Proposition 8 Overturned: Gay Marriage Ban Ruled Unconstitutional

[Padawanbater2]

the reason marriage is legaly defined is because they give married people tax incentaves its because they want you to get married and have kids who will work pay taxes and joiiiin the military ...gay sex dosent make kids their fore marrige should not aply

Then why doesn't anyone care about infertile couples getting married?

It isn't about kids, rights, equality or anything else like that. To them it's about what the Bible says. Except they don't understand the Bible also says, in the same book that condemns homosexuality no less, you can't shave your beard (Lev 19:27), eat shellfish (Lev 11:10), or wear mixed fabrics (Lev 19:19)...

 

[blazin256]

i could care less really. i see this morphing into a war with the churches though, but i could be wrong. if a church doesn't want to marry them i don't think they should be made to.

 

[Keenly2]

i could care less really. i see this morphing into a war with the churches though, but i could be wrong. if a church doesn't want to marry them i don't think they should be made to.

more than a few will take the no's customers away

 

[Padawanbater2]

if a church doesn't want to marry them i don't think they should be made to.

I agree with that.

 

[fdd2blk]

if i wanted to try out being gay for awhile, could i?


just wondering.

 

[Padawanbater2]

if i wanted to try out being gay for awhile, could i?


just wondering.

Why don't you try it, see what happens?

You might learn a lot from that experience.

 

[NLXSK1]

Gays could get married before this ruling.

The argument has been completely skewed.

What homosexuals want is recognition from the government and all of the benefits that come with it in both public and private sector jobs... That is what the argument is about.

If you want to argue about that, please show me statistics on how many homosexuals are in jail for being illegally married... KTHXBYE!!

 

[fdd2blk]

Why don't you try it, see what happens?

You might learn a lot from that experience.

don't i have to be born with it?

 

[beardo]

in cali can you gay marry an illegal and then they get citizenship?

 

[fdd2blk]

in cali can you gay marry an illegal and then they get citizenship?

rflmao, ftw.

then adopt a baby and get free welfare.

 

[SouthernGanja]

don't i have to be born with it?

So the theory goes - You're born homosexual: "an enduring pattern of or disposition to experience sexual, affectional, or romantic attractions primarily to people of the same sex"

So sucking someones dick won't make you gay and you can't "try to be gay".

I don't believe that people can be put into only 3 categoies when it comes to sexual attraction. A better way (not perfect) is to use a scale of 1 to 7. 1 being homosexual, 4 being bisexual and 7 being heterosexual. I even use decimals for my own number on this scale. LOL

 

[UncleBuck]

Marriage is not a fundamental right. It's a privilege and thus something that absolutely can be voted on.

Edit: Background, 2 of my friends are gay, and yes they know my position. 1 supports my position, the other opposes it. I don't think the traditional word "marriage" ought to be redefined as anything other than man + woman. And before you quote merriam or webster, I'm quite familiar with the colloquial modifications of the definition.

I support the rights of gays to have the same legal rights as married couples, but I don't support the NAME: Marriage for them. Let them choose another name. Just because I want to call an apple "Orange" doesn't mean we should change the definition of "orange" to include Apples too. It's got a different name, define it as such.

marriage IS a fundamental right. trying to argue otherwise is inexcusable.

less than 50 years ago, public referendums would have barred interracial marriages in this country. i bet people like you would have been leading the charge for them to have their own separate but equal institution, just so long as they did not call it marriage.

traditional marriage means anything but 1 man + 1 woman. using some of the various most 'traditional' definitions of marriage, traditional marriage means the man owns the woman as his property. kinda funny how it explicitly says right on the marriage application that i do not own my wife as property. i guess we don't have a traditional marriage.

this is a civil rights issue. if two people want to commit to each other for the rest of their lives, what the fuck is it to you? how does that adversely affect you in the least? why do you insist on creating a strata of second class citizens inferior to heterosexuals? what do you get out of doing that? why?

 

[Keenly2]

i love how the judge himself said he doesnt think they will be able to appeal

why is that you ask? because the decision to allow gays to marry "does not affect them"


i agree completely


are people really so immature that they need to take from others in order to make themselves feel good?

 

[UncleBuck]

the reason marriage is legaly defined is because they give married people tax incentaves its because they want you to get married and have kids who will work pay taxes and joiiiin the military ...gay sex dosent make kids their fore marrige should not aply

compulsory breeding! if you get married and don't breed, we send you to jail!

better stop smoking weed, i hear it lowers sperm count

 

[Padawanbater2]

lol I like your sig UncleBuck, +rep SG

 

[Dan Kone]

i could care less really. i see this morphing into a war with the churches though, but i could be wrong. if a church doesn't want to marry them i don't think they should be made to.

I agree with that. The government shouldn't regulated religion. But if this is a religious ceremony, then why are we giving it legal privileges?

 

[Dan Kone]

What homosexuals want is recognition from the government and all of the benefits that come with it in both public and private sector jobs... That is what the argument is about.

Should they be denied those things?

 

[fdd2blk]

(08-16) 18:22 PDT SAN FRANCISCO -- Gay and lesbian couples must hold off on marrying at least until the end of the year, an appeals court said Monday as it froze a federal judge's decision that had struck down California's ban on same-sex weddings as discriminatory and unconstitutional.

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2010/08/16/MNEE1EUOIF.DTL#ixzz0wql6MXY5

​