Massassi Forums Logo

This is the static archive of the Massassi Forums. The forums are closed indefinitely. Thanks for all the memories!

You can also download Super Old Archived Message Boards from when Massassi first started.

"View" counts are as of the day the forums were archived, and will no longer increase.

☖ Forums → Discussion Forum → CA Prop 8 proponents wish to nullify all existing same-sex marriages
1234
CA Prop 8 proponents wish to nullify all existing same-sex marriages
2008-12-20, 9:27 AM #1
http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/12/19/california.proposition/index.html

How on Earth can this fall under the umbrella of "protecting marriage"? It's just mean to persecute people like this. Their complete lack of comprehension of ex post facto is appalling.
the idiot is the person who follows the idiot and your not following me your insulting me your following the path of a idiot so that makes you the idiot - LC Tusken
2008-12-20, 9:31 AM #2
If we are out to protect marriage, shouldn't we nullify divorce measures? I mean, according to my statistics, divorce ends marriages.
SnailIracing:n(500tpostshpereline)pants
-----------------------------@%
2008-12-20, 9:58 AM #3
Yay Jon Stewart?
nope.
2008-12-20, 11:13 AM #4
is the argument against same-sex marriage primarily that marriage is a religious union between man and woman?
Detty. Professional Expert.
Flickr Twitter
2008-12-20, 11:24 AM #5
Yeah, the argument is that the very concept of 'marriage' is a religious one and God hates fags.

In the UK, is there any difference between a 'civil partnership' and a marriage?
"The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt. " - Bertrand Russell
The Triumph of Stupidity in Mortals and Others 1931-1935
2008-12-20, 11:36 AM #6
No reason for this other than to persecute a minority. It's petty and vindictive and it serves no legitimate purpose.
If you think the waiters are rude, you should see the manager.
2008-12-20, 12:38 PM #7
Originally posted by Mort-Hog:
Yeah, the argument is that the very concept of 'marriage' is a religious one and God hates fags.

In the UK, is there any difference between a 'civil partnership' and a marriage?


so presumably they should also go after all the straight couples who aren't religious but are married?
Detty. Professional Expert.
Flickr Twitter
2008-12-20, 12:42 PM #8
Yeah I know plenty of straight people who are NOT religious but they are married, uh-oh
"Nulla tenaci invia est via"
2008-12-20, 12:49 PM #9
How embarrassing is this going to be in 10 years?
ᵗʰᵉᵇˢᵍ๒ᵍᵐᵃᶥᶫ∙ᶜᵒᵐ
ᴸᶥᵛᵉ ᴼᵑ ᴬᵈᵃᵐ
2008-12-20, 1:07 PM #10
It's a mess, for sure, but the Pro 8 folks aren't the only ones taking action.

Jerry Brown, our state AG is taking some action to get 8 overturned as well.

http://www.insidebayarea.com/oaklandtribune/localnews/ci_11275324?source=rss
Pissed Off?
2008-12-20, 1:16 PM #11
Originally posted by Mort-Hog:
In the UK, is there any difference between a 'civil partnership' and a marriage?


The spelling.

I like it that way.
nope.
2008-12-20, 1:25 PM #12
Originally posted by Baconfish:
The spelling.

I like it that way.


Why?
"The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt. " - Bertrand Russell
The Triumph of Stupidity in Mortals and Others 1931-1935
2008-12-20, 2:02 PM #13
Originally posted by Michael MacFarlane:
No reason for this other than to persecute a minority. It's petty and vindictive and it serves no legitimate purpose.

Exactly. I don't care what people think the definition of "marriage" is, the simple fact that straight couples can get married and not gay couples is blatantly discriminatory. Equal protection under the law, hello.
Bassoon, n. A brazen instrument into which a fool blows out his brains.
2008-12-20, 2:20 PM #14
Banning same-sex marriage weakens traditional marriage, not the other way around as some like to say. If you don't allow them to marry, they will still live as if they are married anyway. What you have done, then, is made the marriage itself less important. You will create a culture where marriage does not matter, and that will also apply to straight couples. Children who grow up in this sort of marriage-means-nothing environment will grow up and not get married - because it means nothing!

Worst part for you, who goes and bans these things? That new generation that doesn't care about marriage will probably be happier than you.
2008-12-20, 2:48 PM #15
Originally posted by JM:
Banning same-sex marriage weakens traditional marriage, not the other way around as some like to say. If you don't allow them to marry, they will still live as if they are married anyway. What you have done, then, is made the marriage itself less important. You will create a culture where marriage does not matter, and that will also apply to straight couples. Children who grow up in this sort of marriage-means-nothing environment will grow up and not get married - because it means nothing!

Worst part for you, who goes and bans these things? That new generation that doesn't care about marriage will probably be happier than you.


This will only strength people who marriage does mean something to them. And their examples will stick out from among people.
Nothing to see here, move along.
2008-12-20, 3:19 PM #16
This will only strength people who marriage does mean something to them. And their examples will stick out from among people.
2008-12-20, 3:20 PM #17
Wow, I can picture all of you sitting around naked having this discussion. I must have some repressed (not so much, hello American Beauty?) homosexual tendencies that make me a homophobe.
"I would rather claim to be an uneducated man than be mal-educated and claim to be otherwise." - Wookie 03:16

2008-12-20, 3:25 PM #18
Originally posted by Wookie06:
Wow, I can picture all of you sitting around naked having this discussion. I must have some repressed (not so much, hello American Beauty?) homosexual tendencies that make me a homophobe.


This will only strength people who marriage does mean something to them. And their examples will stick out from among people.
2008-12-20, 3:32 PM #19
I still don't understand you.
"I would rather claim to be an uneducated man than be mal-educated and claim to be otherwise." - Wookie 03:16

2008-12-20, 3:33 PM #20
I have written you in my letter not to associate with sexually immoral people— not at all meaning the people of this world who are immoral, or the greedy and swindlers, or idolaters. In that case you would have to leave this world. But now I am writing you that you must not associate with anyone who calls himself a brother but is sexually immoral or greedy, an idolater or a slanderer, a drunkard or a swindler. With such a man do not even eat.

What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside? God will judge those outside. "Expel the wicked man from among you."
2008-12-20, 3:55 PM #21
Rubbish. I think the speration of church and state needs to happen and happen quicky. Because why should we allow beliefs to be inflicted on us?
Theres too much religious indoctrination in this world. We condem terrorists for it but what are politicians doing? the same. Some religions have one major problem: Intolerance.

If people are gay and want to get married to their partner... whats the big deal? Cause some silly religious text says you can't. Get real.
If God asked you to put your hand in a fire would you?
2008-12-20, 4:33 PM #22
Originally posted by Eddbanger:
If people are gay and want to get married to their partner... whats the big deal? Cause some silly religious text says you can't. Get real.

Some people are still so accustomed to idols that when they eat such food they think of it as having been sacrificed to an idol, and since their conscience is weak, it is defiled. But food does not bring us near to God; we are no worse if we do not eat, and no better if we do.

Be careful, however, that the exercise of your freedom does not become a stumbling block to the weak. For if anyone with a weak conscience sees you who have this knowledge eating in an idol's temple, won't he be emboldened to eat what has been sacrificed to idols? So this weak brother, for whom Christ died, is destroyed by your knowledge. When you sin against your brothers in this way and wound their weak conscience, you sin against Christ. Therefore, if what I eat causes my brother to fall into sin, I will never eat meat again, so that I will not cause him to fall.
2008-12-20, 4:33 PM #23
Originally posted by Eddbanger:
Rubbish. I think the speration of church and state needs to happen and happen quicky.


We have that. What you want is a seperation of people from their values.

Originally posted by Eddbanger:
If God asked you to put your hand in a fire would you?


I'm not a religious person but your question presumes that there is God. Therefore, if God asked you to put your hand in a fire, I think the prudent response would be to do so. I would.
"I would rather claim to be an uneducated man than be mal-educated and claim to be otherwise." - Wookie 03:16

2008-12-20, 4:40 PM #24
Originally posted by Jon`C:
Therefore, if what I eat causes my brother to fall into sin, I will never eat meat again, so that I will not cause him to fall.


lol
2008-12-20, 5:01 PM #25
Originally posted by Wookie06:
We have that. What you want is a seperation of people from their values.


The Spirit clearly says that in later times some will abandon the faith and follow deceiving spirits and things taught by demons. Such teachings come through hypocritical liars, whose consciences have been seared as with a hot iron. They forbid people to marry and order them to abstain from certain foods, which God created to be received with thanksgiving by those who believe and who know the truth. For everything God created is good, and nothing is to be rejected if it is received with thanksgiving, because it is consecrated by the word of God and prayer.
2008-12-20, 5:12 PM #26
You are teasing the wrong person. My opinions on the matter don't have anything to do with religion.
"I would rather claim to be an uneducated man than be mal-educated and claim to be otherwise." - Wookie 03:16

2008-12-20, 5:16 PM #27
Originally posted by Wookie06:
You are teasing the wrong person. My opinions on the matter don't have anything to do with religion.
To the pure, all things are pure, but to those who are corrupted and do not believe, nothing is pure. In fact, both their minds and consciences are corrupted. They claim to know God, but by their actions they deny him. They are detestable, disobedient and unfit for doing anything good.
2008-12-20, 5:33 PM #28
Water too pure has no fish.
2008-12-20, 5:37 PM #29
NOOOOO
nope.
2008-12-20, 5:38 PM #30
Originally posted by Wookie06:
I'm not a religious person but your question presumes that there is God. Therefore, if God asked you to put your hand in a fire, I think the prudent response would be to do so. I would.


Why?
Detty. Professional Expert.
Flickr Twitter
2008-12-20, 6:04 PM #31
Why not?
"I would rather claim to be an uneducated man than be mal-educated and claim to be otherwise." - Wookie 03:16

2008-12-20, 6:05 PM #32
If a gigantic beardy man in the sky with a booming voice called out my name and singled me out to put my hand in a fire I might consider it.
nope.
2008-12-20, 6:08 PM #33
Originally posted by Avenger:
It's a mess, for sure, but the Pro 8 folks aren't the only ones taking action.

Jerry Brown, our state AG is taking some action to get 8 overturned as well.

http://www.insidebayarea.com/oaklandtribune/localnews/ci_11275324?source=rss

He is my new best friend.

**** you fundies, I hate you with a passion now. Stop ruining my state and well the betterment of humanity.
Code to the left of him, code to the right of him, code in front of him compil'd and thundered. Programm'd at with shot and $SHELL. Boldly he typed and well. Into the jaws of C. Into the mouth of PERL. Debug'd the 0x258.
2008-12-20, 6:13 PM #34
Whatever side of the issue you fall on, it is interesting to see a state that seems to fight tooth and nail against its own electorate.
"I would rather claim to be an uneducated man than be mal-educated and claim to be otherwise." - Wookie 03:16

2008-12-20, 6:16 PM #35
Because the electorate is wholly wrong in every regard. This is why I think the proposition system needs to be abolished. It's direct democracy and we clearly see what happens with that. The majority's (read mob) viewpoint is oppressing a minority. The reason why we are a republic is so to stop these "mob rules" and protect the minority. I hope the state wins in every regard.
Code to the left of him, code to the right of him, code in front of him compil'd and thundered. Programm'd at with shot and $SHELL. Boldly he typed and well. Into the jaws of C. Into the mouth of PERL. Debug'd the 0x258.
2008-12-20, 6:23 PM #36
Independent of what anyone thinks about gay marriage, it strikes me as odd that it only takes greater than 50% of the vote to alter the CA State constitution.
Steal my dreams and sell them back to me.....
2008-12-20, 6:25 PM #37
How is not allowing marriage to be redefined opressing a "minority"? Marriage, by definition has never included homosexuals. Maybe if they came up with their own term for it, like "Happy Love Couple" or something...
"I would rather claim to be an uneducated man than be mal-educated and claim to be otherwise." - Wookie 03:16

2008-12-20, 6:27 PM #38
Equal protection under the law. You cannot give a right to one group of people and not to another based entirely on their sexual preference.
Bassoon, n. A brazen instrument into which a fool blows out his brains.
2008-12-20, 6:30 PM #39
The government can't take away a right that it doesn't give to begin with. The government doesn't give us our rights.
"I would rather claim to be an uneducated man than be mal-educated and claim to be otherwise." - Wookie 03:16

2008-12-20, 6:33 PM #40
When did marriage, by definition EXCLUDE homosexuals?
And coming up with a different term is still being exclusive and condescending (especially with your suggested term, why not just say butt buddies and be done)

But the simple fact is marriage is getting more and more meaningless, if you last 2 years you're doing well.
But no, let's not destroy the sanctimony of Brittany Spear's weekend 'just for fun' marriage by giving it to people that have been fighting for it and would take it a lot more seriously then most heteros.
You can't judge a book by it's file size
1234

↑ Up to the top!