriage has been in many religions, defined numerous times, and why it's inconceivable that to homosexuals could get married never made sense to me. Secondly, why can't two people of the same sex get married? Who is getting harmed by to people of the same sex getting married? Nobody. But banning gay marriage creates victims. Banning gay marriage strongly implies that homosexuals do not deserve all of the rights of heterosexuals, and denying them civil unions is even worse. There is nothing wrong with being homosexual.

People say that marriage is a holy religious union between a man and a woman (the really ****ed up people say "It was Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve"). Marriage has existed in numerous religions. And if a certain religion forbids gay marriage, that's the CHURCH's thing to deal with, NOT the Government. Plus, why can't their be secular arrangements of marriages and weddings, etc.? There really is no reason. There are no victims, nobody is harmed. The only reason is people's prejudice, which is a horrible reason.

The thing that really disgusts me isn't the prejudice, but it's the fact that people are so cruel as to let this bias and invalidated opinion lead them to believe homosexuals don't deserve equal rights to heterosexuals. Being against gay rights is no different than being racist. A racist and person who hates homosexuals (we'll call him a gayist for convenience) both have cruel prejudice towards someone that is invalidated. A black man can't choose his skin color, and a gay man can't choose his sexual preference.

 

[dies-l]

I've alluded to the question of divorce and remarriage a couple of times previously. Would someone point out to me the scriptures that approve of remarriage under ANY circumstances other than death? I'm not talking about the conditions for divorce but the conditions for remarriage. It's my understanding that remarriage (scripturally speaking) is a 'no-no' in ALL circumstances other than the death of one of the spouses which THEN, of course, frees up the other party to remarry. Unfaithfulness IS certainly grounds for divorce; however, as long as both original partners are living remarriage would still be considered to be adultery.

Would someone point me to where I'm going wrong on this issue?

If remarriage is impermissible, then what would be the purpose of permissible divorce? (Perhaps to avoid sidetracking this thread, we can discuss on the thread "Should I leave my wife?" on the CP&E Forum.)

 

[Brennin]

We'll see how prop. 8 does. Right now it's heading toward defeat.

Even if it is defeated in the state as a whole, it will not be defeated in all counties. As I wrote previously, my state is not uniform. Nor is the US.

 

[Brennin]

You are entitled to that opinion, but I note that it is only an opinion. Just as it is only my opinion that you are wrong.

My opinion is the informed one. I, for example, would not make the gaff you made below:

So, is it a legitimate use of the commerce clause for a privately owned restaurant to deny service to persons of African descent?

The commerce clause is abused by those who forced businesses to accept customers they do not want to serve.

Or, for the owner of that restaurant to deny the same insurance benefits, say, to the same-sex domestic partner of an employee that another employee's opposite-sex partner receives?

That is perfectly acceptable.

Or, for a country club to deny the same priveleges to a same-sex couple that they extend to a mixed-sex couple?

That is perfectly acceptable.

The best understanding available to us today indicates that homosexuality is an innate orientation that occurs naturally in a minority of the population of every culture and society.

Even if that's true, I don't care.

 

[pgp_protector]

Even if it is defeated in the state as a whole, it will not be defeated in all counties. As I wrote previously, my state is not uniform. Nor is the US.

Doesn't matter about the counties, it's a State issue, not a county issue.

 

[Brennin]

Doesn't matter about the counties, it's a State issue, not a county issue.

No duh. That's not the point.

 

[dies-l]

Even if that's true, I don't care.

Innate orientation or not, it's still just downright icky! (I mean, like, eww, gross, ya know!)

 

[pgp_protector]

No duh. That's not the point.

For the Law it is the point, as the Law will effect the whole state.

 

[Brennin]

And the constitution that governs this country says that EVERYONE is equal. Even members of minorities you don’t like.

Quote the exact language.

 

[Brennin]

For the Law it is the point, as the Law will effect the whole state.

Texas Lynn wrote:

No Massachusetts or California legislator who supported same gender marriage (nor any in Oregon, New Jersey, and Connecticut where same gender marriage was proposed but not yet passed) lost a bid for re-election. Nor did any federal Member of Congress who voted against the Federal marriage amendment. Nor has any judge who ruled for human rights been removed. Thus the evidence is clear the 'will of the people' is for marriage equality. Polls indicate this already. The old heterosexist order is over and human progress marches on.

She glossed over the differences in my state as well as the country as a whole. There is no way the majority in each region of my state supports gay "marriage," let alone each state. If you removed the wretched hive of scum and villainy known as San Francisco, as well as LA and the East Bay, this state would be Republican, and gay "marriage" would not have a snowball's chance.

 

[Brennin]

That's their business. No one else is qualified to judge them.

I agree for the most part, which is why my statement was neutral.

 

[The Madcap]

If I own a business, say, then idiot judges like the four who forced gay "marriage" on us would rule (actually, have ruled) that I have to treat gay "marriages" the same as real marriages. They have no business forcing that nonsense on me or anyone else who disagrees with it.

The whole problem with this argument is that it assumes gay marriage is wrong, nonsensical, etc. It isn't, and the only reason you really give is "Gay marriage shouldn't be allowed because I don't like it." Convincing argument. Unfortunately denying someone their rights simply because you don't like it is a horrible reason to deny someone their rights. What's wrong with homosexual marriages being treated the same as heterosexual marriages?

 

[Caylin]

The whole problem with this argument is that it assumes gay marriage is wrong, nonsensical, etc. It isn't, and the only reason you really give is "Gay marriage shouldn't be allowed because I don't like it." Convincing argument. Unfortunately denying someone their rights simply because you don't like it is a horrible reason to deny someone their rights. What's wrong with homosexual marriages being treated the same as heterosexual marriages?

Because brennin is just like my dad used to be. He feels horrible about himself because he knows what a failure he is, and needs to pick a group of people to rag on so he can feel superior to someone.

Whats the matter brennin, did a gay person beat you up in highschool? Something has to explain your absolute hate on for people who are different from you but dont' impact you in the slightest.

 

[Andreusz]

Don't hold your breath for that apology.

I just love seeing Christianity in action.

 

[Andreusz]

But that is immaterial to this discussion since I do not base my political/governmental/legal opposition to gay "marriage" on the Bible. In fact, not even my moral opposition to gay "marriage" rests solely on the Bible.

What do you base it on, then?

 

[Caylin]

how icky he feels!

 

[Andreusz]

If you removed the wretched hive of scum and villainy known as San Francisco, as well as LA and the East Bay ....

If this isn't a violation of the rules of debate in these threads, then what is? Moderators, could you please do something about this?

 

[Brennin]

Because brennin is just like my dad used to be. He feels horrible about himself because he knows what a failure he is, and needs to pick a group of people to rag on so he can feel superior to someone.

I am certain I am more accomplished than you, so you might want to spin another yarn.

 

[Andreusz]

how icky he feels!

(Off topic: Hi Caylin, glad to see you're back! I hope the op went well!)

 

[Brennin]

If this isn't a violation of the rules of debate in these threads, then what is? Moderators, could you please do something about this?

That Star Wars reference is properly descriptive of San Francisco. I suggest you develop a thicker skin.