Yes on Prop 8 Passed

[LadyLuck]

California Approves Gay Marriage Ban

LOS ANGELES (Nov. 5) - Voters put a stop to same-sex marriage in California, dealing a crushing defeat to gay-rights activists in a state they hoped would be a vanguard, and putting in doubt as many as 18,000 same-sex marriages conducted since a court ruling made them legal this year.
The gay-rights movement had a rough election elsewhere as well Tuesday. Ban-gay-marriage amendments were approved in Arizona and Florida, and Arkansas voters approved a measure banning unmarried couples from serving as adoptive or foster parents. Supporters made clear that gays and lesbians were their main target.

read more here:
Yes on H8 (http://news.aol.com/elections/article/ballot-initiatives/237398?icid=100214839x1212345507x1200772925)

I wonder what will happen to the folks that have already gotten married.

[EK 2.0]

Originally posted by LadyLuck

I wonder what will happen to the folks that have already gotten married.


Didn't Ellen have a wedding along with Sulu from Star Trek??

And yeah, do those get now annulled or what??

[Crymson]

So distgusting. Why can't people just mind their own business and stop giving a shit about what other consenting adults do with their free time. Fuck Religion -- bunch of arrogant assholes.

[LadyLuck]

Originally posted by LadyLuck


read more here:
Yes on H8 (http://news.aol.com/elections/article/ballot-initiatives/237398?icid=100214839x1212345507x1200772925)

I wonder what will happen to the folks that have already gotten married.

The one thing that REALLY bothers me is seeing kids holding signs like these...
http://o.aolcdn.com/photo-hub/news_gallery/5/8/584862/1225908385333.JPEG
Chances are the kid does not know what it even means, the parents are brainwashing their kids and not even giving them a chance to choose to accept certain things in todays society.

sad.:(

[Xtrema]

Originally posted by EK 2.0



Didn't Ellen have a wedding along with Sulu from Star Trek??

And yeah, do those get now annulled or what??

grandfather rule. Hence tons of them got married before the vote. And I thought California is liberal and progressive.

[lint]

Originally posted by LadyLuck


The one thing that REALLY bothers me is seeing kids holding signs like these...
http://o.aolcdn.com/photo-hub/news_gallery/5/8/584862/1225908385333.JPEG
Chances are the kid does not know what it even means, the parents are brainwashing their kids and not even giving them a chance to choose to accept certain things in todays society.

sad.:(

You'd be surprised. If you haven't watched Jesus Camp, it will open your eyes.

[GTI CANADIAN]

Well, that's the douchebag, creationist, bible loving americans for ya! Guns for all, and happiness for some.


I watched a Great documentry last night, it's called "Escape to Canada". It's about people form the US who come to Canada for the enjoyment of marijuana, same sex marriage, and to go A.W.O.L. AND escape the army's pointless war in Iraq.

Who really cares? Get over it, the intitution of marriage is over rated.



Jesus Camp......fuckin' crazy. Basically a jihad training camp in the name of Jesus, instead of Allah, for 8 year olds.

[LadyLuck]

Originally posted by lint


You'd be surprised. If you haven't watched Jesus Camp, it will open your eyes.

Seen it.
The root of evil are still parents tho.

[lint]

Originally posted by LadyLuck


Seen it.
The root of evil are still parents tho.

Yeah, but even at a very young age some of these kids know what it means. Not saying I agree with it, just that kids aren't all innocent and being led like sheep. Some are shepherds themselves.

[TKRIS]

Originally posted by lint


Yeah, but even at a very young age some of these kids know what it means. Not saying I agree with it, just that kids aren't all innocent and being led like sheep. Some are shepherds themselves.

Indoctrination is different that choice.
These kids might know what it means, and believe it, but it's not because they've decided to do so, it's because it's been rammed down their throats since birth.
Same reason why most Jews have Jewish parents, Catholics have Catholic parents, Muslims have Muslim parents, etc, etc.

[kutt3r]

Jesus camp eh?
Might have to check that out.. sounds interesting (not going but seeing the show....)

*sigh*

Crumbling economy, but gay marriage is sooooo important...

:rofl:

[LadyLuck]

Originally posted by lint


Yeah, but even at a very young age some of these kids know what it means. Not saying I agree with it, just that kids aren't all innocent and being led like sheep. Some are shepherds themselves.

Its not that I don't agree with you, however...a kid must be learning this from somebody. You can't tell me that a child can separate the "good" from the "bad" without guidance from an adult. A child can't look at a gay/lesbian couple and automatically believe that its bad, just because the kid thinks so.

EDIT: TKRIS pretty much said it.

[LadyLuck]

Originally posted by kutt3r
Crumbling economy, but gay marriage is sooooo important...

:rofl:

Uh huh, you worry about your stock market and they Gay folks can worry about their treatment as 2nd class citizens.

[finboy]

big :thumbsdow

on the up side, obama's platform ran off of support for equal rights for civil unions, but still no gay marriage. who knows, now that he is in power he might try to get gay marriage through in a couple of years :dunno:

[Supa Dexta]

I just got banned from diesel place for arguing over the election and prop 8... :rofl: What a bunch of retard, redneck, racists.. And any other R word. Out of the dozens of forums I've been on the last 10 yrs, this is my first vacation.. :rofl: :rofl:

[codetrap]

I have to admit, I'm ambivalent on the topic. The worst part is, I can't even tell you why. I'm not one to bar anyone happiness, but there's just something about the concept, or perhaps simply the phraseology surrounding the issue that doesn't sit well.

This doesn't spawn from any religious beliefs either, since I'm pretty much agnostic. I mean, when I think about say LadyLuck wanting to marry her "life partner" or whatever the term is, I don't have any objections.. but when someone says "Gay Marriage" it just bugs me for some reason..

Maybe it's just the issue has been poisoned so much by the media, that it's the words themselves that don't sit well anymore..

I mean, it's just Marriage.. why does it have to be "Gay Marriage"... :dunno:

Anywhoo.. that's my introspection for now..

[kutt3r]

Originally posted by LadyLuck


Uh huh, you worry about your stock market and they Gay folks can worry about their treatment as 2nd class citizens.

I think my statement was misunderstood... why waste the time of taking rights away from people, when the politicians could be focusing on important issues such as the economy.

I have no issues with same sex marrige, I just think to bother getting a bill past to stop it is a waste of tax payers dollars.

Gov't + Religion = bad

[Super_Geo]

I used to be 100% pro gay marriage... but after thinking about it some more, I think I am pro gay civil union and indifferent on gay marriage.

What I am definitely against is how some gay couples tried to get a court to force a priest to marry them (here in Canada) when the priest said no, based obviously on his religious beliefs. There are many priests out there willing to perform gay marriages in Canada... trying to force one that is against it to marry you is just fucking ignorant.

[TKRIS]

Originally posted by Super_Geo
What I am definitely against is how some gay couples tried to get a court to force a priest to marry them (here in Canada) when the priest said no, based obviously on his religious beliefs. There are many priests out there willing to perform gay marriages in Canada... trying to force one that is against it to marry you is just fucking ignorant.

I think I've made my views on gay marriage well known enough in the past, but I agree with this.

No self respecting priest would perform my wedding ceremony, so why should he be legally obligated to perform one between two gay guys/girls? The ONLY argument for this would be if churches were the only places one could get married. Since that's not the case, this is complete fucking bullshit.

[tentacles]

Well, Timmy, it looks like you'll have to do without college, but at least we stopped teh gheys from getting married. :nut:


http://www.sacbee.com/391/story/1308945.html



Pam and Rick Patterson have always followed teachings of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and tried to live within their means.

He drives a 10-year-old Honda Civic to his job at Intel. She is a stay-at home mom who makes most of the family meals and bakes her own bread. The couple, who have five sons between the ages of 3 and 12, live in a comfortable but modest three-bedroom home in Folsom.

It's a traditional lifestyle they believe is now at risk. That's why the Pattersons recently made a huge financial sacrifice – they withdrew $50,000 from their savings and donated it to the Yes on Proposition 8 campaign, the ballot measure that seeks to ban same-sex marriage.

"It was a decision we made very prayerfully and carefully," said Pam Patterson, 48. "Was it an easy decision? No. But it was a clear decision, one that had so much potential to benefit our children and their children."

Mormons such as the Pattersons have emerged as the leading financial contributors to the controversial Nov. 4 ballot measure. Church members have donated about 40 percent of the $22.8 million raised to pass the initiative since July, according to Frank Schubert, campaign manager for ProtectMarriage.com, the primary backer of the "yes" campaign.

Other religious groups have contributed, including a Catholic fraternal service organization – the Knights of Columbus – which donated more than $1 million. But no group has given more than the Mormons.

In a June letter to members, top church leaders urged them to "do what you can do" to support Prop. 8. Members have answered the call.

Mormons have sponsored meetings, knocked on doors, installed lawn signs, staffed phone banks and given generously.

Their financial dominance is getting their opponents' attention and raising concerns about the role of churches in state policymaking.

"I think anyone would be troubled by any one religion exerting that kind of financial influence in a decision about what our constitution is going to say," said Kate Kendell, executive director for the National Center for Lesbian Rights and a member of the executive committee of No on Prop 8.

"The amount of money the Mormon church is giving is alarming and sobering," she said. "This is a wake-up call."

Kendell said there are a number of people of faith who oppose the ban and who are working to defeat Prop. 8. "There is not one monolithic view on this, but surely this is a case where we're being massively outspent," Kendell said.

Opponents have raised about $17 million since July, according to Kendell.

She believes reports about the financial role Mormons are playing will motivate opponents of the measure. "Too many people are sitting on the sidelines," she said.

Several celebrities have made generous donations, including film director Steven Spielberg and T.R. Knight of the television series "Grey's Anatomy," who each gave $100,000.

"But we're not going to win with celebrity money," Kendell said. "We need everyday Californians who are willing to write checks and make the financial sacrifice for their beliefs."

Churches can play an active role and can endorse propositions without violating federal tax laws, according to Robert Boston of Americans United for Separation of Church and State.

"Those laws prohibit churches from endorsing or opposing candidates," said Boston. "That principle does not extend to the discussion of an issue. They are allowed to address ballot issues."

Mormon officials contend that this "is not a Mormon issue. And it shouldn't be portrayed that way," said Lisa West, spokesperson for the church in the Sacramento region.

More than 700,000 church members live in the state; 85,000 in the Sacramento region. "Obviously, a lot of other people besides Mormons are concerned about this and are contributing," she said.

West said church members have given generously to this issue because it strikes at the core of their beliefs – that marriage is between a man and a woman and lasts for eternity.

"The No. 1 reason members are donating and working toward this cause is the preservation of the traditional family," she said.

That's why Auburn resident David Nielson, 55, is giving. He said the church has not pressured him to contribute.

"Absolutely not," said Nielson, a retired insurance executive. He and his wife, Susan, live on a budget. The couple donated $35,000, he said, "because some things are worth fighting for."

The couple will forgo a vacation for the next two years and make other sacrifices to pay for their donation, he said.

"If it doesn't pass, then at least I can tell my grandchildren I gave everything I could," Nielson said.

The Pattersons, who have been married 14 years, say there were thinking about their children's future when they decided to tap into their savings to contribute. And they also said no one pressured them into giving.

They were reluctant to talk about their donation – not even their families knew how much they contributed – and agreed to do so only because it is listed on public campaign documents.

"The amount may surprise people," said Rick Patterson. "But people who know us, know how much the family means to us."

Will they regret donating so much of their savings if the ballot proposition fails?

"No. I feel totally at peace about it," Pam Patterson said. She said they will continue to live frugally. "We have done what we feel is right."

[Super_Geo]

Originally posted by tentacles
Well, Timmy, it looks like you'll have to do without college, but at least we stopped teh gheys from getting married. :nut:


http://www.sacbee.com/391/story/1308945.html



:rofl: Mormons... :rofl:

[Penis McNickels]

Originally posted by Super_Geo
I used to be 100% pro gay marriage... but after thinking about it some more, I think I am pro gay civil union and indifferent on gay marriage.

What I am definitely against is how some gay couples tried to get a court to force a priest to marry them (here in Canada) when the priest said no, based obviously on his religious beliefs. There are many priests out there willing to perform gay marriages in Canada... trying to force one that is against it to marry you is just fucking ignorant.

Hey, don't let a few retarded homos change your mind. I agree what they did was stupid, but they still have the right to get married and the priest has just as much right to refuse to perform their wedding based on his religious beliefs.

They should have just gone and found a different priest. But if I remember correctly (assuming we are thinking of the same article) these people didn't tell the priest they were a gay couple up until the last minute, because they thought "it wasn't an important issue"... To me, it seemed more like they were baiting him, as if they didn't know that some religions might not be accepting of their lifestyle...

[lint]

Originally posted by TKRIS
Indoctrination is different that choice.
These kids might know what it means, and believe it, but it's not because they've decided to do so, it's because it's been rammed down their throats since birth.
Same reason why most Jews have Jewish parents, Catholics have Catholic parents, Muslims have Muslim parents, etc, etc.

So there's no possibility that children choose to follow in the footsteps of their parents as opposed to being forced to? These children are still presented with different opinions in school, the media, and other aspects of their lives. Some will be influenced, others won't.

I think it's sad not because they don't know what they're doing, but rather because some do.

[Super_Geo]

Originally posted by Penis McNickels


Hey, don't let a few retarded homos change your mind. I agree what they did was stupid, but they still have the right to get married and the priest has just as much right to refuse to perform their wedding based on his religious beliefs.

They should have just gone and found a different priest. But if I remember correctly (assuming we are thinking of the same article) these people didn't tell the priest they were a gay couple up until the last minute, because they thought "it wasn't an important issue"... To me, it seemed more like they were baiting him, as if they didn't know that some religions might not be accepting of their lifestyle...

I guess what I was trying to say was: The government should have no position on gay marriage... if a priest wants to marry gays, sure go ahead and let him. If a priest refuses to marry gays, sure go ahead and let him.

Haha but I can't get over that article posted up by tentacles... fuckin Mormons :rofl: $50,000 by a single 'modest' family to ban gay marriages :rofl: I hope the dad loses his job, just for comedic value that situation would provide. "I can't feed my kids cause I spent all my money fighting the gays!"

[LadyLuck]

Originally posted by lint


So there's no possibility that children choose to follow in the footsteps of their parents as opposed to being forced to? These children are still presented with different opinions in school, the media, and other aspects of their lives. Some will be influenced, others won't.

I think it's sad not because they don't know what they're doing, but rather because some do.

This is something we could talk about for days and days lol.
Children choose to follow the footsteps of their parents because at such a young age they just do not have any other choice.
One of the reasons why some teenages leave their churches as soon as they turn 18 or whatever the legal age may be where ever they are.

My mom became a Jehovas Witness when we moved to Germany in '92. My mother never pushed the religion on me, but offered me to learn about it. It was eventually up to me once I was 8 years old to choose if I wanted to learn about it.

BUT whenever I was around my dads family they would trash talk my mother and Jehovas Witnesses in general, saying they were disgusting and making up rumors of sex acts and god knows what else they "thought" was going on inside of the church or cult as they called it, things so far from the truth. They hated Jehovas Witnesses, and would make up whatever shit they could just to get people to not like them.

Thats how these things start.

[TKRIS]

Originally posted by lint


So there's no possibility that children choose to follow in the footsteps of their parents as opposed to being forced to? These children are still presented with different opinions in school, the media, and other aspects of their lives. Some will be influenced, others won't.

I think it's sad not because they don't know what they're doing, but rather because some do.

Oh come on.
By the time they're old enough to have anywhere close to equal influence from any alternative ideas they're already well into their formative years. Especially in the case on fundamental evangelicals who are often home schooled.

Of course some of these kids will eventually grow up to dissapoint their parents by not being complete fuckup morons, but they won't get to that point until late in life. The 8 year old holding the sign that says "God Hates Fags" might really believe that, but it ain't because she's made that decision for herself.

[7thgenvic]

my favorite gays are on www.pornhub.com God bless those "lesbians"

[3g4u]

Originally posted by TKRIS


Oh come on.
By the time they're old enough to have anywhere close to equal influence from any alternative ideas they're already well into their formative years. Especially in the case on fundamental evangelicals who are often home schooled.

Of course some of these kids will eventually grow up to dissapoint their parents by not being complete fuckup morons, but they won't get to that point until late in life. The 8 year old holding the sign that says "God Hates Fags" might really believe that, but it ain't because she's made that decision for herself.

(hypothetical situation) Well how about the 8 year old kid who dosent know any better then to BE gay because a couple homosexuals adopted this poor kid? I figure this would be more of an issue, then some kid holding a sign their parents wrote for them.

Since when does having an opinion and expressing it condemn you into the redneck, fuckup moron, racist, category?

[Idratherbsidewayz]

I support gay marriage (one aunt and uncle that are each gay and very happy), but I don't support gay couples having adopted children.

A kid with two moms or two dads will be scarred for life. As a young impressionable child, he (or she) will see his parents together and will come to think of it as normal (for lack of a better word). When he comes to school, as soon as kids find out they will tease him. He will feel betrayed, and won't understand why his parents would do that to him. The hate he has towards them will escalate and when he eventually leaves the nest, he will be bitter and jaded.

So many children are fucked up nowadays because of bad parenting. If you throw gay/non gay issues into the mix, I think it really puts the child at a huge disadvantage.

Im glad people that were born gay can find happiness in this world. Im glad the world is open enough to essentially support (though with discretion usually) gay people being together. Hoewever, I think we should know where to draw the line. Until homosexuality becomes as normal as heterosexuality, gay people should not have children.

[kertejud2]

Originally posted by Idratherbsidewayz
I support gay marriage (one aunt and uncle that are each gay and very happy), but I don't support gay couples having adopted children.

A kid with two moms or two dads will be scarred for life. As a young impressionable child, he (or she) will see his parents together and will come to think of it as normal (for lack of a better word). When he comes to school, as soon as kids find out they will tease him. He will feel betrayed, and won't understand why his parents would do that to him. The hate he has towards them will escalate and when he eventually leaves the nest, he will be bitter and jaded.

So many children are fucked up nowadays because of bad parenting. If you throw gay/non gay issues into the mix, I think it really puts the child at a huge disadvantage.

Im glad people that were born gay can find happiness in this world. Im glad the world is open enough to essentially support (though with discretion usually) gay people being together. Hoewever, I think we should know where to draw the line. Until homosexuality becomes as normal as heterosexuality, gay people should not have children.


So it is better off having kids be bounced around in foster homes until they're 18 rather than putting them in a household with two loving parents because they would be teased? Is a child with two mommies or two daddies really at a greater disadvantage compared to a child with just a mother or just a father? Hell, are they better off than a kid who's parents are divorced?

Kids have been fucked up long before gays wanted to adopt, and I would gladly put a child in the care of two competent gay people than some of the idiot fuckup couples I've seen with kids.

And then how can we possibly as humans prevent them from having their own children? If a lesbian wants to be artificially inseminated, or if a couple gay guys can find an egg donor and a surrogate mother, how can our morality reject them? And if we can't reject gay couple from having their own children, how can we prevent them from adopting one as well? If a gay couple can't be considered 'appropriate' enough to raise a child, surely we can take that basic human right away from others.

[CUG]

Good :)

[TKRIS]

Originally posted by 3g4u
(hypothetical situation) Well how about the 8 year old kid who dosent know any better then to BE gay because a couple homosexuals adopted this poor kid?
This assumes that being gay is a choice, which is something open to debate.
Second, this presumes that the parents will be trying to make the kid gay in the same way the Phelps try to make their kids hate.
Third, why is it so much better to be hetrosexual than homosexual? Why is being gay some travesty to be avoided at all costs? The fuck business is it of yours if my kid is gay?

Originally posted by 3g4u
I figure this would be more of an issue, then some kid holding a sign their parents wrote for them.
You think that gay people are worse than people who protest funerals and use every method available to spread hate an intolorance?
I disagree with this entirely.


Originally posted by 3g4u
Since when does having an opinion and expressing it condemn you into the redneck, fuckup moron, racist, category?

Since when did I say it did?

I'm not condemning anyone just for having an opinion. But if you're opinions are based on racism, then I'm going to go ahead and call you a racist. Same goes for the rest of your list.


Originally posted by Idratherbsidewayz
A kid with two moms or two dads will be scarred for life. As a young impressionable child, he (or she) will see his parents together and will come to think of it as normal (for lack of a better word). When he comes to school, as soon as kids find out they will tease him. He will feel betrayed, and won't understand why his parents would do that to him. The hate he has towards them will escalate and when he eventually leaves the nest, he will be bitter and jaded.
You might have had a point if you wouldn't have just pulled this all directly out of your ass.
There are plenty of kids that come from homes with same sex parents, and plenty of long term tests and studies on what effects this has.
The only negative is that these kids tend to get picked on a bit more. In other words, my kid will get picked on because your kid isn't able to accept him for who he is. That sounds a lot more like you not doing your job than it does anything to do with me.

Additionally, in spite of this (or possibly because of it), the children of same sex couples tend to be better adjusted, and more tolorant and empathetic to others.

I went to high school with a guy who's dad was gay. I didn't know the kid too well (he was younger than me), but I worked with his dad for a long time. He was fine. A bit on the rebellious side, but had plenty of friends and was always nice enough to everyone. Certainly not the dark withdrawn resentful soul that appears to haunt your overactive imagination.

Your assertion that we shouldn't allow gays to be parents until it's normal is hypocritical and self-defeating (I suspect intentionally so). How are they ever going to be equal and normal if we don't treat them equally and normally (and teach our kids to do the same).
That's like saying "We'll start treating black people equally as soon as it seems normal to treat them equally."

[CUG]

Whatever, I think it's time that some lobby groups here and there get their mouths shut. This was a good start. Give them a tax break or whatever for the civil union sure.

[BerserkerCatSplat]

Ah, TKRIS. As usual, you type so I don't have to. Spot on.

[pyroza]

my reaction: :facepalm: ...:banghead:

separation of church and state.

[finboy]

on the up side, cali killed prop 4

[pyroza]

Originally posted by finboy
on the up side, cali killed prop 4

I am very happy about that one. I'm glad 2 passed as well, and all the other ones I really didn't care about all that much.

Still wanted 8 to be shot down :guns:

[dino_martini]

Originally posted by Xtrema


grandfather rule. Hence tons of them got married before the vote. And I thought California is liberal and progressive.

Don't kid your self..the Central Valley in particular and Southern California outside of Los Angeles can be freakishly conservative.

[LadyLuck]

Originally posted by Idratherbsidewayz
Until homosexuality becomes as normal as heterosexuality, gay people should not have children.



Originally posted by TKRIS
Your assertion that we shouldn't allow gays to be parents until it's normal is hypocritical and self-defeating (I suspect intentionally so). How are they ever going to be equal and normal if we don't treat them equally and normally (and teach our kids to do the same).
That's like saying "We'll start treating black people equally as soon as it seems normal to treat them equally."

TKRIS: I couldn't have said it better myself.

Idratherbsidewayz: I find it hard to believe that even with gay family members you are ok with gay marriage only because of this statement you made.

How do you think homosexuality will become normal?

[HiTempguy1]

I think I've made my views on gay marriage well known enough in the past, but I agree with this.

Ok TKRIS, I am calling you out. When I posted in a thread stating I was pro gay civil union but against gay marriage, you beat the piss out of me. What changed, and why is super-geo allowed to say the same fawkin' thing without getting pwned?

Seriously, I am just curious. I meant EXACTLY what he stated, and everyone jumped on me like some bigot, baby eating, gay killing monster. :nut:

[TKRIS]

Originally posted by HiTempguy1


Ok TKRIS, I am calling you out. When I posted in a thread stating I was pro gay civil union but against gay marriage, you beat the piss out of me. What changed, and why is super-geo allowed to say the same fawkin' thing without getting pwned?

Seriously, I am just curious. I meant EXACTLY what he stated, and everyone jumped on me like some bigot, baby eating, gay killing monster. :nut:

I justified not getting into a civil union vs gay marriage debate because I'd so recently kicked your ass on exactly that.
;)

Geo stated he was indifferent. You did not take that stance.
Not caring one way or the other is quite a bit different than being against.
I don't care what you meant to say, I can only address what you did say. And you had plenty of chances to elaborate and modify your arguments.
I can only address what you actually write, not what you meant to write.

Furthermore, since when do I have some obligation to correct all these wrongs? Why am I charged with having the same argument over and over and over again least I be considered a hypocrite? Don't I babble, rant and ramble on enough without being burdened with the sole responsibility of defending my position anytime anyone calls it into question?

If you'd like to now assume the position of indifference, and not care either way, that's understandable and, in my opinion, commendable. But that's not what you said.

[finboy]

i would say civil unions for all would be the best solution:dunno:

[Zephyr]

The main reason why this was passed is because of the false ads that were presented. The Yes on Prop 8 ads all claimed that homosexuality was taught in the classrooms. I talked to a few friends that are teachers or work with kids today, all of them say that it isn't true at all. I believe No on Prop 8 was endorsed by teachers and the school board.

I think it's really stupid that people dragged kids into this just to get their own agenda across, especially when it's a huge lie. I know a few friends that fell for that lie and voted yes. We had a huge amount of ads for this prop, so much that I seriously got tired of this, there was crowds of pro 8 people on major intersections. Most of them were lead by some church groups,.


Thou shalt not hate thy brother in thine heart: thou shalt in any wise rebuke [reason with] thy neighbour, and not suffer sin upon him.
Thou shalt not avenge, nor bear any grudge against the children of thy people, but thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself: I am the Lord.
-- Leviticus 19: 17-18

I don't get why the bible says to love each other yet religious groups think they have the right to control the lives of others...

[SilVFan]

i am, not sure why they would support such a thing, . seems like a waste of moneies and time.

[Supa Dexta]

I have a question.. Is there a large problem of HIV/AIDS in prison? With all the forced homo sex people talk about, you would think there would be.. And if there isn't wtf are real homo's up to, that they get it so much more often..

[Redlyne_mr2]

So much drama for a bill that in a totally different country lol.

[LadyLuck]

Originally posted by Redlyne_mr2
So much drama for a bill that in a totally different country lol.

May be.
First it was legalized, then voted against.
Its legalized here, you never know if the same thing might happen in canada.

[HiTempguy1]

Geo stated he was indifferent. You did not take that stance.

Thanks, I appreciate the straight quick answer. ;)

[Idratherbsidewayz]

Originally posted by kertejud2
So it is better off having kids be bounced around in foster homes until they're 18 rather than putting them in a household with two loving parents because they would be teased? Is a child with two mommies or two daddies really at a greater disadvantage compared to a child with just a mother or just a father? Hell, are they better off than a kid who's parents are divorced?

If the choice was between two fucked up heterosexual people who have no business being parents and a loving gay couple with good values and parenting skills Id obviously pick the gay couple. But if we compare a hetero and a homo couple, both with the same parenting skills and level of fuckedupness, the straight couple will be better for the child because it is a more natural setting. All im saying is that there is no point throwing the added issues of gay parents into our already difficult world to grow up in.


Originally posted by TKRIS
You might have had a point if you wouldn't have just pulled this all directly out of your ass. There are plenty of kids that come from homes with same sex parents, and plenty of long term tests and studies on what effects this has. The only negative is that these kids tend to get picked on a bit more. In other words, my kid will get picked on because your kid isn't able to accept him for who he is. That sounds a lot more like you not doing your job than it does anything to do with me.

I just looked at the situation logically, and you confirmed my musings. The child will be picked on more than a normal child and because of this will undergo more emotional trauma than a child not exposed to gay parents. His life will be harder. If this is something gay parents are willing to subject their child to then by all means. It is a little selfish though...


Originally posted by TKRIS
Additionally, in spite of this (or possibly because of it), the children of same sex couples tend to be better adjusted, and more tolorant and empathetic to others.

Seems like you're pulling this out of your ass. I feel that the children have a way higher chance of being fucked up than someone raised by a hetero couple with the same values and parenting skills. Emotional Trauma may not be evident on the surface, but you don't see these people with their close friends/alone.


Originally posted by TKRIS
I went to high school with a guy who's dad was gay. I didn't know the kid too well (he was younger than me), but I worked with his dad for a long time. He was fine. A bit on the rebellious side, but had plenty of friends and was always nice enough to everyone. Certainly not the dark withdrawn resentful soul that appears to haunt your overactive imagination.

Your friend was not born into a gay couple. Im assuming his dad came out when he was a kid/teen. This is a totally different situation. Im talking about children raised from the beginning by gay parents. Everything that they absorb when they're too young to speak. The teasing at school would be much more hurtful in that situation as it would violate the trust you have with your parents.


Originally posted by TKRIS
Your assertion that we shouldn't allow gays to be parents until it's normal is hypocritical and self-defeating (I suspect intentionally so). How are they ever going to be equal and normal if we don't treat them equally and normally (and teach our kids to do the same).
That's like saying "We'll start treating black people equally as soon as it seems normal to treat them equally."

All I was saying here is that gay couples having children should be the last step in the gay revolution. Im a very open-minded guy, and would never treat anyone gay differently than any other person. The issue is the rest of the world who needs time (a few generations) to be fully accepting of the gay culture. Until this has happened, the children of gay couples will be at a disadvantage to children of heterosexuals.

I would also like to mention, and this is my personal belief, that the bond shared between children and parents is not so strong just because they live together. When I look at my mom and dad, see the family I came from, the history, the features, and most importantly the blood we share, I feel honored and satisfied in a way thats not really explainable. This is something gay people will never be able to offer their children.


Originally posted by LadyLuck
Idratherbsidewayz: I find it hard to believe that even with gay family members you are ok with gay marriage only because of this statement you made.

How do you think homosexuality will become normal?

It will become normal when everybody is indifferent to it. When you look at hetero marriage and homo marriage to be the same thing. The only thing that will make this happen is time. Eventually people will realize it doesn't matter who you marry as long as you are in love.

Personally, I am not pro or anti gay. I believe in the right to choose your own path as long as you don't try to change other people. Everyone should be able to choose their own way.

[msommers]

Originally posted by Idratherbsidewayz
I would also like to mention, and this is my personal belief, that the bond shared between children and parents is not so strong just because they live together. When I look at my mom and dad, see the family I came from, the history, the features, and most importantly the blood we share, I feel honored and satisfied in a way thats not really explainable. This is something gay people will never be able to offer their children. In that case, how would an adopted child feel with hetero parents?

[Idratherbsidewayz]

Originally posted by msommers
In that case, how would an adopted child feel with hetero parents?

The same way, he/she wouldn't be as connected to his/her roots. In that respect its no different hetero to homo...

[LadyLuck]

Originally posted by Idratherbsidewayz
I would also like to mention, and this is my personal belief, that the bond shared between children and parents is not so strong just because they live together. When I look at my mom and dad, see the family I came from, the history, the features, and most importantly the blood we share, I feel honored and satisfied in a way thats not really explainable. This is something gay people will never be able to offer their children.


I think that this is where Lesbians have more of an advantage than Gay Men because they can get insaminated and one of them would actually be the birth mother allowing the child to be born into the Homosexual family and sharing what you just mentioned above.

[TKRIS]

Originally posted by Idratherbsidewayz

I just looked at the situation logically, and you confirmed my musings. The child will be picked on more than a normal child and because of this will undergo more emotional trauma than a child not exposed to gay parents. His life will be harder. If this is something gay parents are willing to subject their child to then by all means. It is a little selfish though...

There's a lot in my life that made it harder than a lot of other people's. I wouldn't change it for anything. Harder doesn't mean worse. Overcoming is a satisfaction that few of today's bubble wrapped kids will ever experience.
Plus, I noticed you grazed right over the part about how your kid being a bigoted bully is your fault, not mine.


Originally posted by Idratherbsidewayz
Seems like you're pulling this out of your ass.
It seems like that because that's obviously the only place you know to look.


Originally posted by Idratherbsidewayz
I feel that the children have a way higher chance of being fucked up than someone raised by a hetero couple with the same values and parenting skills. Emotional Trauma may not be evident on the surface, but you don't see these people with their close friends/alone.
What you feel as a hetrosexual person who grew up around almost all hetrosexual people, with hetrosexual parents, is completely irrelevant. What is relevant is the numerous studies on the actual cases.
What you feel doesn't matter. What matters is what actually happens, and we've got plenty of analysis and examples and studies to show what actually happens, which also happens to prove your omnipotent feelings wrong.

I've intentionally neglected to post the studies. I was going off memory the first time, but just as a check, I was easily able to find a plethora of examples in well under 2 minutes on Google. I have no choice but to assume you didn't even bother looking, assuming your precious feelings on the matter to be infailable. :rolleyes:



Originally posted by Idratherbsidewayz
Your friend was not born into a gay couple. Im assuming his dad came out when he was a kid/teen. This is a totally different situation. Im talking about children raised from the beginning by gay parents. Everything that they absorb when they're too young to speak. The teasing at school would be much more hurtful in that situation as it would violate the trust you have with your parents.

1.) Not that it matters but this happened before school started, so he was very young. Additionally, this was rural Saskatchewan in the 80-90's. Not exactly a mecca for sexual tolorance.
2.) You're really grasping at straws by shrinking your window.
3.) You have no idea what you're talking about because, not only have you never been in that situation, you've done absolutely no research on what people who have have to say about it. Your entire premise is based on assumptions derived from your specific world view, in which you have virtually zero actual experience with the subject at hand. Nothing you've said has any basis beyond "Well, this is what I think would happen, so that's what'll happen" while closing your eyes and intentionally neglecting to actually look into the issue.
You're a blind man describing a sunset you've never seen, nor had described to you. It's pure fantasy.

Originally posted by Idratherbsidewayz
All I was saying here is that gay couples having children should be the last step in the gay revolution. Im a very open-minded guy, and would never treat anyone gay differently than any other person.
Except that they shouldn't be allowed to have kids, and if tey do, they'll fuck them up with their selfish lifestyle. :rolleyes:

"I'm open minded. I'm not a bigot. But I don't think people should be alowed the same rights and choices as the rest of us."


[i]Originally posted by Idratherbsidewayz
The issue is the rest of the world who needs time (a few generations) to be fully accepting of the gay culture. Until this has happened, the children of gay couples will be at a disadvantage to children of heterosexuals.

Based on your extensive knowledge and research....that's left a skidmark on your boxers...


Originally posted by Idratherbsidewayz
I would also like to mention, and this is my personal belief, that the bond shared between children and parents is not so strong just because they live together. When I look at my mom and dad, see the family I came from, the history, the features, and most importantly the blood we share, I feel honored and satisfied in a way thats not really explainable. This is something gay people will never be able to offer their children.

Edit: In the interests on not pulling this too far off topic, I'll edit this down to simply say that this sort of claim has no positive effect other than to make people like you, who come from what you consider to be the ideal family situation, feel superior to those that didn't.
To use this as reasoning to support your beliefs is disgusting.


Originally posted by Idratherbsidewayz
It will become normal when everybody is indifferent to it.

No one is ever going to be indifferent to it as long as people like you insist it's different.
No one is going to see a same sex marriage as equal as long as people like you insist that they're not equal.
No one is going to see same sex couples as being capable of properly raising a child as long as people like you pull bullshit out of the air and insist they're not capable of properly raising a child (despite all evidence to the contrary).


Originally posted by Idratherbsidewayz
When you look at hetero marriage and homo marriage to be the same thing. The only thing that will make this happen is time. Eventually people will realize it doesn't matter who you marry as long as you are in love.

Personally, I am not pro or anti gay. I believe in the right to choose your own path as long as you don't try to change other people. Everyone should be able to choose their own way.

But they shouldn't be alowed to do what I'm allowed to do because I think it's wrong.
What hypocritical horseshit.

At the end of the day, I'm not trying to make you think or do anything. I give a shit if you're against gay marriage, or gay adoption, or whatever. We can have a discussion about it, but I'm not going to bother trying too hard. Unless you're misrepresenting the issue, I don't really care.

What I'm irritated with is the type of people who hide under a blanket of tolorance and open mindedness and think that excuses their intolorance and close mindedness.
If you don't want gays to be married or have kids, fine. But like I've said before, don't say "I think we're all equal" and then refuse equal treatment to a specific group.

And no, doing it by proxy by trying to use other people's predjudices to excuse your own doesn't make it OK.

[creeper]

Originally posted by Zephyr
I don't get why the bible says to love each other yet religious groups think they have the right to control the lives of others...

The mystical child's wizard bible contains much bullshit and hypocrisy.

[Idratherbsidewayz]

Originally posted by TKRIS
At the end of the day, I'm not trying to make you think or do anything. I give a shit if you're against gay marriage, or gay adoption, or whatever. We can have a discussion about it, but I'm not going to bother trying too hard. Unless you're misrepresenting the issue, I don't really care.

What I'm irritated with is the type of people who hide under a blanket of tolorance and open mindedness and think that excuses their intolorance and close mindedness.
If you don't want gays to be married or have kids, fine. But like I've said before, don't say "I think we're all equal" and then refuse equal treatment to a specific group.

And no, doing it by proxy by trying to use other people's predjudices to excuse your own doesn't make it OK.

Openmindedness does not mean let the world do whatever it wants until it implodes. It means let it go until it seems illogical to you, then draw a line. I feel that I am openminded on a worldly scale but maybe not as much as you. Im also not saying we're all equal, I never did. I said people should be entitled to marry whoever they want. When it comes to children, a happy hetero couple will naturally do a better job than a happy gay couple with the same values and parenting skills. The child's life will be more balanced as he will have good male and female direction. In this way, a gay couple is not equal to a hetero couple. However, they are definitely better than an abusive couple, or a foster home.

I'm definitely not disputing that I looked at the situation logically with little to no basis on actual written fact. However, I feel the points I made are valid. The googled surveys you were praising are indeed very conclusive. Absolutely nothing different when gay couples raise children. In fact the kids are better off than hetero couple's kids. They are more open to social and sexual differences.

I say it all seems a little too good to be true, and we'll just have to wait and see. We'll all be long dead once we know whether or not this has helped or hurt our society.

[TKRIS]

Originally posted by Idratherbsidewayz
When it comes to children, a happy hetero couple will naturally do a better job than a happy gay couple with the same values and parenting skills. The child's life will be more balanced as he will have good male and female direction. In this way, a gay couple is not equal to a hetero couple.


Originally posted by Idratherbsidewayz
The googled surveys you were praising are indeed very conclusive. Absolutely nothing different when gay couples raise children. In fact the kids are better off than hetero couple's kids. They are more open to social and sexual differences.


Originally posted by Idratherbsidewayz
I say it all seems a little too good to be true, and we'll just have to wait and see. We'll all be long dead once we know whether or not this has helped or hurt our society.

Wait and see for what?
You said you've read the reports and studies. If that's the case, you should know that we've already waited. We've already seen. You just don't want to believe it because it doesn't fit into your world view.

In any case, this was a good discussion.

[LadyLuck]

Originally posted by TKRIS
In any case, this was a good discussion.

Yep, and WOW what a discussion it was.

[momofan]

I believe in equal rights, I believe a gay couple can raise children in a safe loving home just as well as any hetro couple.

You get bad parents in every group regardless of age, sexual orientation, race and religion of people. We have a lot of children sitting in foster home that would love to live with a forever family.

I know 2 seperate women that married men just to have children, both divorced both in a homosexual relationship raising children. Why did they do this? They knew they would be denied the option of adoption being in a gay relationship.

We can't just say all homosexuals are self indulgent, because I know just as many self indulgent heterosexual couples that think they need to drive the best car and own the best house and have the best of everything.

[Idratherbsidewayz]

Originally posted by TKRIS
Wait and see for what?
You said you've read the reports and studies. If that's the case, you should know that we've already waited. We've already seen. You just don't want to believe it because it doesn't fit into your world view.

In any case, this was a good discussion.

It's my belief that we'll need more than 30 years (most of the studies were done since 1980) to determine long term effects. In 200 years, people will be able to look back and say whether this was a good idea or not.

Great discussion. I'm glad I read those studies. Now my old conclusive thoughts have been reopened and I can start looking past my old logic and develop new ideas/musings. Anyway ill keep my eyes open...


Originally posted by momofan
I know 2 seperate women that married men just to have children, both divorced both in a homosexual relationship raising children. Why did they do this? They knew they would be denied the option of adoption being in a gay relationship.

We can't just say all homosexuals are selfish, because I know just as many selfish heterosexual couples that think they need to drive the best car and own the best house and have the best of everything.

Are you saying these women aren't selfish? They seem like people with terrible values. Why not just get inseminated by a random dude, why ruin two men's lives? Seems selfish to me...

Being selfish isn't about owning the best of everything, I don't know if you understand the meaning of the word...

[semograd]

The only thing I would like to see for the child (I am not saying it does/doesn't happen) whose parents are gay/lesbian is not only love, care and guidance from his/her parents but also love, care and guidance from a relative of the opposite sex than the parents.

For example: if I were raised by mom and mom I should also have a good positive influence from an uncle in my life. There are just some things a mom cant teach a son and vice versa.

In the "classic" situation of hetero marriage this is compensated for but in this "new" situation it should still be accounted for.

EDIT: And this should also apply for single parents.

[momofan]

Well these women tried to conform and have a relationship that was doomed to fail.

yes I guess it was a little selfish. Aren't we all a little selfish.
Aren't we taught from a young age that you, yourself are the most important person, and that you have to make yourself happy? Nobody but you will make you happy?

[momofan]

ideally we want our children to have positive influences from both sexes. But how many children are already being raised in single family homes?

This is always an interesting conversation, but I will bow out of this one. I just know I would have voted for equal rights for homosexual couples.

[Toms-SC]

If being gay is natural they'll bread themselves out of existence amirite?

[Penis McNickels]

Originally posted by Toms-SC
If being gay is natural they'll bread themselves out of existence amirite?
You're right, lesbians dying everywhere due to yeast infections.

[The_Rural_Juror]

Originally posted by Penis McNickels

You're right, lesbians dying everywhere due to yeast infections.

:rofl: :rofl:

[Xtrema]

Originally posted by Penis McNickels

You're right, lesbians dying everywhere due to yeast infections.

Best pun ever! :thumbsup:

[SilVFan]

Originally posted by Penis McNickels

You're right, lesbians dying everywhere due to yeast infections.

You are clever. I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.

[mucat]

Originally posted by momofan
Aren't we taught from a young age that you, yourself are the most important person, and that you have to make yourself happy? Nobody but you will make you happy?

No.

[Crymson]

Originally posted by Toms-SC
If being gay is natural they'll bread themselves out of existence amirite?

Good article, from last week actually

http://www.economist.com/research/articlesbysubject/displaystory.cfm?subjectid=348945&story_id=12465295

There are a few theories posited, some quite plausible and interesting.

[googe]

This was the most ridiculars waste of time and money we have had in awhile.

It's not a rights issue.

It's a WORD issue. Here in California, gay domestic partnerships are 100% equivalent to married couples. This whole vote was over whether or not the books say that marriage is between a man and a woman. The law already states that any rights or benefits equally apply to marriages and domestic partnerships, so it's a total non-issue. They even get a certificate. One says Marriage certificate, one says Domestic Partnership certificate.

They can even have divorces. And get alimony payments. If one dies, the other even gets "widow" benefits. They get half of each other's property. Conjugal visits if one goes to prison.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/25/Ca_dp_certificate.jpg/452px-Ca_dp_certificate.jpg

I think neither side should be allowed to use the word marriage, for fighting over such nonsense. Seriously, there are enough things in need of fixing that we don't need to spend $70 million arguing over a stupid word.