Cali Gay Marriage Opinion to be Released Today

[Shotgun 1]

Quote

There seems to be some confusion as to the word “Marriage” in this issue. The majority of those that are against same sex marriage are so because of the religious belief that a marriage is between a man and a woman. There are also religious beliefs that say it can be between any two adults. My reason for removing marriage from government is that it denies religious freedom and equality as protected by our constitution. If the government says that same sex marriage is not okay then they are taking a stand as a government determining that a religions view is wrong and thereby denying their freedom of religious beliefs. If they say it is okay, you have the same denial of religious beliefs on the other side. If we as a nation come up with a universal definition of civil unions that allows people to share their lives with who they want then we create a win win solution. Everyone has equality and the government is not judging or denying any religious beliefs.

While this might be a good idea, I don't see it happening any time soon, especially since there seems to be no major efforts to get government out of the business of marriage. So as long as we continue to have legal marriages, I believe that they should be available to same-sex couples too.

And I don't think that the government is denying anyone freedom to their religious beliefs by allowing _legal_ same-sex marriages. People are still free to believe that (religious) marriage is between a man and a woman, and they will never be forced to marry someone of the same sex.

It's sort of like alcohol. Some religions do not permit the consumption of alcohol, yet our government has decided it should be legal. Does the fact that the government has gotten into the business of alcohol (taxing it and making it legal with certain restrictions) mean that they are infringing on the rights of people whose religions do not permit alcohol? I don't think so, since those people still have a personal choice in the matter.

[wmw999 2,144]

If marriage becomes the sole domain of the church, and civil unions of the government (which really would be fine with me), then the discussion of which church will accept other churches' marriages (e.g. will Catholic churches call the children of Lutherans bastards because they aren't Catholic-married?) goes to the churches. Where it belongs.

So the UCC-married gay couple, or the couple that has a Jew and a Baptist, or whoever, are free to be rejected as divinely married. This will increase the religious divisiveness for exactly the people who want religious divisiveness.

What a wonderful world we live in

Wendy P.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[Shotgun 1]

Quote

If marriage becomes the sole domain of the church, and civil unions of the government (which really would be fine with me), then the discussion of which church will accept other churches' marriages (e.g. will Catholic churches call the children of Lutherans bastards because they aren't Catholic-married?) goes to the churches. Where it belongs.

I bet if we spent some time seriously considering making marriage the sole domain of the churches, we'd discover all sorts of problems with that. For one thing, assuming a couple got married in the church but didn't get the legal civil union, what happens if they split up? I'm guessing that the law might get involved at that point, especially if the couple had children.

I don't know. And I don't think there is a large number of people who even want to get the government out of the business of marriage. No one seemed to be complaining about the government being involved in marriage until same-sex marriage became a high-profile issue. If it was such a sacred thing to these religious folks, why haven't they been trying to get the government out of it all along?

[LyraM45 0]

Quote

Discrimination is treating one group of people different than another because of a trait, not because of a free-will choice. We choose who to love and who we want to marry, it is not somethig that is forced upon us or that we have no say in.
When blacks were not afforded equal rights it was because they were black. Gays are not being discriminated against in any way because of any traits. Nobody here has shown any law that specifically denies any person the right to marry because of their sexual orientation. Show me anywhere in the law where it says "Homosexuals are not allowed to marry" and I will agree with you 100% that they are being discriminated against.

Are you really kidding?? Like, seriously.... there are so many people out there who revert to this "they choose to be gay" thing when they have nothing else to stand on in their argument except to admit that they are filled with hate and fear over the homosexual community. Did you choose to be straight??? Have you ever loved somebody? Did you choose to love them or is it an emotion that just comes from within you?? It's an emotion you can't describe. It's an emotion that comes from you heart. It's your soul that tells you who to be with and who not to be with. Not your conscious mind (even though it does help with decision making with that person you are in love with and want to be with.) GAYS AND LESBIANS DO NOT "CHOOSE" TO BE GAY. THEY LOVE THEIR PARTNER JUST LIKE YOU LOVE YOUR GIRLFRIEND/WIFE/FIANCE/SIGNIFICANT OTHER AND CAN'T DESCRIBE WHERE THAT EMOTION COMES FROM!!!! It's not like they wake up in the morning and decide, "you know what?? I'm going to stir the pot and want to marry another dude just because I choose to do that." No way, man! Get real.... seriously.

What if the tables were turned. What if it were the gays who were allowed to be married and it was the gay community that is standing up with rage saying, "How dare these straights want to marry in our churces and have our rights... how dare they. They don't have to be straight. They can choose to marry another person of the same sex and be normal and rightouse and moral just like the rest of us. It's their choice." Would you then look at yourself and say, "oh, you know what... I decided I don't want to be straight anymore... it was just a bad choice I made and a phase I was going through. You're right... I'll be gay and marry another man and make the right decision?" Could you seriously look me in the face and tell me that you would just up and switch to being homosexual because it's an easy "choice?"

Apologies for the spelling (and grammar).... I got a B.S, not a B.A. :)

[LyraM45 0]

Quote

Quote

>Discrimination is treating one group of people different than
>another because of a trait, not because of a free-will choice.

Exactly. And homosexuality is a trait, not a free-will choice. (Unless you are going to argue that nude men turn you on just as much as nude women, and you've "made a choice" to go after women alone!)
You are correct. Homosexuality is a trait. But nobody is being targeted because they are homosexual. If I am wrong, show me the evidence and I will admit I was wrong.

>When blacks were not afforded equal rights it was because they were black.

They had exactly the same rights as whites! They could marry their own race, just like whites. Were you OK with that?
People were deinied the right to choose their partner specifically because of skin color and/or heritage, something that is totally different than who they choose to love

>Gays are not being discriminated against in any way because of any traits.

They are denied a right that I have. Therefore they are being discriminated against.
Once again, where do you see it written in the laws that they are being denied any rights because of their sexual orientation?

> Show me anywhere in the law where it says "Homosexuals are not
>allowed to marry"

Show me anywhere where any law from the 1950's said "blacks are not allowed to marry." Again, are you therefore OK with banning interracial marriage?

You forgot one very important part that changes the entire meaning of the phrase. In the 1950s blacks were not denied the right to marry, they were denied the right to marry whites. That one little word makes all the difference in context.

*****************************************************

ok... so in the one sentence you finally admit that it is a trait.. But further down in your reply you go back to saying its a choice because it conveniently backs your argument. Which is it??? It can't be both!

Quote

They are denied a right that I have. Therefore they are being discriminated against.
Once again, where do you see it written in the laws that they are being denied any rights because of their sexual orientation?

Uhhhh.... have you seen PROP8?????????? Is that not a LAW? Are they not being singled out because of their sexual orientation and god given (or nature given, powers that be, etc.) TRAIT to love the same sex??? Thats the main reason behind denying them the right to marry, so what you're saying makes absolutely no sense at all.

Apologies for the spelling (and grammar).... I got a B.S, not a B.A. :)

[Belgian_Draft 0]

Jesus H Christ you people can't read.
Where the Hell did I ever say that gays chose to be gay??? WHERE????

A big part of the problem with any debate about any controversial subject is that SOME people hear or read somebody disagreeing with them in even the slightest way and they go off the deep end and think that person is the Anti-Christ.

Finally admit homosexuality is a trait? I never once said it wasn't.
I am fully aware of Prop. 8. That is the basis of this thread. My challenege to all here has been, and still is, to show where in that law gays/homosexuals are singled out by trait.
Since you obviously have not read enough of the thread, I'll clue you into something. The one and only point that I disagree with most here is very simple. I don't feel gays are being disciminated against. That's it. I don't give a shit if they marry each other or not. Not my business. I have friends who are gay. They know my position yet they have never treated me the way I'm being treated here because they know I fully support their right to marry who they want. To them, my contention concerning discrimination is a non-issue.

HAMMER:
Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a
kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the
object we are trying to hit.

[LyraM45 0]

Quote

Jesus H Christ you people can't read.
Where the Hell did I ever say that gays chose to be gay??? WHERE????

A big part of the problem with any debate about any controversial subject is that SOME people hear or read somebody disagreeing with them in even the slightest way and they go off the deep end and think that person is the Anti-Christ.

Actually... I can read just fine. Write too! (gasp!) I'm working on my thesis right now and my professors don't seem to have a problem with it.

Let's dig back a little bit here... hmmm... how about post #224:

QUOTE:
Discrimination is treating one group of people different than another because of a trait, not because of a free-will choice. We choose who to love and who we want to marry, it is not somethig that is forced upon us or that we have no say in.
When blacks were not afforded equal rights it was because they were black. Gays are not being discriminated against in any way because of any traits. Nobody here has shown any law that specifically denies any person the right to marry because of their sexual orientation. Show me anywhere in the law where it says "Homosexuals are not allowed to marry" and I will agree with you 100% that they are being discriminated against.


You said right there that homosexuality is a free will choice!!! Do you need me to point out other places that you've said it again too?? I have no problem showing you where you said it, it just boogles my mind that you convince yourself that you haven't said it when its obviously right there for somebody to dig up in the thread! I in no way think your the anti-christ, but I also don't think people who discriminate against race, sex, religious orientation are not the nicest or fairest people, so it really gets my wheels spinning. I'm not upset that your views differ... I think it sucks, but eveyrbody is entitled to their opinions which is what helps make this a free country. What I did have a problem with is you saying that being gay was a choice they made, and since its a choice they can choose not to make it and then get happily hetrosexually married like the rest of the "moral" population and put the whole controversial debate to bed. I just think its cowardly to hide behind the "choice" argument.

I guess SOME people on here don't know how to go back and look at their old posts and see their contradictive words to their current arguments.

Apologies for the spelling (and grammar).... I got a B.S, not a B.A. :)

[Shotgun 1]

Quote

Jesus H Christ you people can't read.
Where the Hell did I ever say that gays chose to be gay??? WHERE????

A big part of the problem with any debate about any controversial subject is that SOME people hear or read somebody disagreeing with them in even the slightest way and they go off the deep end and think that person is the Anti-Christ.

No offense, but I've found your posts in this thread to be somewhat confusing and contradictory, so it hasn't been very clear what it is that you're trying to say.

You've made several comments about how people can choose who they love, so I'm not surprised that people would infer from that that you think gays choose to be gay.

[jakee 1,257]

Quote

I understood his statement perfectly. When a government refuses to recognize a same-sex marriage they arte, in effect, siding with religion. There is no reason other than religious beliefs for denying people that right.
Do you not agree with that?

Oh deary me, you just can't help yourself, can you?

Read the sentence that starts "If they say it is OK..." and then get back to me.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[jakee 1,257]

Quote

FACT: She did not thank me or show any sort of appreciation for the favor,

I think you have confused the definition of 'fact' with the definition of 'lie'.

"B_D, thank you for outright stating your opinion..."

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[Belgian_Draft 0]

No, I did not say gays choose to be gay. What I said was that we can choose who to love and who not to love. What we cannot control is who we have an instinctual sexual attraction to...something that does not have to include love or affection but it may. Sexual attraction and love are two very different emotions.
It's too bad you don't feel people who disagree with you have the same rights as you. It is truly sad.

HAMMER:
Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a
kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the
object we are trying to hit.

[Belgian_Draft 0]

Quote

Quote

FACT: She did not thank me or show any sort of appreciation for the favor,

I think you have confused the definition of 'fact' with the definition of 'lie'.

"B_D, thank you for outright stating your opinion..."

Nice try at changing the context by leaving out half the post. In case you didn't notice, it was avery sarcastic reply to a PM that she then posted.

HAMMER:
Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a
kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the
object we are trying to hit.

[Belgian_Draft 0]

Quote

Quote

Jesus H Christ you people can't read.
Where the Hell did I ever say that gays chose to be gay??? WHERE????

A big part of the problem with any debate about any controversial subject is that SOME people hear or read somebody disagreeing with them in even the slightest way and they go off the deep end and think that person is the Anti-Christ.

No offense, but I've found your posts in this thread to be somewhat confusing and contradictory, so it hasn't been very clear what it is that you're trying to say.

You've made several comments about how people can choose who they love, so I'm not surprised that people would infer from that that you think gays choose to be gay.

If you read what I wrote, and not what others have claimed i wrote, you would see my position has been the same all through this thread.

HAMMER:
Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a
kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the
object we are trying to hit.

[LyraM45 0]

Quote

It's too bad you don't feel people who disagree with you have the same rights as you. It is truly sad.

I'm here fighting for equal rights for all, which is the basis of my argument, and you pull that statement out of your hat?? Are you really that desperate? I wish you the same rights as anybody else, no matter what your opinion. I may not agree with you on things, but you still deserve the same things people who oppose you have rights to. What did I say that makes you think you don't deserve the same rights as me because you disagree with me? I mean, really.... I'd like to know because I feel as if my posts have been the polar opposite in trying to fight for equal rights for EVERYBODY.

Apologies for the spelling (and grammar).... I got a B.S, not a B.A. :)

[Belgian_Draft 0]

Now you know how it feels to be falsely accused.
The only thing I ever said ..the ONLY thing...was that I don't feel Prop.8 is discrimination based on sexual preference or against gays specifically. THAT IS IT!
Then you and others come along and accuse me of saying things i never said, etc. Are you proud of misrepresenting people's words?
If you really want to change to law...REALLY WANT TO...then stop calling it discrimination against gays and start calling it what it really is; discrimination based on gender.

HAMMER:
Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a
kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the
object we are trying to hit.

[Shotgun 1]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Jesus H Christ you people can't read.
Where the Hell did I ever say that gays chose to be gay??? WHERE????

A big part of the problem with any debate about any controversial subject is that SOME people hear or read somebody disagreeing with them in even the slightest way and they go off the deep end and think that person is the Anti-Christ.

No offense, but I've found your posts in this thread to be somewhat confusing and contradictory, so it hasn't been very clear what it is that you're trying to say.

You've made several comments about how people can choose who they love, so I'm not surprised that people would infer from that that you think gays choose to be gay.

If you read what I wrote, and not what others have claimed i wrote, you would see my position has been the same all through this thread.

I was referring to what _you_ have written. Your position has been very convoluted.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

No, I did not say gays choose to be gay. What I said was that we can choose who to love and who not to love. What we cannot control is who we have an instinctual sexual attraction to...something that does not have to include love or affection but it may. Sexual attraction and love are two very different emotions.
It's too bad you don't feel people who disagree with you have the same rights as you. It is truly sad.

So you're saying what? That gay men will be sexually attracted to other men, but can still find a woman they love and want to marry?

I'm pretty sure their choices are limited to men, so the choice isn't going to get past the prop 8 hurdle.

[Belgian_Draft 0]

Actually, my position has been very firm and consistent.

HAMMER:
Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a
kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the
object we are trying to hit.

[fasted3 0]

Quote

Actually, my position has been very firm and consistent.

I agree. I think you have been remarkably consistant.
What do you think of this law?
Everyone shall be free to drink the beer of their choice.
As long as it's Budweiser.

But what do I know?

[Belgian_Draft 0]

Quote

Quote

Actually, my position has been very firm and consistent.

I agree. I think you have been remarkably consistant.
What do you think of this law?
Everyone shall be free to drink the beer of their choice.
As long as it's Budweiser.

I think it would be just as wrong as the law that says you can marry anyone you want as long as they are of the opposite sex.
I have never said I agreed with Prop.8 and have stated that in this thread in a previous post.

HAMMER:
Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a
kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the
object we are trying to hit.

[fasted3 0]

Well so much for my reading and comprehension.

So you are not opposed to gay marriage?

But what do I know?

[Belgian_Draft 0]

Quote

Well so much for my reading and comprehension.

So you are not opposed to gay marriage?

Nope. Who people marry is up to them. Always said that, always will.

HAMMER:
Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a
kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the
object we are trying to hit.

[fasted3 0]

OK, I'm slow, bear with me.

Prop 8 is to prohibit gay marriage.

And you are against Prop 8

But you don't see it as discrimination.

Because it applies to everybody, both straight and gay.

Right?

But what do I know?

[jakee 1,257]

Quote

The marriage laws in California do not discriminate on any level....

Start calling it what it really is; discrimination based on gender....

Actually, my position has been very firm and consistent.

Yeah...

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[Belgian_Draft 0]

Quote

OK, I'm slow, bear with me.

Prop 8 is to prohibit gay marriage.

And you are against Prop 8 YEP!

But you don't see it as discrimination. Not against gays. Against gender, yes, as was pointed out to me.

Because it applies to everybody, both straight and gay. No, because it does not specifically single out gays or homosexuals.

Right?

HAMMER:
Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a
kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the
object we are trying to hit.