California backs gay marriage ban

That's funny, because i think the same thing, basically:

Each of us was created to be something, but with the addition of free will,

the sky's the limit!

Sure, you can use your bathtub to be a planter ~ but where do you bathe? (Now, all bathtubs are planters, in your world)

But the bottom line is, no matter what you decide to use whatever it is for, it was MADE to be used a certain way ~ the old "You-Can't-Make-A-Silk-Purse-Out-Of-A-Sow's-Ear" thang. :rofl:

 

Homosexuality is practiced in over 1500 species, so how do we view it as unusual or uncommon. Seems to me it's biological.

Where does the octo mom fall in this discussion. She certainly procreated but she isn't married to the dad and doesn't plan on being so.

 

And i suppose that that is part of the problem ~

if folks don't see the basic logic (which, btw, is a science) underlying that fundamental truth (and the Truth IS "Out There"),

i don't know what to say.

Seriously.

i'm at a loss for words.

 

I see. Money is more important than human rights.

Maybe you should work for an oil company?

 

Money isn't more important but today in my state we are looking at losing a lot of social safety net programs because of lost revenues. Revenue which could have been generated through same sex marriages. But prop. 8 passed our constitution has been changed. No one thought to look at the financial impact on this issue. We look at it everywhere else but no one thought to consider it here. Maybe we can make it up by taxing divorces?

Fact is homosexuality exists throughout the species, to deny that is just plain ignorant. Similar to denying global warming...but no one has come up with cap and trade for homosexuality.

 

Gay people deserve to get marriage and have children.

 

But that's exactly what you said. Changed your mind?

 

I think that's the best sign I've ever seen

 

I know. I love it too.

 

Okay, so i'm a traitor, but ~

DAMN! That sign IS just too COOLIO!

 

Oh! But for a totally different reason ~

Jesus had a worldly dad,

and His Father in Heaven.

We ALL have that, because of sex.

Between a man and a woman.

(i know ~ i suck.)

 

How is that?
From what I have read it was class action law suit not a referendum and African Americans won it in the end.

 

The will of the general public in the south at the time was pro-segregation, yes they won in the court but remember schools had to be at literal gunpoint when Eisenhower had to deploy the national guard to enforce the ruling in some instances to allow black children to enter them.

 

When you haven't got any and society demands it in order to exist, it does become somewhat of a focus.

 

I think the simplest solution to the whole thing is remove all refrerences and benefits outlined in civil code to marriage . It should be viewed solely on religious terms. Thus each church can set it's own restrictions, but nationally no citizen is impacted by any church's view. Do you think no one would look at the financial ramifications of that Hip?

Removing it from the tax code would mean wholesale editing and reprinting.

 

Maybe it was the will of the general white public in the south. But you can't have direct democracy without including all people in it especially minorities.
As far as proposition 8, I think the battle is far from over and there will be more initiatives.

 

SAN FRANCISCO - California's supreme court backed a ban on gay marriage on Tuesday, upholding a voter-approved proposition defining marriage as between a man and a woman, but said the marriages last year of 18,000 same-sex couples were still legal.

The court, which last year unexpectedly opened the door to same-sex unions in the most populous U.S. state, bowed to the majority of California voters who passed the ban known as Proposition 8 last November.The argument continued in San Francisco streets, where gay marriage backers vowed to continue the fight at the ballot box in 2010.

"We will not be moved. Repeal Prop 8!" shouted seated protesters who blocked off an intersection in a show of civil disobedience. Police began arresting them one by one.

DeWitt Hoard, 65, a black man who legally married another man in California last year, compared the gay rights fight to one for racial equality. "I've been on this road for a while," he said at the courthouse. "Now we can't marry? Yes we will, it will happen."

Social conservatives, too, vowed to fight. "If marriage were between two men society could not go on. It's not fear, it's just the way it should be," said college student Mike Choban, 18.

The court said the roughly 18,000 marriages that took place in the state between June and November last year remained valid since the ban was not retroactive. That leaves the state of 37 million people with a tiny group of married same-sex couples that cannot grow.

"Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California," Chief Justice Ronald George wrote in the court's opinion, arguing that voters under the California constitution could make the change with a simple majority vote but that the decision did not end broad protections for same-sex couples to form families.

Tuesday's ruling was unlikely to be the last move in what is seen as a pivotal state in U.S. culture wars.

In Los Angeles, gay advocates said they would try to change the state constitution again - to affirm gay marriage - in a vote as early as November 2010.


us marriage

 

The ironic thing is that when you analyze the vote back in November for prop 8, it's actually the minority vote who made it pass, thus denying rights for other minorties. Obama running sent out an unprecedented amount of black and hispanic voters, good for keeping McCain/Palin out of the white house, but Hispanics and blacks are generally much more socially convervative and helped it pass

 

You can't force the church to marry and you can't force the state not to marry.

This issue should be up to whichever organization wants to marry and those that want to be married. No one should have the right to stop it and no one has the right to enforce it on those that don't want it.

I don't understand what's so difficult.

Direct democracy usually works very well in countries not comprised of loony toons. It's a whole lot better than a representative democracy imo, but only when the people are advanced enough in thinking.

 

I don't really understand your point.

You seem to be firmly sitting on the fence.