|
 Libertad
Stranger
Registered: 11/26/08
Posts: 35
Last seen: 4 years, 4 months
|
 Prop 8 Failure why it should stay that way from gay perspective 
#9318673 - 11/26/08 09:03 PM (4 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
1. African-Americans voted FOR Prop 8 -- BY MAJORITY -- MOST African-Americans do not think Gay Marriage is a Civil right.
2. GAY people endorse Prop 8
3. Being Gay is NOT Marriage
4. A lot of people really do not believe in it so stop trying to force it down their throats -- and being vindictive about it.
5. Gay "Marriage" does not help ANYONE.
|
Redstorm
Prince of Bugs
Registered: 10/08/02
Posts: 44,162
Loc: [life]now[/life]
Last seen: 1 year, 6 months
|
Re: Prop 8 Failure why it should stay that way from gay perspective [Re: Libertad]
#9318715 - 11/26/08 09:13 PM (4 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
So essentially you have no legal or Constitutional arguments for it?
|
kidaihuan
First Growery Ban
Registered: 07/25/07
Posts: 3,173
Loc: Shanghai, China
Last seen: 2 years, 7 months
|
Re: Prop 8 Failure why it should stay that way from gay perspective [Re: Redstorm]
#9318818 - 11/26/08 09:28 PM (4 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
1. African-Americans voted FOR Prop 8 -- BY MAJORITY -- MOST African-Americans do not think Gay Marriage is a Civil right.
So?
2. GAY people endorse Prop 8
Gay people want gay marriage legal.
3. Being Gay is NOT Marriage
Right. Neither is being straight.
4. A lot of people really do not believe in it so stop trying to force it down their throats -- and being vindictive about it.
They don't have to get gay themselves, it won't affect them at all. It only effects whether gays can get married.
5. Gay "Marriage" does not help ANYONE.
It helps gays. It doesn't HURT anyone.
Banning gay marriage won't stop gayness. Stop thinking it will.
|
 Minstrel
Man of Science
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 1,974
Loc: Hogtown
|
Re: Prop 8 Failure why it should stay that way from gay perspective [Re: Libertad]
#9319198 - 11/26/08 10:32 PM (4 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Libertad said:Gay "Marriage" does not help ANYONE.
wtf....? What about the ones who want to get married?
|
johnm214
Registered: 05/31/07
Posts: 16,557
Loc: Americas
|
Re: Prop 8 Failure why it should stay that way from gay perspective [Re: Libertad]
#9319253 - 11/26/08 10:39 PM (4 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Do a search. As redstorm identifies, your arguments are irrelevant. Yes Prop 8 was legally enacted as far as Cali law goes, no it isn't legal, and no your arguments mean nothing as to the issues actually debated (legality).
Welcome to the shroomery, I don't want to be harsh, but this has been done to death and nobody has been able to both explain what the fourteenth amendment means and what the test for a violation is and then show how that allows prop 8 or gay marriage bans in general but doesn't overturn accepted rulings.
If you want to debate this why don't you read some of the old threads so we don't have to start over.
|
Libertad
Stranger
Registered: 11/26/08
Posts: 35
Last seen: 4 years, 4 months
|
Re: Prop 8 Failure why it should stay that way from gay perspective [Re: johnm214]
#9326411 - 11/28/08 12:06 PM (4 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
No, just wanted to make my point. Plus, someone told me that I should get into growing truffles which takes about five years to get started.
neway, the problem is Arnold as much as anything. Arnold wants to make churches and private intitutions who don't believe in gay marriage that it is even marriage to force it on them and make them acknowledge that stuff on the same grounds as a real man and woman marriage, which is the only marriage there has ever been. It is not equal to marriage no way.
But if Arnold and the supreme court wear dresses I would not agree with them, I would just acknowledge that they really believe this baloney. No way would I ever let arnold and his dresses make me view a gay relation the same as a marriage or a man and a woman's love for eachother along with the fact that this is the only way to have a real family.
No matter what anyone says to pretend it is the same, it is not.
The 14th amendment is for equal rights and not special rights. Arnold wants to make special rights. Gay marriage does not start a family either and it is not a marriage. Forcing it on people is thought control and intolerance.
|
Redstorm
Prince of Bugs
Registered: 10/08/02
Posts: 44,162
Loc: [life]now[/life]
Last seen: 1 year, 6 months
|
Re: Prop 8 Failure why it should stay that way from gay perspective [Re: Libertad]
#9326614 - 11/28/08 12:52 PM (4 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Your argument makes no sense. How is granting a group of people the same rights enjoyed by others "special"?
Also, it doesn't matter whether or not you believe a behavior is wrong if it does not explicitly harm anyone outside the transaction. It is none of your business.
By the way, I'm going to need a source showing that Arnold is going to force churches to recognize gay marriage.
|
Gastronomicus
3-0-G
Registered: 04/01/05
Posts: 9,009
Loc: D-Town
Last seen: 9 days, 7 hours
|
Re: Prop 8 Failure why it should stay that way from gay perspective [Re: Libertad]
#9327897 - 11/28/08 05:25 PM (4 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Yeah, explain how letting everyone marry is not the very definition of equality. If it gets up your gander so much call it a civil union, what's at stake here is the rights and the tactic of people trying to deny those rights is the same as any other: change the subject. We can't legalize drugs "for the children" and now we can't let gays marry because "it threatens the sanctity of marriage." This technique is absolute bullshit. Look at divorce rates, look at adultery rates. Marriage is anything but sacred. Do two gays who love each other have less of a right to be married then two straights who hate each other?
--------------------
Make my Funk the P Funk, I wants to get Funked up
|
Libertad
Stranger
Registered: 11/26/08
Posts: 35
Last seen: 4 years, 4 months
|
Re: Prop 8 Failure why it should stay that way from gay perspective [Re: Redstorm]
#9327903 - 11/28/08 05:27 PM (4 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Every man has the right to marry a woman and every woman has the right to marry a man. That is equal rights and natural too.
Men cannot marry men. That is gay not marriage. Sorry dude. Go with the Arnold mindflips all you want but the only way to start a real family is with a man and woman who love eachother. But Arnold should still wear a dress if he really believes in special rights.
As far as thought control, California Gov. Arnold wants to force people to learn that marriage is not just between a man and woman, accept the opposite of the truth, and then like it. Cannot happen.
You can get me fired from my job like the gays did to that guy out of their intolerance, but I will never consider you and your boyfriend as a Mr. and Mr. on par with a man and his wife as a Mr. and Mrs. That is just ridiculous.
Thank you African-America. Keep striking gay marriage down and protecting the real civil rights movement, which is for families and children not special rights and thought control.
Even some gays support proposition 8 because at least they admit the truth of thought control.
|
Redstorm
Prince of Bugs
Registered: 10/08/02
Posts: 44,162
Loc: [life]now[/life]
Last seen: 1 year, 6 months
|
Re: Prop 8 Failure why it should stay that way from gay perspective [Re: Libertad]
#9327919 - 11/28/08 05:31 PM (4 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Listen to your self. You have no way of backing your point up other than providing your opinions over and over and appealing to emotions.
Rights are being denied to a minority class. That's all there is to it. Straight people can be married and gays can't. Are you unfamiliar with the definition of gay marriage because this is pretty much it.
If you are so gung-ho about the sanctity of marriage, do you support a prohibition on divorce and strong penalties for adultery as well?
|
Gastronomicus
3-0-G
Registered: 04/01/05
Posts: 9,009
Loc: D-Town
Last seen: 9 days, 7 hours
|
Re: Prop 8 Failure why it should stay that way from gay perspective [Re: Libertad]
#9327922 - 11/28/08 05:31 PM (4 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Go with the Arnold mindflips all you want but the only way to start a real family is with a man and woman who love eachother
Well first of all, children raised by gay couples have statistically significant increases in grades during high school and thus go on to better careers. But you're not really here to argue, you make wild bizarre claims and then can't back them up to save your life. Keep up with your bigotry 
--------------------
Make my Funk the P Funk, I wants to get Funked up
|
 zappaisgod
horrid asshole
Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 42,234
Last seen: 8 minutes, 18 seconds
|
Re: Prop 8 Failure why it should stay that way from gay perspective [Re: Libertad]
#9328285 - 11/28/08 06:56 PM (4 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Prop 8 didn't fail. It passed. Do you have any idea what you are talking about in any forum whatsoever?
--------------------
Edited by zappaisgod (11/28/08 06:58 PM)
|
johnm214
Registered: 05/31/07
Posts: 16,557
Loc: Americas
|
Re: Prop 8 Failure why it should stay that way from gay perspective [Re: Libertad]
#9328580 - 11/28/08 08:01 PM (4 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
I guess in your view if the legislature created an "African American Achievment License" that allowed blacks to demand a grand per day from their local city office this would be fine per the fourteenth amendment? Can't do shit about it? Sure it is unconstitutional as it excludes non-blacks, but after all, you couldn't have an african american achievement license granted to and benifiting whites now could you? So the law stands and the blacks get their thousand dollars a day of your tax dollars.
Great work, chief. 
If only those schools that didn't want blacks attending would have thought to create the "white people only school program" which provided for public schooling of whites only- they could have avoided brown vs board. Sure it gave rights to one class unconsitutionaly, but you couldn't have blacks going to the white people only school could you? Too bad you didn't advise them of this, they must not have thought to hard about it.
Support your premise: show that a word's common definition has anything to do with the fourteenth amendment. Where is that written in there?
And where does the constitution give the general public the ability to change the definition of statutorily defined words and rights just by using a word differently?
This has been argued repeatedly in the courts and looses: definintions can be given in statutes cuz the constituion gives the legislature the ability to enact laws and the laws mean what they say- even if they use words defined more narrowly or widely than commonly used.
But if I'm ever arrested for conspiracy to manufacture drugs without an overt act, I'll be sure to tell the cops that you've overturned supreme court precedent and that overt act is now an element even though its not in the statute cuz the word conspiracy denotes an overt act as an element.
And when I'm convicted of possesing a gram of LSD which is really only a ml of water with a ng of LSD in it, I'll be sure to tell them that you've saved me from the mandatory minimum and I can only be convicted of the ng and not the carrier weight despite the statute and supreme court saying the opposite. After all the public uses LSD to refer to the chemical, so I can't be convicted of possesing a mg when I really only possesed a ng, right?
Again, your premise is silly and I'd love to see where the constitution says what you claim.
And Answer redstorm's question: Where has arnold tried to or said he would try to force churchs to recognize gay marriage? I suspect this is more made up shit, but fill us in. The catholics refuse to recognize the majority of divorces granted- is he going to force them to recognie that to? How are they burdened by the differing legal and catholic definitions of marriage and divorce/annulment?
Again, welcome to the shroomery, I don't wanna sound pissy or anything, but this has been discussed before and you are raising no new claims and have not supported those claims you have made with any citation to any legal authority. At least say what supports your proclamations of what the law is.
|
Libertad
Stranger
Registered: 11/26/08
Posts: 35
Last seen: 4 years, 4 months
|
 Re: Prop 8 Failure why it should stay that way from gay perspective [Re: johnm214]
#9343571 - 12/01/08 01:59 PM (4 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
johnm214 said:
I guess in your view if the legislature created an "African American Achievment License" that allowed blacks to demand a grand per day from their local city office this would be fine per the fourteenth amendment? Can't do shit about it? Sure it is unconstitutional as it excludes non-blacks, but after all, you couldn't have an african american achievement license granted to and benifiting whites now could you? So the law stands and the blacks get their thousand dollars a day of your tax dollars.
The main thing that is different now is that since most African-Americans voted FOR Prop 8 and most are for ONLY traditional marriage, the gay movement's favorite propaganda piece of claiming civil rights is proven invalid. The end of the idea of homosexual behavior as a civil right is a total loss and utter defeat. That is what is new.
Behavior and status (as in status crimes) do not constitute the definition of a minority. For instance, nobody is allowed to be convicted for BEING a drug-addict -- that is called in law a "status crime". Conviction has to be based on posession, transport, or distribution -- not the status of the individual.
On top of this, FORCING people (society) to accept and CONDONE the status of an individual (as explained above), especially as it relates to unnatural homosexual behavior is merely thought-control and special rights.
And it really interests me where the 14th Amendment gets so popular when it can be used for thought-control but nobody seems to care that the real intent of the 14th Amendment has been overthrown -- completely -- with the Incorporation Doctrine to mean the opposite of what it says.
The Incorporation Doctrine as relates to the 14th Amendment, of course, has NOTHING to do with "gay marriage" as neither does the original meaning of the 14th. But when the true issues of the 14th Amendment do not serve the status and behavior preferences of radical homosexuals and their attempted overthrow of marriage and family, the 14th does not matter. How hypocritical!
If you want to know about the 14th Amendment, read Raoul Berger: Government by Judiciary. Tell me if anything in the book -- or just pick another law book -- and tell me if it says anything about the 14th protecting status and behavior as a civil right.
Law by its very nature restricts and defines behavior. Law by its very nature LEGISLATES MORALITY -- every law legislates morality. So-called "gay marriage" enforces upon EVERYONE that they must accept, as a matter of law and society, that such non-marriages are equal with the holy marriage of a man and a woman.
I am not saying the same old things. NO on 8 people lost, and they still want to claim "civil rights!" and go through what I called Arnold mind-flips.
Just because Arnold will wear a dress, does not mean that America wants to teach our boys how to wear them just to make some homosexual activists happy about their misery. Because as they say, misery loves company, and that is the real root of the radical homosexual movement.
As far as the divorce question goes, a lot of people believe divorce law has become corrupted and needs to be much stiffer. There are too many couples being divorced. That being said, the "gay marriages" have not been working out as we were told they would work in such places as have them in the northeast. The "gay divorces" are reportedly a nightmare up there.
Plus, it was Jeffrey Dalmer who got away when one of his victims ran down the street screaming for help -- the police just thought it was another homosexual thing gone wrong.
Marriage? Not even close.
You would have to kill me, and I still would not recognize a so-called "gay marriage." 2+2 will never equal 5, and a man and a man etc. cannot constitute a marriage.
Give the dresses to Arnold and stop trying to enforce gay indoctrination on everybody's children in schools, as mandated by the government, we have no choice but to sent our children.
|
Minstrel
Man of Science
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 1,974
Loc: Hogtown
|
Re: Prop 8 Failure why it should stay that way from gay perspective [Re: Libertad]
#9343771 - 12/01/08 02:35 PM (4 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Libertad said:
Law by its very nature restricts and defines behavior. Law by its very nature LEGISLATES MORALITY -- every law legislates morality.
No. It is ironic, with all your talk of thought-control, that you think morals are defined by law. Keep in mind you are posting in a forum where the theme is the use of illegal hallucinogenic mushrooms, where the majority of the population has broken with the law of the land to define their own morality. After all, we wouldn't use mushrooms we considered them to be immoral, as the law seems to suggest.
Conversely, is the only reason you don't kill and steal is because the law says so? Would it be moral if the law said you have to stone to death anyone who works on the sabbath?
I think if you examine your own moral code, you will find it is not derived from law, but from your own intuitive faculties.
Quote:
Plus, it was Jeffrey Dalmer who got away when one of his victims ran down the street screaming for help -- the police just thought it was another homosexual thing gone wrong.
You are blaming the ineptitude of law enforcement on the existence of homosexuals?
Edited by Minstrel (12/01/08 03:00 PM)
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole
Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 42,234
Last seen: 8 minutes, 18 seconds
|
Re: Prop 8 Failure why it should stay that way from gay perspective [Re: Libertad]
#9343801 - 12/01/08 02:40 PM (4 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Libertad said:
The main thing that is different now is that since most African-Americans voted FOR Prop 8 and most are for ONLY traditional marriage, the gay movement's favorite propaganda piece of claiming civil rights is proven invalid.
Really? It is not unusual for the beaten wife to beat the child to then turn around and beat the dog, who bites the cat who kills the rat.
Do not for one second take this to mean that I either support or oppose Prop 8. I just support sound thinking and you are not exhibiting it. The government needs to get the fuck out of the marriage business entirely and enforce marriage contracts just like any other contract. Any government sponsored marriage privilege is by definition discrimination against unmarried people and thus unfair.
--------------------
|
eatyualive
ExoCanibalist
Registered: 08/17/01
Posts: 1,522
Loc: In Your Head
|
Re: Prop 8 Failure why it should stay that way from gay perspective [Re: zappaisgod]
#9344398 - 12/01/08 04:17 PM (4 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
the key to this whole mess is to keep us divided so much that we can never band together to stop this system. individuality has been psychologically engineered through our society. the best thing that can happen is to keep this bullshit up by trying to keep everyone divided. that way, they win.
--------------------
Every piece of information or picture posted has nothing to do with reality.
Click 4 Eat's Reference Guide
|
zouden
Neuroscientist
Registered: 11/12/07
Posts: 7,091
Loc: Australia
Last seen: 3 years, 7 months
|
Re: Prop 8 Failure why it should stay that way from gay perspective [Re: Libertad]
#9344842 - 12/01/08 05:16 PM (4 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Libertad said:
The main thing that is different now is that since most African-Americans voted FOR Prop 8 and most are for ONLY traditional marriage, the gay movement's favorite propaganda piece of claiming civil rights is proven invalid.
How so?
--------------------
I know... that just the smallest
part of the world belongs to me
You know... I'm not a blind man
but truth is the hardest thing to see
|
johnm214
Registered: 05/31/07
Posts: 16,557
Loc: Americas
|
Re: Prop 8 Failure why it should stay that way from gay perspective [Re: Libertad]
#9344901 - 12/01/08 05:23 PM (4 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Why would I want to read some book on the 14th? It means what it says- period.
Intent of the drafters or whatever bullshit is irrelevant. If you have some argument as to the legality feel free to make it, but I'm not going to read a book to search for youre argument.
And I don't get your civil rights nonsense. Blacks can violate civil rights, and I don't give a shit who approves or disaproves of a policy- it doesn't impact its legality or propriety.
I have no idea how you can claim that the demographics of the supporters makes any difference.
Everyone has the same rights, blacks have no more rights than anyone else, and they don't get to have their way- the law does.
An would you stop parroting this "force people to accept gay marriage" nonsense untill you support that claim?
Is the government forcing the catholic church to recognize their version of divorce? No, the catholics don't in fact recognize such legalities and they do what they like. Anybody that doesn't want to accept gay marriage doesn't have to. The only argument that holds water to is as to the employers who may be forced to give benifits, but if so they should change their own policies which are the thing that forces them to do so.
|
Gastronomicus
3-0-G
Registered: 04/01/05
Posts: 9,009
Loc: D-Town
Last seen: 9 days, 7 hours
|
Re: Prop 8 Failure why it should stay that way from gay perspective [Re: zouden]
#9344904 - 12/01/08 05:24 PM (4 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zouden said:
Quote:
Libertad said:
The main thing that is different now is that since most African-Americans voted FOR Prop 8 and most are for ONLY traditional marriage, the gay movement's favorite propaganda piece of claiming civil rights is proven invalid.
How so?
Cuz black people can't be racist duh...
This guy doesn't have a single feasible argument.
--------------------
Make my Funk the P Funk, I wants to get Funked up
|
|
Images only 
Threaded
Previous
Index
Next
Edit 
Reply 
