Shotgun 1 #1 October 25, 2008 . . . would you seek to ban strip clubs? Or would you just try to get the schools to stop teaching such a thing? Just curious. A lot of people who are for Prop 8 (banning same-sex marriage) here in CA argue that if we allow same-sex marriage then it will be taught in schools. Now I personally don't see that as a bad thing, but it makes sense to me that if we don't like what is being taught in schools then we should try to get the schools to change what they're teaching. It makes no sense to simply make something illegal because we don't want it taught in schools. There are currently plenty of things that are legal that are not taught in schools. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,400 #2 October 25, 2008 >would you seek to ban strip clubs? It would be much easier to just ban stripping altogether. That way no one would take their clothes off. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
downwardspiral 0 #3 October 25, 2008 It makes no sense I am limited to 10 (or less) round magazines for my firearms. Sex and gun laws are largely emotional and logic is thrown by the wayside....sadly.www.FourWheelerHB.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
miked10270 0 #4 October 25, 2008 Quote.... people who are for Prop 8 (banning same-sex marriage) here in CA argue that if we allow same-sex marriage then it will be taught in schools... "Think of the children!" "I know nothing about this, but speaking as a bigot Mother..." "WILL NO-ONE THINK OF THE CHILDREN!!!!" This sort of argument proves that "Patriotism" is no longer the last resort of a scoundrel, it's now "concern for The Children" (of others, usually, ANY children, whether actually existent or not, which furthers their argument). Mike. Taking the piss out of the FrenchAmericans since before it was fashionable. Prenait la pisse hors du FrançaisCanadiens méridionaux puisqu'avant lui à la mode. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Shotgun 1 #5 October 25, 2008 QuoteIt makes no sense I am limited to 10 (or less) round magazines for my firearms. Yeah, that doesn't make sense. I guess I'm not familiar with the gun laws here in CA. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #6 October 25, 2008 QuoteIt makes no sense I am limited to 10 (or less) round magazines for my firearms. Sex and gun laws are largely emotional and logic is thrown by the wayside....sadly. Didn't that go away with the sunsetted assault weapons ban? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
downwardspiral 0 #8 October 25, 2008 QuoteQuoteIt makes no sense I am limited to 10 (or less) round magazines for my firearms. Sex and gun laws are largely emotional and logic is thrown by the wayside....sadly. Didn't that go away with the sunsetted assault weapons ban? Not in CA. We adopted the Federal Assault Weapon Ban as our very own.www.FourWheelerHB.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
downwardspiral 0 #9 October 25, 2008 QuoteQuoteIt makes no sense I am limited to 10 (or less) round magazines for my firearms. Yeah, that doesn't make sense. I guess I'm not familiar with the gun laws here in CA. I'm honestly surprised to see people are using education as a reason to ban same sex marriages. Does the CA public school system not teach children about homosexuality?www.FourWheelerHB.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Shotgun 1 #10 October 25, 2008 Quote I'm honestly surprised to see people are using education as a reason to ban same sex marriages. Does the CA public school system not teach children about homosexuality? I think they do, but I'm not sure. Either way, it's not a logical reason to ban same-sex marriage, but it's about the only argument they have. Well, that and they want to "protect the sanctity of marriage." But I think heterosexuals have already done a pretty good job of destroying the "sanctity of marriage" with our ~50% divorce rate. If anything, gay people should be trying to ban us from getting married. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,623 #11 October 25, 2008 Who would administer the final exam?... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
LadiDadi 0 #12 October 25, 2008 The thing I don't understand about people's fear of same sex marriage is this: how in the world does it impact YOU? I am heterosexual and married for almost ten years which seems to be rare these days. I have gay friends who have been together longer than my husband and I have. Ultimately, they feel the same way we did about getting married - no piece of paper and no words repeated after someone during a ceremony made our relationship any stronger or better or more permanent than it was prior to that or would have been without that. I could have cared less if we ever got married or not. It changed nothing about our relationship. It made buying a house easier. It makes benefits through jobs easier (although he works for a company that has same-sex partner benefits). Nothing about our relationship changed. Marriage didn't make us love each other. Not being married didn't make us not love each other. Marriage makes legal paperwork easier. There isn't a gay couple on this planet whose marriage could ruin mine. Gay marriage does nothing to 'devalue' anyone else's marriage. I wish that the following terms would go away: -Date Rape - Rape is rape. It doesn't matter if you know each other. -Reverse Discrimination - Discrimination by any other name... -Gay Marriage - Get married. If you want. To who you love. Or don't. It should be your choice - NOT MINE. Are schools going to teach about gay marriage? Maybe. Schools should teach about the real world and what goes on in it. Even if they don't, are parents going to take their precious little yard apes out of their bubbles, blind fold them, put their ear plugs in and place them directly in the mini van and go directly to their logic-free school. Do not pass Reality. Do not collect Intelligence.If you can't laugh at yourself, I'll be happy to do it for you. **************************** Be like the cupcake and suck it up. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DrewEckhardt 0 #13 October 25, 2008 QuoteThe thing I don't understand about people's fear of same sex marriage is this: how in the world does it impact YOU? A lot of those people like to use the old testament as an excuse. If they didn't wear cotton-polyester blends and spent time outside Red Lobster chanting No fins! No scales! No sale! I'd buy it, but the way they ignore the rest of Leviticus means it's just an excuse. The only logical explanation I can come up with is that some of those conservative men are closetted homosexuals who are affraid that with governent approval they'll leave their assets and lives behind to chase men. The wives are affraid that their nancy-boy husbands are actually gay and in more danger of leaving them for a man if the government approves. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tbrown 26 #14 October 26, 2008 QuoteThe thing I don't understand about people's fear of same sex marriage is this: how in the world does it impact YOU? I am heterosexual and married for almost ten years which seems to be rare these days. I have gay friends who have been together longer than my husband and I have. Ultimately, they feel the same way we did about getting married - no piece of paper and no words repeated after someone during a ceremony made our relationship any stronger or better or more permanent than it was prior to that or would have been without that. There isn't a gay couple on this planet whose marriage could ruin mine. Gay marriage does nothing to 'devalue' anyone else's marriage. I've been married for 27 years and feel pretty much the same way as you. Actually I disagree about the value of marriage, as I DO think it makes a difference. But that's where you and I have room to simply disagree with each other. But if marriage weren't so important, then WHY would it matter to same sex couples (just asking) ? But the upshot of what you and I are both saying is that we don't feel threatened OR the need to be stingy about our married status. Marriage has a lot of obligations that go with it, as anyone with kids, or who has an ill spuse, or is widowed, or who has been divorced will tell you. In point of fact, the first generation of kids with same sex parents has already grown to adulthood, and guess what ? They're just as normal and no more screwed up than anyone else's kids from hetero or single parents. They're not even any gayer. Inspite of the many gay couples we know, I'm not sure if I'm totally "comfortable" with it. But the point is - I don't have to be ! I just need to respect it, the way I respect a lot of other people I'm not exactly warm or fuzzy about (hell, some of my best friends are Republicans...). People, if we can just let this whole marriage thing ride for a bit, twenty years from now we'll all be wondering what the fuss was all about. It might even seem silly by then - unless we turn on our fellow law abiding, tax paying Americans, and even some of our friends we may not even know about - and deny them this simple basic RIGHT. Anyway, I've already voted, and I'm proud to say I voted against Prop 8. Your humble servant.....Professor Gravity ! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bfilarsky 0 #15 October 27, 2008 Shouldn't gays be allowed to be just as miserable as everyone else? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ChasingBlueSky 0 #16 October 27, 2008 Quote A lot of people who are for Prop 8 (banning same-sex marriage) here in CA argue that if we allow same-sex marriage then it will be taught in schools. Now I personally don't see that as a bad thing, but it makes sense to me that if we don't like what is being taught in schools then we should try to get the schools to change what they're teaching. It makes no sense to simply make something illegal because we don't want it taught in schools. There are currently plenty of things that are legal that are not taught in schools. Um, what does that mean? Teach it in schools? Quote Here is the definition from the dictionary: mar⋅riage /ˈmærɪdʒ/ [mar-ij] –noun 1. the social institution under which a man and woman establish their decision to live as husband and wife by legal commitments, religious ceremonies, etc. 2. the state, condition, or relationship of being married; wedlock: a happy marriage. 3. the legal or religious ceremony that formalizes the decision of a man and woman to live as husband and wife, including the accompanying social festivities: to officiate at a marriage. 4. a relationship in which two people have pledged themselves to each other in the manner of a husband and wife, without legal sanction: trial marriage; homosexual marriage. 5. any close or intimate association or union: the marriage of words and music in a hit song. 6. a formal agreement between two companies or enterprises to combine operations, resources, etc., for mutual benefit; merger. So...all the "man and woman" parts would be changed to "two people." Ok, maybe I miss the issue here? There are problems with stopping the ignorance at a young level in this country?_________________________________________ you can burn the land and boil the sea, but you can't take the sky from me.... I WILL fly again..... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ferdberfel 0 #17 October 27, 2008 If people were honestly interested in preserving and protecting marriage, they would lobby to make divorce difficult, if not impossible. As far as gay marriage, I am opposed to it. Haven't those poor people suffered enough? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
headoverheels 291 #18 October 27, 2008 QuoteIf people were honestly interested in preserving and protecting marriage, they would lobby to make divorce difficult, if not impossible. Making marriage more difficult might also help preserve and protect it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Shotgun 1 #19 October 27, 2008 Quote Um, what does that mean? Teach it in schools? I'm not sure exactly. Something about how "a king can marry a king" is what I've been hearing around here. Quote So...all the "man and woman" parts would be changed to "two people." I'm surprised the "Yes on Prop 8" people are not using that excuse too. "But if we allow gay marriage, we'll have to change the dictionaries! Won't someone please think of the dictionaries!" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,400 #20 October 27, 2008 >Um, what does that mean? Teach it in schools? "Gayness" will not be taught at schools, and there is no requirement to teach it. The angle people are latching onto is that some schools require age-appropriate sex education. In other words, in third grade, it would be along the lines of "if a stranger touches you in a private place, or tries to kiss you, tell your parents, the police, a teacher or the nearest adult you know." Some people consider that "teaching gayness" because they don't say "if you are a boy, and a woman (but not a man) touches you, tell your parents." But in reality nothing is going to change. An additional angle is that state guidelines require any health classes that talk about sex teach respect for marriage and committed relationships. Again, that's not going to change. Gays aren't going to stop having committed relationships no matter what happens on Prop 8. In terms of anecdotal stories, a California teacher once took her class to see her marry her partner. To me that was a bad use of school time, mainly because it's time that could be better spent, you know, teaching them stuff. And it would be a bad idea no matter who was marrying who. In Massachusetts, a teacher once used a book that involved two princes who got married. A religious parent heard about it and was outraged. That has become the centerpiece of some of their ads. That's never happened in California, but the angle they're using is "it could happen here next!" (I don't know why it couldn't happen even if prop 8 passes though.) >So...all the "man and woman" parts would be changed to "two people." In most dictionaries the addition has already been made. (i.e. Merriam-Webster, Encarta, Dictionary.com) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
livendive 8 #21 October 27, 2008 Quote Quote Um, what does that mean? Teach it in schools? I'm not sure exactly. Something about how "a king can marry a king" is what I've been hearing around here. Seriously? I would think they'd want to use the homonym "queen", but of course thinking about that might make their little heads explode. Blues, Dave"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!" (drink Mountain Dew) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,255 #22 October 28, 2008 QuoteSeriously? I would think they'd want to use the homonym "queen", but of course thinking about that might make their little heads explode. Hehe, you said "homo."Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Trent 0 #23 October 28, 2008 QuoteIt would be much easier to just ban stripping altogether. That way no one would take their clothes off. Now that's just downright un-American right there, Bill. You take that back!Oh, hello again! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
