All of those against gays getting married are a bunch of fags and you don't want them to legalize gay marriage cause you're afraid your partners will start getting on your nerves asking when you both will Tie the Knot...
-
Hello, this board in now turned off and no new posting.
Please REGISTER at Anabolic Steroid Forums, and become a member of our NEW community!
-
Check Out IronMag Labs® KSM-66 Max - Recovery and Anabolic Growth Complex
Not looking good for California Prop 8
- Thread starter Splash Log
- Start date
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2004
- Messages
- 32,369
- Reaction score
- 2,936
- Points
- 0
- Age
- 52
- Location
- In a van, down by the river...
My sister, who lives in LA, told me last night that 85% of all blacks voted yes on Prop 8.
People are afforded equal protection under the law. You are deluded if you think otherwise. I have the ability to marry a woman, so does a gay man. A woman has the ability to marry a man, so does a gay woman. There is absolutely no right being unequally applied.
Yeah i heard about blacks in large support. Blacks have historically been against gay marriage. But really what percentage of blacks make up that vote, it ain't that much.
Gays don't need any more coddling anyway. I had to put up with a gay at olive garden "waiter/waitress." 300lbs, male, more make-up than my girlfriend, with fake "girly" voice. I'm sure if the manager tried to fire him he'd have been branded a bigot and promptly sued.
They've also been trying to pass laws to allow those "gender confused" people to go into whatever bathroom they want. In other words, you're going to have disgusting men going into the women's bathroom, because they feel they're really women. This is insanity.
They've also been trying to pass laws to allow those "gender confused" people to go into whatever bathroom they want. In other words, you're going to have disgusting men going into the women's bathroom, because they feel they're really women. This is insanity.
Pretty sure (but not certain) the latinos are against gay marriage in general as well.
actually its about 52.5% in california. 57 in florida and 63 in arizona. and greater than 50% in 27 other states
then i must have reversed florida and arizona. either way. the majority is not yet ready to abandon marriage.
my point was with reference to the minority vote for prop 8. I don't understand why it is getting so much hype, when there influence isn't that great.
LOL I have just ignored him. Some people constantly have blinders on to what is occuring around them.
chill Kelju. dont let this get to you.
The gist of his argument (though very poorly stated) is that homosexuality is not a protected class. this isn't like passing a law against women, or blacks. How do you set up a protected class for a group of individuals that can change from day to day? a black person will always be black, for the most part a woman will always be a woman (excluding drastic surgery and hormone treatment). are you going to tell me Lindsay Lohan will always be gay?
has anyone hear actually studied the different court cases regarding marriage and why they were ruled the way they have been? this is not a new subject by any stretch.
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2004
- Messages
- 32,369
- Reaction score
- 2,936
- Points
- 0
- Age
- 52
- Location
- In a van, down by the river...
When I read your post, I heard it as spoken by Samuel L. Jackson.
"No I can't stop yelling. Haven't you seen any of my MOO-VIES?"
I saw this on tv. Most blacks are highly religious. Thus the vote.....
In some cases. perhaps. I really don't feel homosexuality is understood well enough to tell you the truth. I think a lot of factors go into it. perhaps some people are born with an attraction to the opposite sex. perhaps it is environmental, cultural. I don't know. With Lohan it is a momentary convenience.
To make this a civil rights case and argue that homosexuality needs to be a protected class as Race, sex, or religion is I think a stronger argument has to be made than has been previously done on this forum.
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2004
- Messages
- 32,369
- Reaction score
- 2,936
- Points
- 0
- Age
- 52
- Location
- In a van, down by the river...
That was my thought, as well.
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2005
- Messages
- 14,833
- Reaction score
- 1,676
- Points
- 113
- Age
- 43
- Location
- In my imagination.
Thats fine and well. If you think gays shouldn't have the right to marry because of x y z reason is a valid. I don't agree wit hit, but it is valid.
But, to say that you don't understand what the problem is and that there is no issue of rights being infringed upon because a gay person has the right to marry someone of the opposite sex blows my mind.
Really brogers? Really? That is your argument? Wow! Using that piece of deductive logic, I could shutdown any debate from now on. I have never heard of such. It is almost like straw man fallacy with a switch-o-roo twist.
So you pick something that is already law, while avoiding the issue that is being debated, and then you pretend that nobody can claim that this is a civil rights issue.
So when blacks wanted the right to attend white schools, your argument would have been that there is no debate because blacks have the right to attend black schools. Am I understanding how this works?
Show us proof that it isn't.
I don't think his argument is valid. i'll just start off there.
as far as a black kid attending school. the difference is the black kid can't be black on tuesday and white on wednesday and still be a protected class. the black kid is always black and that is how it is.
No, my argument is perfectly stated. No right is being denied. All are treated equally under the law with the same opportunities afforded to each. I have yet to see anyone demonstrate otherwise. Marriage is not "LIFE PARTNER TO LIFE PARTNER" or whatever euphemism you want to use for gays. It has been, and is being enshrined in the state constitutions as man-woman.
Wills, power of attorney, and any other contractual agreements are open to all people, regardless of if someone is gay/straight/"CONFUSED."
That is a poor ignorant rebuttal Dave.
I still don't think everyone understands what can of worms this will open if passed nationally. Just like others stated, what about poligimy? Should we make that legal too? We are certainly obstructing rights of some that want multiple partners. Do we allow these men like in the result cults that were marrying young girls at 10 and 12 yrs old to marry? Certainly that can be argued as a right also. Where does this stop?
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2005
- Messages
- 14,833
- Reaction score
- 1,676
- Points
- 113
- Age
- 43
- Location
- In my imagination.
Why? As I may think it a choice and you may not, I doubt either of us can show proof either way.
I can remeber when my son was 5/6 and was watching women at a beauty pageant with binoculars my daughter went to. To me that is natural and proves that homosexuality is a choice.
