Breaking. Prop 8.... struck down.

[g5000]

So if Ralph , an adult, Loves Mary, his adult Sister, and she loves him, and they are denied the right to marry, IS THAT ALSO a Civil Right issue?

How about if John , an adult, loves Mary, Sybil and Rachael, all 3 adults and they love him, if they can not get married is that too a Civil Right?

Or do you ADMIT that the State has a compelling interest in defining what is marriage and who can legally do so?

What if abdul wants to marry his goat, is that a civil right? I guess so in Californacation.

Oh, be careful, progressives would call that the "slippery slope."

It's the slippery slope logical fallacy.

 

[Stephanie]

I don't know why the people in California even bother to vote..they should just let their courts and Government run their lives.

 

[g5000]

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.

In that case, Marriage has nothing to do with sex and nothing to do with having children. It is a legal contract between two consenting adults

So, why shouldn't it apply to adults of the same sex?

Because most people are Christians and under Christianity it is a sin...

Yes, like I said, it always boils down to "I hate fags" or "God hates fags".

 

[rightwinger]

There are genetic reasons why you are a male or female.. there are genetic reasons why you have brown eyes or blue eyes.. there are genetic reasons why your skin is brown or white or yellow or whatever pigment...

There is no proof that there is a genetic cause to being gay or what you are attracted to... while it may not be ENTIRELY correct that it is conscious choice, it can also be based on exposure, experiences, conditions, etc..

just sayin'

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

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 is not legal because of specific genetic risks. What is the specific risk to society of homosexual marriage?

Personally, I don't give a shit about polygamy if it is between consenting adults.

 

[jillian]

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.

In that case, Marriage has nothing to do with sex and nothing to do with having children. It is a legal contract between two consenting adults

So, why shouldn't it apply to adults of the same sex?

Because most people are Christians and under Christianity it is a sin...

perhaps you should go live in a theocracy then. i wasn't aware government is supposed to legislate against sin.

 

[gallantwarrior]

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

Homosexuals didn't get to vote?

Yes we did. Are you saying that if a group is a minority, they just have to suck it up if the majority votes away their civil rights?

OK, I've got no horse in this race, but I am interested in how marriage qualifies as a civil right?

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Why did you bring these up if they are not harmful, Gunny?

You put yourself at a crossroads here. Since you equated gay relationships with incest and polygamy, you either averring to us that they are all harmful, or all not harmful, since you claim they are equal.

Which is it?

I am arguing that YOUR desire to claim Gay marriage is a Civil Right has consequences. I am further pointing out that when people like you claim all that matters is what two consenting adults want you are LYING. You are being a hypocrite.

Further this notion that LOVE is somehow a Civil Right is hilarious.

Also the fact remains when you and your buddies trot out the argument that the Government has no right to be involved in peoples bedrooms you are also lying. You have stated forcefully now over and over you are opposed to Incest among consenting adults and multiple marriages. YOU DO SUPPORT the Government being involved in the Bedroom.

I can almost see the spittle hitting the screen. Now we have strawmen entering the picture.

So let's take this one step at a time, all socratic-like: Would there be anything wrong with making incest legal?

IF as you claim, Gays have a Civil Right to marry, then I see no other possible outcome. IT either is or is not a Civil Right. Same with multiple marriages.

You and all that argue the 2 consenting adults part have seen to it. Exactly WHY can government prevent 3 consenting adults from doing what 2 are allowed? I mean you insist it is a Civil Right. RIGHT?

 

[g5000]

I have no problem with gay marriage, but the people of California voted not to have it in their state. If judges are just going to overturn the will of the people then why vote at all?

More logical fallacies. I'm losing count.

You can vote for Constitutional things without interference all you wish!

I know. Is that a fucking surprise, or what?

What a country!

 

[g5000]

I am arguing that YOUR desire to claim Gay marriage is a Civil Right has consequences. I am further pointing out that when people like you claim all that matters is what two consenting adults want you are LYING. You are being a hypocrite.

Further this notion that LOVE is somehow a Civil Right is hilarious.

Also the fact remains when you and your buddies trot out the argument that the Government has no right to be involved in peoples bedrooms you are also lying. You have stated forcefully now over and over you are opposed to Incest among consenting adults and multiple marriages. YOU DO SUPPORT the Government being involved in the Bedroom.

I can almost see the spittle hitting the screen. Now we have strawmen entering the picture.

So let's take this one step at a time, all socratic-like: Would there be anything wrong with making incest legal?

IF as you claim, Gays have a Civil Right to marry, then I see no other possible outcome. IT either is or is not a Civil Right. Same with multiple marriages.

You and all that argue the 2 consenting adults part have seen to it. Exactly WHY can government prevent 3 consenting adults from doing what 2 are allowed? I mean you insist it is a Civil Right. RIGHT?

We'll put the slippery slope fallacy aside and continue: Would there be anything wrong with making incest legal?

 

[Katzndogz]

Interracial relationships result in children born to the parties who, through no fault of their own are illegetimate. Same sex couples cannot have childen who risk being illegetimate. Even interracial couples have a penis and a vagina. Again you equate skin color with behavior. It is not the same thing at all.

 

[rightwinger]

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.

In that case, Marriage has nothing to do with sex and nothing to do with having children. It is a legal contract between two consenting adults

So, why shouldn't it apply to adults of the same sex?

Because most people are Christians and under Christianity it is a sin...

Hey Libertarian......read your Constitution

 

[gallantwarrior]

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?

What's a Kardshian, and why should anyone care?

 

[Katzndogz]

Good for the gays. Divorce lawyers are celebrating across the Golden State!

Nah, gays have been required to get a divorce ever since civil unions were legalized long ago.

 

[Mr.Nick]

What if abdul wants to marry his goat, is that a civil right? I guess so in Californacation.

Oh, be careful, progressives would call that the "slippery slope."

It's the slippery slope logical fallacy.

It's not a fallacy...

Not when there are crazy people who want to marry their cars, pets, trees etc...

The basis is there and there is evidence to support the notion "individuals" would marry just about anything....

It's NOT a fallacy...

Calling that a fallacy is just a convenient argument - its like calling those who oppose Obamafuck a racist..

 

[RetiredGySgt]

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

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 is not legal because of specific genetic risks. What is the specific risk to society of homosexual marriage?

Personally, I don't give a shit about polygamy if it is between consenting adults.

The incest claim is horse shit. There are people in the gene pool that carry defects that have a 50 percent chance to occur if they breed, and a 100 percent chance if they breed with someone with the same defect. Once again the incident of defect in a first generation incest relationship are nearly zero. And the chance that the offspring of an incestuous couple would grow up and marry each other is, according to you guys and your theory that what the parents do as a couple has no bearing, almost no chance of occurring.

 

[Harry Dresden]

It became a civil right when they voted to deny homosexuals the right to marry the person they love

So if Ralph , an adult, Loves Mary, his adult Sister, and she loves him, and they are denied the right to marry, IS THAT ALSO a Civil Right issue?

How about if John , an adult, loves Mary, Sybil and Rachael, all 3 adults and they love him, if they can not get married is that too a Civil Right?

Or do you ADMIT that the State has a compelling interest in defining what is marriage and who can legally do so?

What if abdul wants to marry his goat, is that a civil right? I guess so in Californacation.

Abdul lives in Pakistan.....he moved many years ago with is goat...he used to go by the name Adam Gadahn.........

 

[g5000]

Let me explain the slippery slope fallacy in terms anti-gays can understand.

"The Supreme Court ruled today that a state cannot prevent a man from buying a gun for home protection."

No one screams about states rights in this case. Dead silence. Not a peep about "activist judges". No, a celebration that the Constitution was protected ensues.

But then some Leftie starts screaming, "If we allow a man to buy a gun for home protection, then we must allow him to own nuclear weapons!"

Everybody would pile on such an idiot, amiright?

 

[bodecea]

So if a gay couple goes to a photographer and a caterer for their wedding plans, you would totally respect a denial of service. If a landlord refused to rent to a same sex couple, you would feel they were completely within their rights.

No more and no less than if that photographer and a caterer refused service to an interracial couple or an interfaith couple.

In other words YOU DO want to force your life style down others throats, thanks for admitting it.

Did the "no more and no less" portion of my answer confuse you? Apparently it did.

 

[Mr.Nick]

In that case, Marriage has nothing to do with sex and nothing to do with having children. It is a legal contract between two consenting adults

So, why shouldn't it apply to adults of the same sex?

Because most people are Christians and under Christianity it is a sin...

Hey Libertarian......read your Constitution

I keep one in my back pocket...

 

[RetiredGySgt]

I can almost see the spittle hitting the screen. Now we have strawmen entering the picture.

So let's take this one step at a time, all socratic-like: Would there be anything wrong with making incest legal?

IF as you claim, Gays have a Civil Right to marry, then I see no other possible outcome. IT either is or is not a Civil Right. Same with multiple marriages.

You and all that argue the 2 consenting adults part have seen to it. Exactly WHY can government prevent 3 consenting adults from doing what 2 are allowed? I mean you insist it is a Civil Right. RIGHT?

We'll put the slippery slope fallacy aside and continue: Would there be anything wrong with making incest legal?

IS IT A CIVIL RIGHT OR NOT? I have no need to answer your question other then to say if as you claim it is a civil right you MUST also agree to incest relationships between consenting adults.

And IF that is the ruling, then the absolute right thing to do LEGALLY and according to the Constitution, would be to make them legal.