dAnzac wrote:How did California of all places pass something like this in the first place
That would be like Sweden passing an anti-white-people law
California isn't the liberal wonderland most think it is, but for the most part, it is a liberal thinking state relative to other states and liberals/liberal-leaning moderates are the majority here. That said, California does have its strong conservative bastions, generally in Orange County and in San Diego. Even then, a lot of people in this state don't have a clear-cut opinion of legalizing/banning gay marriage, regardless of political affiliation and perhaps that's the primary reason why it passed in the first place (I do remember Prop 8 being a narrow win).
dAnzac wrote:How did California of all places pass something like this in the first place
That would be like Sweden passing an anti-white-people law
California isn't the liberal wonderland most think it is, but for the most part, it is a liberal thinking state relative to other states and liberals/liberal-leaning moderates are the majority here. That said, California does have its strong conservative bastions, generally in Orange County and in San Diego. Even then, a lot of people in this state don't have a clear-cut opinion of legalizing/banning gay marriage, regardless of political affiliation and perhaps that's the primary reason why it passed in the first place (I do remember Prop 8 being a narrow win).
People were voting on this the way their political party told them to vote? Un-be-liev-able
Off-topic: I seriously don't get it when Americans say "I'm a Republican/Democrat", that's sooo not the way choosing a government is supposed to work.
Cafe bets 2010: W/j24jags - Oakland A's more wins then NYM W/mweir145 - Oakland A's more wins then TOR (hat-trick?)
dAnzac wrote:How did California of all places pass something like this in the first place
That would be like Sweden passing an anti-white-people law
California isn't the liberal wonderland most think it is, but for the most part, it is a liberal thinking state relative to other states and liberals/liberal-leaning moderates are the majority here. That said, California does have its strong conservative bastions, generally in Orange County and in San Diego. Even then, a lot of people in this state don't have a clear-cut opinion of legalizing/banning gay marriage, regardless of political affiliation and perhaps that's the primary reason why it passed in the first place (I do remember Prop 8 being a narrow win).
People were voting on this the way their political party told them to vote? Un-be-liev-able
No, a lot of people in California still have a conflicted opinion about gay marriage, one way or the other. I wasn't implying that a lot of those folks vote to stay consistent with their party platform alone.
Off-topic: I seriously don't get it when Americans say "I'm a Republican/Democrat", that's sooo not the way choosing a government is supposed to work.
I don't think the majority of people say they are. I think the vast majority would say they vote for the best candidate. The problem is both parties have a certain pull based on issues like this that always draw people to vote Democrat or Republican without looking at the other issues, so in essence you're right but not many actually say so.
kaveman wrote: Yeah, and how come only straight couples can make babies? Nature's nothing but a bigoted homophobe.
So what you're saying is that the only point of marriage is to make babies?
No no no, don't put words in his mouth. I want to see him state this point himself, so it can be taken apart and belittled on its own merits.
Feel free to take apart and belittle the connection between marriage and procreation. I've already read numerous pro-ssm editorials and articles by legal scholars and gay activists. They didn't convince me, but then again they didn't have a jester icon. I'd rather hear your arguments for including LGBT individuals and couples in elementary school materials as prominently as racial minorities. I've taught Language Arts at numerous grade levels and have yet to find a transexual or a gay couple in a story. I would think you would want this heterosexism remedied.
The Artful Dodger wrote: California isn't the liberal wonderland most think it is, but for the most part, it is a liberal thinking state relative to other states and liberals/liberal-leaning moderates are the majority here. That said, California does have its strong conservative bastions, generally in Orange County and in San Diego. Even then, a lot of people in this state don't have a clear-cut opinion of legalizing/banning gay marriage, regardless of political affiliation and perhaps that's the primary reason why it passed in the first place (I do remember Prop 8 being a narrow win).
People were voting on this the way their political party told them to vote? Un-be-liev-able
No, a lot of people in California still have a conflicted opinion about gay marriage, one way or the other. I wasn't implying that a lot of those folks vote to stay consistent with their party platform alone.
Yeah, it wasn't really a party-line vote. African-Americans overwhelmingly voted in favor of it.
Last edited by kaveman on Thu Aug 05, 2010 2:32 am, edited 1 time in total.
knapplc wrote: So what you're saying is that the only point of marriage is to make babies?
No no no, don't put words in his mouth. I want to see him state this point himself, so it can be taken apart and belittled on its own merits.
Feel free to take apart and belittle the connection between marriage and procreation. I've already read numerous pro-ssm editorials and articles by legal scholars and gay activists. They didn't convince me, but then again they didn't have a jester icon. I'd rather hear your arguments for including LGBT individuals and couples in elementary school materials as prominently as racial minorities. I've taught Language Arts at numerous grade levels and have yet to find a transexual or a gay couple in a story. I would think you would want this heterosexism remedied.
So what relevance does the ability to make babies have with the legal standing of gay marriage?
See, I've never gotten a satisfactory explanation for this line of reasoning. I also find people who unironically endorse this idea few and far between, so it's a rare opportunity for me to ask this question.
Last edited by Neato Torpedo on Thu Aug 05, 2010 2:43 am, edited 1 time in total.
Rocinante2: you know Rocinante2: its easy to dismiss the orioles as a bad team ofanrex: go on Rocinante2: i'm done Rocinante2: lmao
Give it 20 years and it won't even be an issue any more. Fag haters will be treated the same as the KKK have been in recent memory. But for now, let 'em stand on their high horse yelling at people for loving each other. Because that love is clearly ruining kids' lives and it needs to be balanced with unrelenting hatred and the fear of their grandchildren marrying dogs and cats.
woodson_28 wrote:Just another situation in which we use democracy and vote in order to make a decision, only to have the Government (and more recently Judges) turn around and slap the average American in the face and say we're wrong.
I must have missed the time where we voted that marriage was only between a man and a woman. Link?
That, quite literally, is what Prop 8 was about: "only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California." Of course, the Proposition pertained only to California, but this ruling (if it stands) could set national precedence.
Well it will be appealed to the 9th. Then SCOTUS.
This ruling only really sets a precedent in the Northern District of California.
"I do not think baseball of today is any better than it was 30 years ago... I still think Radbourne is the greatest of the pitchers." John Sullivan 1914-Old athletes never change.