Prop 8 stands...

[BrianEtrius]

Prop 8 still stands, as announced today by the Supreme Court.

This is still quite sad. Especially since it's California, one of the most liberal states.

[D3NTATUS]

As far as I'm concerned, they're only postponing the inevitable. By looking at the demographics and how they voted, all the younger generations voted overwhelmingly against prop 8. As time goes on, the majority will support gay marriage, no matter what the Supreme Court says.

As for current issues, does anyone else think it's absurd that the Court upheld Prop 8, but also upheld all the marriages that occurred before Prop 8?

[Bolo]

If the Supreme Court of California had gone against public opinion for a second time, there's no way they would still have the trust of the people, and there would be an outcry about judicial activism, etc. It is a sad fact that they must uphold the petty prejudices of their constituents expressed in the outcome of the 2008 elections.

But as has already been mentioned, the younger generations are infinitely more tolerant than their forebears, and infinitely more willing to award the deserved individual freedoms to people who for so long have suffered under the burden of a lack thereof. Within the next decade, probably, the ruling will be overturned, the citizens of California will apologize for their previous obstinacy, and the path to the pursuit of happiness will have been thusly paved.

[Memorize]

California is not a liberal state.

A democrat one, but not a liberal one.

[Tony-DarkGrave]

who cares get over it jesus.

[Tancrisism]

At 5/26/09 07:36 PM, Bolo wrote: If the Supreme Court of California had gone against public opinion for a second time, there's no way they would still have the trust of the people, and there would be an outcry about judicial activism, etc. It is a sad fact that they must uphold the petty prejudices of their constituents expressed in the outcome of the 2008 elections.

Against the people? 52% (many of whom, I strongly believe, were tricked or confused) of the people =/= the people. As far as I am concerned, the Supreme Court went against the people in this ruling.

Within the next decade, probably, the ruling will be overturned, the citizens of California will apologize for their previous obstinacy, and the path to the pursuit of happiness will have been thusly paved.

I certainly hope so. I'm sickened by this state.

[Memorize]

At 5/26/09 08:44 PM, Tancrisism wrote:

Against the people? 52% (many of whom, I strongly believe, were tricked or confused) of the people =/= the people. As far as I am concerned, the Supreme Court went against the people in this ruling.

Excuses are fun.

Though I think the government should stay out of marriage, I'm still hoping to one day see a gay rights protest at Jewish temples, Black churches, or mosques.

Since 70% of African Americans voted in favor of the amendment while whites were split down the middle, I find that many of these gay rights activists are cowards if they're only going to protest in mainly white christian churches.

[Tancrisism]

At 5/26/09 08:51 PM, Memorize wrote: Excuses are fun.

I was among those who voted that day, and when I read the bill I had to double check it several times to make sure I was voting correctly (I voted "no"). I have several friends that voted Yes after misunderstanding what it meant.

Before the voting for Prop 8 took place, there were lots of thorough ad-campaigns that tried to paint Prop 8 as something that was going to prevent gayness from being encouraged in classrooms, when all it was doing was banning gay marriage. Lots of people saw the arguments made in these advertisements and thought they sounded reasonable and voted yes on 8 because of it (I have talked to many that regret it now).

Though I think the government should stay out of marriage, I'm still hoping to one day see a gay rights protest at Jewish temples, Black churches, or mosques.

Since 70% of African Americans voted in favor of the amendment while whites were split down the middle, I find that many of these gay rights activists are cowards if they're only going to protest in mainly white christian churches.

I agree with both points. Marriage should either be universally accepted under the law, or it should not have anything to do with it.

[stafffighter]

At 5/26/09 08:51 PM, Memorize wrote:

Since 70% of African Americans voted in favor of the amendment while whites were split down the middle, I find that many of these gay rights activists are cowards if they're only going to protest in mainly white christian churches.

So they're cowards for not protesting in a community that's already on their side?

[GrammerNaziElite]

At 5/26/09 08:42 PM, Dante-Son-Of-Sparda wrote: who cares get over it jesus.

Yeah, Civil Rights are so outdated.

[Tony-DarkGrave]

At 5/26/09 09:33 PM, GrammerNaziElite wrote:

At 5/26/09 08:42 PM, Dante-Son-Of-Sparda wrote: who cares get over it jesus.

Yeah, Civil Rights are so outdated.

not really. it was voted by the people of california and it was tried to get over turned and went to the california Supreme court and lost. Oh well.

[GrammerNaziElite]

not really. it was voted by the people of california and it was tried to get over turned and went to the california Supreme court and lost. Oh well.

A similar thing occurred regarding abortion, but people like you can't stop bitching about that either. The difference? Prop 8 was less than a year ago. Roe vs. Wade? THIRTY-SIX YEARS AGO.

So shut the fuck up.

[Memorize]

At 5/26/09 09:20 PM, stafffighter wrote:

At 5/26/09 08:51 PM, Memorize wrote:

Since 70% of African Americans voted in favor of the amendment while whites were split down the middle, I find that many of these gay rights activists are cowards if they're only going to protest in mainly white christian churches.

So they're cowards for not protesting in a community that's already on their side?

I'd hardly consider the 70% of African Americans who voted in favor of the amendment to ban gay marriage as "On their side".

[Tony-DarkGrave]

At 5/26/09 09:51 PM, GrammerNaziElite wrote:

not really. it was voted by the people of california and it was tried to get over turned and went to the california Supreme court and lost. Oh well.

A similar thing occurred regarding abortion, but people like you can't stop bitching about that either. The difference? Prop 8 was less than a year ago. Roe vs. Wade? THIRTY-SIX YEARS AGO.

So shut the fuck up.

why should I? its all democratic. and another similliar thing was that the catholic church was involved in both cases in Prop 8 and Roe VS wade.

[GrammerNaziElite]

why should I? its all democratic. and another similliar thing was that the catholic church was involved in both cases in Prop 8 and Roe VS wade.

Because you guys have been protesting a decision made by the Supreme Court for 37 years and tell us to stop protesting a Civil Rights issue that was made less than a year ago, that, in addition, had a RIDICULOUS smear campaign going for it.

[Tony-DarkGrave]

At 5/26/09 10:07 PM, GrammerNaziElite wrote:

why should I? its all democratic. and another similliar thing was that the catholic church was involved in both cases in Prop 8 and Roe VS wade.

Because you guys have been protesting a decision made by the Supreme Court for 37 years and tell us to stop protesting a Civil Rights issue that was made less than a year ago, that, in addition, had a RIDICULOUS smear campaign going for it.

oh boo hoo thats what happens, if you don't like it get out of the country personally I think its a good thing because there are loop holes in the whole same sex marriage thing anyways it can be exploited

[adrshepard]

At 5/26/09 09:56 PM, Memorize wrote: I'd hardly consider the 70% of African Americans who voted in favor of the amendment to ban gay marriage as "On their side".

I think he was referring to the "on the down-low" phenomenon among black people.

What I don't understand is the activism for gay marriage. If civil unions already provide the same benefits and legal status, what difference does it make to gay people their partnership is called marriage or not? Isn't the whole "coming out of the closet" struggle about self-acceptance? People truly comfortable with who they are don't need validation from others.

[GrammerNaziElite]

oh boo hoo thats what happens, if you don't like it get out of the country personally I think its a good thing because there are loop holes in the whole same sex marriage thing anyways it can be exploited

Oh I understand now. When you protest an old decision from the Supreme Court, you're keeping America's interests at heart, but when we protest a new decision, we're whiny America-haters who are selfish.

You can fuck right off now.

[Tony-DarkGrave]

At 5/26/09 10:32 PM, GrammerNaziElite wrote:

oh boo hoo thats what happens, if you don't like it get out of the country personally I think its a good thing because there are loop holes in the whole same sex marriage thing anyways it can be exploited

Oh I understand now. When you protest an old decision from the Supreme Court, you're keeping America's interests at heart, but when we protest a new decision, we're whiny America-haters who are selfish.

You can fuck right off now.

well one no I won't and you cant tell me and thats totally trollish. two if it's democratic it can be overturned if its took to the US Supreme Court. and three I never said that because its right to protest what you believe in even if its futile.

[Korriken]

At 5/26/09 10:19 PM, adrshepard wrote:

What I don't understand is the activism for gay marriage. If civil unions already provide the same benefits and legal status, what difference does it make to gay people their partnership is called marriage or not? Isn't the whole "coming out of the closet" struggle about self-acceptance? People truly comfortable with who they are don't need validation from others.

its the same as activism for anything else. Bunch of miserable wretches, unhappy with their lives are desperate to find some way to validate their existance by stepping on others and making them miserable as well. Lest we forget the most miserable wretch of all... Lack of logic can be a dangerous thing.

What can I say? Many people's behavior can by summed up in a single word. This is like a 'christian' protesting an execution trying to quote the bible. I wish there would be a 'christian protest' of a murderer close to where I live. I would walk around with a sign that simply reads Numbers 35:31

anyway, back to gay marriage. You can give them anything, they won't be happy. No matter how much you give them, they will always continue to push, much like many other movements. Once the movement's goal is met, those who truly wanted the goal will go home and enjoy their victory, while others continue to fight for a prize that's already been won.

If civil union gives you the same rights as marriage, just under a different name, then why continue to fight, when you already have what you want?

A lot of these 'activist movements' get started by organizations like the ACLU. why? simple. It's a cash cow that the leaders milk! You think they work for non profits for free out of the goodness of their hearts? pfft. riiiight. If you believe that then I got a flying magic carpet to sell you. Non profit activist organizations are a gold mine! However, they have to continue whatever 'battle' they can find to stay afloat and keep the donations flowing in to line their pockets.

[GrammerNaziElite]

well one no I won't and you cant tell me and thats totally trollish. two if it's democratic it can be overturned if its took to the US Supreme Court. and three I never said that because its right to protest what you believe in even if its futile.

Then don't complain about people protesting Prop 8.

[Tony-DarkGrave]

At 5/26/09 10:54 PM, GrammerNaziElite wrote:

well one no I won't and you cant tell me and thats totally trollish. two if it's democratic it can be overturned if its took to the US Supreme Court. and three I never said that because its right to protest what you believe in even if its futile.

Then don't complain about people protesting Prop 8.

that doesn't mean I cant give my opinion does it? even though it went through the democratic process and if it went to the Caly Supreme court get over it.

[Elfer]

Prop 8 was a constitutional amendment. Regardless of whether it was right or wrong, it's not really within the court's jurisdiction to overturn it.

[Tony-DarkGrave]

At 5/26/09 11:16 PM, Elfer wrote: Prop 8 was a constitutional amendment. Regardless of whether it was right or wrong, it's not really within the court's jurisdiction to overturn it.

exactly thank you.

[GrammerNaziElite]

that doesn't mean I cant give my opinion does it? even though it went through the democratic process and if it went to the Caly Supreme court get over it.

...
...
...

I don't understand. I call you out on the abortion issue, and you say, it's your right as a citizen to protest decisions. Fine. Then you tell us to get over Prop 8. It doesn't work that way. Either you get over Roe vs Wade and we get over Prop 8, or neither of us give it up.

Are you trolling?

[GrammerNaziElite]

At 5/26/09 11:24 PM, Dante-Son-Of-Sparda wrote:

At 5/26/09 11:16 PM, Elfer wrote: Prop 8 was a constitutional amendment. Regardless of whether it was right or wrong, it's not really within the court's jurisdiction to overturn it.

exactly thank you.

I never argued that point, it has nothing to do with our argument. We are discussing how, somehow, protesting Roe vs Wade is more justified than protesting Prop 8.

Somehow.

[kraor024]

At 5/26/09 07:36 PM, Bolo wrote: If the Supreme Court of California had gone against public opinion for a second time, there's no way they would still have the trust of the people, and there would be an outcry about judicial activism, etc. It is a sad fact that they must uphold the petty prejudices of their constituents expressed in the outcome of the 2008 elections.

I think it's sad, I watch a prop 8 commercial on youtube & the tone of it was in blah blah blah these blah judges ignored public opinion blah blah blah

People who think that judges should follow public opinion are idiots it's a judges job to interpret the law w/o bias, taking public opinion into account would create a bias,So going against public opinion is really the mark of a good judge.

At 5/26/09 10:19 PM, adrshepard wrote: What I don't understand is the activism for gay marriage. If civil unions already provide the same benefits and legal status, what difference does it make to gay people their partnership is called marriage or not? Isn't the whole "coming out of the closet" struggle about self-acceptance? People truly comfortable with who they are don't need validation from others.

Civil Unions do not provide the same legal status, for one thing a civil union is only recognized on the state level whilst a marriage by law must be recognized by every state & the Federal gov, also it immediate family can claim a deceased persons estate even if that person had a civil union, it's easier to transfer pensions to a married person than a civilly united person, etc....

[Tony-DarkGrave]

At 5/26/09 11:25 PM, GrammerNaziElite wrote:

that doesn't mean I cant give my opinion does it? even though it went through the democratic process and if it went to the Caly Supreme court get over it.

...
...
...

I don't understand. I call you out on the abortion issue, and you say, it's your right as a citizen to protest decisions. Fine. Then you tell us to get over Prop 8. It doesn't work that way. Either you get over Roe vs Wade and we get over Prop 8, or neither of us give it up.

Are you trolling?

wait what? I'm confused either I misread and responded wrong or you did and im certain it was me. seriously im all for Roe VS wade woman have a right to do with their body Im just saying people should get over that its a personal choice for a woman to do with their body.
as for prop 8 people should get over it its was a constitutional amendment. Regardless of whether it was right or wrong, it's not really within the court's jurisdiction to overturn it.

I never argued that point, it has nothing to do with our argument. We are discussing how, somehow, protesting Roe vs Wade is more justified than protesting Prop 8.

Somehow.

we were talking about that oh sorry for the misunderstanding im posting and watching anime on the web again lol. but either their was a constitutional amendment. Regardless of whether it was right or wrong, plus its just a slippery slope

[aviewaskewed]

At 5/26/09 11:16 PM, Elfer wrote: Prop 8 was a constitutional amendment. Regardless of whether it was right or wrong, it's not really within the court's jurisdiction to overturn it.

Agreed. People may not like the amendment, but unless you can prove that it was ILLEGALLY PASSED there's nothing to be done about it except protest and try to get a referendum on the ballot in a future election that would repeal it. I don't agree with the decision because I'm personally for the right of same sex couples to be married in the eyes of the law (the eyes of the church should absolutely stay with what each individual church or church hierarchy decides. The church should damn well have the right to believe what they want even if I don't agree with their viewpoint). I just don't see a reason not to do it other then homophobia and people saying "but my religion says no". Yeah well, some Southern Baptists used to claim it was in the Bible that blacks should be slaves, we don't believe that nonsense anymore now do we?

[fli]

Mmm...
There's talk that it's going to ballot again.

But now the conservatives are afraid that, without the strong Black presence of the last presidential election, that prop 8 will definitely be overturned.

Which creates a predicament for a lot of people...
for black people, who historically didn't vote in mass like the last election, will not come back to vote for it..

for gay people who, although are friends with the Black community, don't really want them to vote...

for the White Republican upper class older males (and their families) who are still bitter about McCain's loss who didn't want Black people to vote... NOW wants them to vote...

For the Black people who suddenly feel empowered in the last election... suddenly feeling that they're losing momentum.

This issue is turning people ugly, ugly, UGLY.