Breaking. Prop 8.... struck down.

[g5000]

Who banned blacks from voting, who banned woman from voting???

Someone tell me that??

The states. Thus the need for a federal Constitution and its amendments to protect people from the bigoted mob.

 

[Luissa]

They let California citizens vote on it via direct democracy - they voted against the idea.

TYRANNY...

The Tenth Amendment won...

Our country is going to shit...

I suppose if you don't like a constitutional outcome you find a judge that will take your position..

Every progressive in this country belongs in prison.

If the Democrat FDR can throw the Japanese, communists and Italians in prison then we can throw progressives in prison - using their own Authoritarian logic...

The Libertarian wants to tell others who they are allowed to fall in love with

The Libertarian wants government in your bedroom

Love is not a valid argument dumb ass.

Why not? If two consenting adults who love each other want to get married, why prevent that? I don't want to hear that it will then pave the way to people marrying children etc, children are not consenting adults.

 

[Harry Dresden]

Basically, people who are not homosexual and who squirm at the very idea of homosexual sex got to vote on what rights should be extended to homosexuals

so did the people who are gay and those who dont squirm at the idea of Homosexual Marriage....and in this State i would think they outnumber the Anti-Gay Marriage people by a decent margin.....obviously many Democrats/Liberals out here told the gays one thing and then voted no.....

The Democratic Party is just as homophobic as the Republican Party. This is one of the few areas where the spirit of bipartisanship still survives.

If the Democratic Party was not homophobic, both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama would have jumped on the gay marriage bandwa-, er, wait, there was no bandwagon.

See what I mean?

hey i said this before about the parties......Republican Party says to the gays faces....."no,we are against gay marriage".....the Democrtic Party says....."hey we are with you".....but as soon as they are voting its....."yea,gay Marriage my ass".....and yet the Gays overwhelmingly stick with the Democrats.....even though they lie to their faces.....

 

[Katzndogz]

They aren't consenting adults today. That's nothing more than an arbitrary written law. Change it.

 

[Steelplate]

Conservatives call us a REPUBLIC, not a Democracy because a Constitutional Republic protects the minority from the majority...EXCEPT, when the minority is a group that Conservatives don't like.

Then, they like a good ol fashioned Mob Rule Democracy.... I wish they'd make up their minds.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

BUT you should not be allowed to marry your sibling right? Even if both of you are adults and it is consensual? And since multiple marriage is illegal when do you plan to protest THAT violation ( according to your theory) of their Civil Rights?

Incest causes harm. And I have outlined the harm caused by polygamy.

So your comparison of these harmful practices to harmless gay relationships is illogical.

You have proven absolutely nothing, you have made a couple statements without evidence, fact or links to back up your claims. Incest between consenting adults causes WHAT harm? What you mean is the ICK factor is to high for your sensibilities. As for multiple marriages the argument has been that love trumps all and is a civil right. Again you have an ick factor so have no problem regulating that away.

 

[Mr.Nick]

Who banned blacks from voting, who banned woman from voting???

Someone tell me that??

The states. Thus the need for a federal Constitution and its amendments to protect people from the bigoted mob.

Tenth Amendment..

Not to mention the states didn't have the legal right to oppress in the first place.

It's "we the people" not "we the white men."

 

[RetiredGySgt]

The Libertarian wants to tell others who they are allowed to fall in love with

The Libertarian wants government in your bedroom

Love is not a valid argument dumb ass.

Why not? If two consenting adults who love each other want to get married, why prevent that? I don't want to hear that it will then pave the way to people marrying children etc, children are not consenting adults.

Any two consenting adults? And why only 2? So you support incest between consenting adults?

 

[g5000]

BUT you should not be allowed to marry your sibling right? Even if both of you are adults and it is consensual? And since multiple marriage is illegal when do you plan to protest THAT violation ( according to your theory) of their Civil Rights?

Incest causes harm. And I have outlined the harm caused by polygamy.

So your comparison of these harmful practices to harmless gay relationships is illogical.

You have proven absolutely nothing, you have made a couple statements without evidence, fact or links to back up your claims. Incest between consenting adults causes WHAT harm? What you mean is the ICK factor is to high for your sensibilities. As for multiple marriages the argument has been that love trumps all and is a civil right. Again you have an ick factor so have no problem regulating that away.

You need evidence incest cause harm? Are you that out of touch? You are unware of the genetic abnormalities which result?

 

[g5000]

Geez, some people will feign incredible levels of stupidty and ignorance to defend their logical fallacies.

Inbreeding is the reproduction from the mating of two genetically related parents. Inbreeding results in increased homozygosity, which can increase the chances of offspring being affected by recessive or deleterious traits. This generally leads to a decreased fitness of a population, which is called inbreeding depression.

Livestock breeders often practice controlled breeding to eliminate undesirable characteristics within a population, which is also coupled with culling of what is considered unfit offspring, especially when trying to establish a new and desirable trait in the stock.

Inbreeding may result in a far higher phenotypic expression of deleterious recessive genes within a population than would normally be expected.[1] As a result, first-generation inbred individuals are more likely to show physical and health defects, including:

Reduced fertility both in litter size and sperm viability
Increased genetic disorders
Fluctuating facial asymmetry
Lower birth rate
Higher infant mortality
Slower growth rate
Smaller adult size
Loss of immune system function

Inbreeding - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Plenty of scientific publication cites at the bottom of the link.

 

[Mr.Nick]

The Libertarian wants to tell others who they are allowed to fall in love with

The Libertarian wants government in your bedroom

Love is not a valid argument dumb ass.

Why not? If two consenting adults who love each other want to get married, why prevent that? I don't want to hear that it will then pave the way to people marrying children etc, children are not consenting adults.

Marriage has nothing to do with love...

Legal documents can't love one another....

That is some of the dumbest shit ever...

Marriage is a legal document and idea - in the US at least.

 

[Katzndogz]

There is no doubt that we will follow Europe and Scandanavia into a wholly depraved sexually licentious culture. If islam lets us live that long.

 

[g5000]

so did the people who are gay and those who dont squirm at the idea of Homosexual Marriage....and in this State i would think they outnumber the Anti-Gay Marriage people by a decent margin.....obviously many Democrats/Liberals out here told the gays one thing and then voted no.....

The Democratic Party is just as homophobic as the Republican Party. This is one of the few areas where the spirit of bipartisanship still survives.

If the Democratic Party was not homophobic, both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama would have jumped on the gay marriage bandwa-, er, wait, there was no bandwagon.

See what I mean?

hey i said this before about the parties......Republican Party says to the gays faces....."no,we are against gay marriage".....the Democrtic Party says....."hey we are with you".....but as soon as they are voting its....."yea,gay Marriage my ass".....and yet the Gays overwhelmingly stick with the Democrats.....even though they lie to their faces.....

During the 2008 primaries, the GOP and Democratic candidates gave IDENTICAL answers to the gay marriage question. They supported "civil unions" on the state level. Which is not equality as long as the federal government refuses to give them cash and prizes, too.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Incest causes harm. And I have outlined the harm caused by polygamy.

So your comparison of these harmful practices to harmless gay relationships is illogical.

You have proven absolutely nothing, you have made a couple statements without evidence, fact or links to back up your claims. Incest between consenting adults causes WHAT harm? What you mean is the ICK factor is to high for your sensibilities. As for multiple marriages the argument has been that love trumps all and is a civil right. Again you have an ick factor so have no problem regulating that away.

You need evidence incest cause harm? Are you that out of touch? You are unware of the genetic abnormalities which result?

Not a valid argument. You see Our government allows people with KNOWN defects to marry, defects that have as higher or higher chance of occurring as 100 percent. We don't even tst for them. 1st Generation birth defects and abnormalities do not occur much at all among family members, I believe a read something like a 1 percent chance of it occurring.

Since we do not weed out KNOWN defects why would possible defects by family members be a problem? After all the argument is that LOVE trumps all and that marrying is a Civil Right and can not be denied to two consenting adults.

 

[Harry Dresden]

As soon as you ask someone else to consider your "marriage" normal, legal and binding, you have invited in the the world.

If you think that a photographer should not have the right to decline services for a same sex wedding you have invited in the world. If you think that a counselor is wrong to refuse counseling for same sex couples you have invited in the world. You can't claim that this relationship is private just between two people AND want the right to browbeat everyone else into accepting it.

did you know i was married?.....outside of those who knew me.....i seriously doubt if the WORLD knew i was married or could care less.....

Then you too would uphold the rights of anyone to decline services to another for any reason whatsoever?

i thought we were talking about gay Marriage?.....

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Geez, some people will feign incredible levels of stupidty and ignorance to defend their logical fallacies.

Inbreeding is the reproduction from the mating of two genetically related parents. Inbreeding results in increased homozygosity, which can increase the chances of offspring being affected by recessive or deleterious traits. This generally leads to a decreased fitness of a population, which is called inbreeding depression.

Livestock breeders often practice controlled breeding to eliminate undesirable characteristics within a population, which is also coupled with culling of what is considered unfit offspring, especially when trying to establish a new and desirable trait in the stock.

Inbreeding may result in a far higher phenotypic expression of deleterious recessive genes within a population than would normally be expected.[1] As a result, first-generation inbred individuals are more likely to show physical and health defects, including:

Reduced fertility both in litter size and sperm viability
Increased genetic disorders
Fluctuating facial asymmetry
Lower birth rate
Higher infant mortality
Slower growth rate
Smaller adult size
Loss of immune system function

Inbreeding - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Plenty of scientific publication cites at the bottom of the link.

And if you are worried about the health of a society why would you allow gays to marry? They can NOT BREED at all.

Once again as a society and as a Government we do not test for nor prevent people with KNOWN defects from marrying or breeding, why suddenly is a little in family breeding a problem? I mean after all what would the percentage of siblings marrying be? And what are the chances their offspring would marry and breed with each other?

You have no argument.

 

[DiamondDave]

Who cares if it is genetic or a personal choice?

If you are in love with someone of your own sex you should be allowed to marry them if you CHOOSE........just like anyone else

Because we are allowed to accept or not accept the choices of others without having government force it upon us.... hence why government should be out of the choices of 'marriage' except for things revolving around government such as taxes, inheritance, etc...

You have the right not to accept the behavior of others... you don't have to hire a person who chooses the have facial tattoos or who openly participates in satanic rituals... you don't have to rent your available room out to someone who does not meet behavior that is compatible with yours

And that is the thing here.... have the freedom to choose whomever you wish to be with, file a tax return with them, pass on your worldly possessions, make medical decisions when they are in a coma... fine.. great... but do not use government to force your choice upon the freedoms of others...

being yellow skinned or brown eyes or male or a dwarf or whatever is not a choice and should not be subject to rejection (unless you are a paraplegic applying to paint houses or crap that is that obvious).... a pattern or history of behavior and/or choice can be subject to the freedom of others to accept that behavior or not

I agree that government should be out of the marriage business. But if they are going to extend legal privileges to one group they must extend it equally to all. If they recognize marriage for taxes, survivor benefits, life and death decisions for heterosexuals......they must do the same for homosexuals

The government shouldnt be telling you who you are allowed to love

I never said they should

And I have also continually called for marriage out of government since I have been on here

 

[Mr.Nick]

You have proven absolutely nothing, you have made a couple statements without evidence, fact or links to back up your claims. Incest between consenting adults causes WHAT harm? What you mean is the ICK factor is to high for your sensibilities. As for multiple marriages the argument has been that love trumps all and is a civil right. Again you have an ick factor so have no problem regulating that away.

You need evidence incest cause harm? Are you that out of touch? You are unware of the genetic abnormalities which result?

Not a valid argument. You see Our government allows people with KNOWN defects to marry, defects that have as higher or higher chance of occurring as 100 percent. We don't even tst for them. 1st Generation birth defects and abnormalities do not occur much at all among family members, I believe a read something like a 1 percent chance of it occurring.

Since we do not weed out KNOWN defects why would possible defects by family members be a problem? After all the argument is that LOVE trumps all and that marrying is a Civil Right and can not be denied to two consenting adults.

Charles Darwin was a product of inbreeding... Ironic eh?

 

[CaughtInTheMid]

Here are some of the arguments used against allowing interracial marriage. Recognize any of them??






Here are four of the arguments they used:

1) First, judges claimed that marriage belonged under the control of the states rather than the federal government.

2) Second, they began to define and label all interracial relationships (even longstanding, deeply committed ones) as illicit sex rather than marriage.

3) Third, they insisted that interracial marriage was contrary to God's will, and

4) Fourth, they declared, over and over again, that interracial marriage was somehow "unnatural."

On this fourth point--the supposed "unnaturality" of interracial marriage--judges formed a virtual chorus. Here, for example, is the declaration that the Supreme Court of Virginia used to invalidate a marriage between a black man and a white woman in 1878:

The purity of public morals," the court declared, "the moral and physical development of both races….require that they should be kept distinct and separate… that connections and alliances so unnatural that God and nature seem to forbid them, should be prohibited by positive law, and be subject to no evasion.

The fifth, and final, argument judges would use to justify miscegenation law was undoubtedly the most important; it used these claims that interracial marriage was unnatural and immoral to find a way around the Fourteenth Amendment's guarantee of "equal protection under the laws." How did judges do this? They insisted that because miscegenation laws punished both the black and white partners to an interracial marriage, they affected blacks and whites "equally." This argument, which is usually called the equal application claim, was hammered out in state supreme courts in the late 1870s, endorsed by the United States Supreme Court in 1882, and would be repeated by judges for the next 85 years.

 

[EriktheRed]

It was expected the three judge panel are the three MOST liberal on the bench. Still one voted for Prop 8. The issue wll go to an en banc hearing next. Which is merely a formality. It was always going to end up in front of the Supreme Court.

Prop 8 will probably be struck down in its entirety eventually. It is part of the general trend toward degeneracy. If there was a reversal of direction now, that would be a surprise as the whole of the culture is moving on the path toward even more depravity.

Degeneracy... really?


How long was that nice hetro couple....what was her name.... Kim Kardashian....married?

Really.

If you are looking at me to say that Kim Kardashian's marriage wasn't a sham and a travesty you are looking in the wrong place. But then again, I did say that the whole culture was on a path to depravity A culture that normalizes same sex marriage should be expected to normalize Kardashian type marriages too.

What do you mean "normalize Kardashian type marriages"? That kind of marriage is already legal.