CA Prop. 8 shot down

[Alias]

Can you tell me what the straight gene is? Or when you chose your sexuality?

I asked you first. Tell us when the gay gene was found and who found it.

 

[Cancel 2016.11]

You call your male partner your "wife"? You need to have a little talk with Jesus, Mr. Christian.

Because any male who is pro-gay rights must be gay! You know, I think for a long time that schoolyard shaming tactic was really working for you guys.

But have you noticed? More and more, it's just not anymore.

 

[Cancel 2016.11]

Denial of the tax breaks and governmental entitlements to two guys who do each other in the butt, is no more tyranny than the denial of the same tax breaks and governmental entitlements to the single mother and widowed grandmother down the street from me, who have shared a home, raising the 3 children/grandchildren for 8 years now. Nothing special about being gay. If you want to extend marriage to gays, there really would be no justification for denying it to any two consenting adults seeking a marriage.

Wow, so you can't be who I thought you might be, because that person isn't stunningly stupid.

Maybe your name really is a coincidence.

 

[USFREEDOM911]

All that, and anything else can be accomplished by a simple contract (agreement) between the homo's....but thats not what the homo's want,.....they want to destroy the present definition of marriage that has endured from early civilization....


Homo's have the same rights as everyone else......no one can 'marry', an underage child, a person of the same sex, or an animal......

We all live by the same rules right now.....the same rights.....

Has endured from which early civilization; because "civilization" has redefined marriage many times over.

 

[christiefan915]

Oh, for sure. So was Jesus. Jesus said this....."And He answered and said to them, “Have you not read that He who made them at the beginning ‘made them male and female,’ and said, ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’? So then, they are no longer two but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let not man separate.”

What if the same sex couple isn't religious?

 

[dixon76710]

At one time marriage was between a man and women of the same race. This was never an issue, until the definition was challanged.

Interracial couples procreate, just like same race couples. Children of interracial couples benefit, just as much from the advantage of having both their mother and father together in the home to provide and care for them. Government has, or should have just as much interest in the wellbeing of interracial children as they do single race children.

Purifying the white race isnt a legitimate governmental interest. Improving the well being of children is such an interest.

 

[Alias]

Like Darla said above, the time for you & yours is over. If you want to rely on the hate of people in history, be my guest. There was a time when millions hated any one of a # of minorities (and still do). There was a time when millions supported slavery, and fought a war for it. There was a time when millions thought that women shouldn't vote.

I'm so glad I'm not consumed by hate.

So all of the millions of Americans from our foundation as a nation..... great leaders, Presidents, congressmen, judges, lawyers, business leaders, clergy, Billy Graham, the Popes, etc, etc, were "HATERS" becaue they believed marriage was between a man and a woman. I think you're a couple tacos short of a combination plate.

 

[Billy the Great Khan]

I asked you first. Tell us when the gay gene was found and who found it.

I don't know, I'm not a genetic scientist. But that's irrelevant. Plenty of traits that are genetic have yet to have the specific gene discovered. Can you tell me the gene that causes a predisposition to pancreatic cancer? If your argument is that homosexuality cannot be genetic because we have not discovered the gene(s) that cause it, you are entirely ignorant of science.

But the crux of MY argument goes much further than that. It is a right to freely associate, in whatever way I see fit. If I wish to marry someone because said partnership would benefit me financially, how is that less offensive or damaging to society than two individuals, who will most likely not procreate in any event, marrying? If I, a heterosexual man, can marry whomever I want, why then cannot a homosexual?

 

[Onceler]

So all of the millions of Americans from our foundation as a nation..... great leaders, Presidents, congressmen, judges, lawyers, business leaders, clergy, Billy Graham, the Popes, etc, etc, were "HATERS" becaue they believed marriage was between a man and a woman. I think you're a couple tacos short of a combination plate.

It's an interesting way that you read things, and try to distract from the truth. You're quite a piece of work.

But you are definitely a bigot; don't try to invoke people who are admired as being on "your side." And, btw, the idea that homosexuality is a choice is ludicrous, as is your argument that it must be because they haven't found a "gay gene."

 

[USFREEDOM911]

Interracial couples procreate, just like same race couples. Children of interracial couples benefit, just as much from the advantage of having both their mother and father together in the home to provide and care for them. Government has, or should have just as much interest in the wellbeing of interracial children as they do single race children.

Purifying the white race isnt a legitimate governmental interest. Improving the well being of children is such an interest.

And what about the couples who choose not to or are unable to procreate?
Is their "marriage" annuled because of their choice or ability?

 

[dixon76710]

What if the same sex couple isn't religious?

It appears to us that appellants are prevented from marrying, not by the statutes of Kentucky or the refusal of the County Court Clerk of Jefferson County to issue them a license, but rather by their own incapability of entering into a marriage as that term is defined.....

A license to enter into a status or a relationship which the parties are incapable of achieving is a nullity...

In substance, the relationship proposed by the appellants does not authorize the issuance of a marriage license because what they propose is not a marriage.
http://ky.findacase.com/research/wfrmDocViewer.aspx/xq/fac.\SAC\KY\1973\19731109_0040029.KY.htm/qx

........................

 

[Alias]

What if the same sex couple isn't religious?

That's okay. They don't have to believe it. I'm just giving you where the definition of marriage comes from in our Christian culture.

Is Jesus a "HATER" because he stated marriage is between a man and a woman?

 

[Mott the Hoople]

Interracial couples procreate, just like same race couples. Children of interracial couples benefit, just as much from the advantage of having both their mother and father together in the home to provide and care for them. Government has, or should have just as much interest in the wellbeing of interracial children as they do single race children.

Purifying the white race isnt a legitimate governmental interest. Improving the well being of children is such an interest.

And how does discriminating against gay couples do that? My brother and his partner had a son, via a surrogate, and raised him. He's now 22 years old and a normally adjusted young man. So please explain to me how gay couples cannot raise normal children?

 

[dixon76710]

And what about the couples who choose not to or are unable to procreate?
Is their "marriage" annuled because of their choice or ability?

No

Petitioners note that the state does not impose upon heterosexual married couples a condition that they have a proved capacity or declared willingness to procreate, posing a rhetorical demand that this court must read such condition into the statute if same-sex marriages are to be prohibited. Even assuming that such a condition would be neither unrealistic nor offensive under the Griswold rationale, the classification is no more than theoretically imperfect. We are reminded, however, that "abstract symmetry" is not demanded by the Fourteenth Amendment
http://www.cas.umt.edu/phil/faculty/walton/bakrvnel.htm

In addition, within limits, a statute generally does not fail rational basis review on the grounds of over- or under-inclusiveness; “[a] classification does not fail rational-basis review because ‘it is not made with mathematical nicety or because in practice it results in some inequity.’”...

And the link between opposite-sex marriage and procreation is not defeated by the fact that the law allows opposite-sex marriage regardless of a couple’s willingness or ability to procreate. The facts that all opposite-sex couples do not have children and that single-sex couples raise children and have children with third party assistance or through adoption do not mean that limiting marriage to opposite-sex couples lacks a rational basis. Such over- or under-inclusiveness does not defeat finding a rational basis....
http://www.courts.wa.gov/newsinfo/content/pdf/759341opn.pdf

 

[Alias]

I don't know, I'm not a genetic scientist. But that's irrelevant. Plenty of traits that are genetic have yet to have the specific gene discovered. Can you tell me the gene that causes a predisposition to pancreatic cancer? If your argument is that homosexuality cannot be genetic because we have not discovered the gene(s) that cause it, you are entirely ignorant of science.

But the crux of MY argument goes much further than that. It is a right to freely associate, in whatever way I see fit. If I wish to marry someone because said partnership would benefit me financially, how is that less offensive or damaging to society than two individuals, who will most likely not procreate in any event, marrying? If I, a heterosexual man, can marry whomever I want, why then cannot a homosexual?

When you have some evidence that people are born homosexual then be sure to present it. So, yes I don't believe people are born queer. Looks like your surprise at that is limited to only your opinion and not based on scientific fact. Thanks, I already knew that.

 

[Mott the Hoople]

I don't know, I'm not a genetic scientist. But that's irrelevant. Plenty of traits that are genetic have yet to have the specific gene discovered. Can you tell me the gene that causes a predisposition to pancreatic cancer? If your argument is that homosexuality cannot be genetic because we have not discovered the gene(s) that cause it, you are entirely ignorant of science.

But the crux of MY argument goes much further than that. It is a right to freely associate, in whatever way I see fit. If I wish to marry someone because said partnership would benefit me financially, how is that less offensive or damaging to society than two individuals, who will most likely not procreate in any event, marrying? If I, a heterosexual man, can marry whomever I want, why then cannot a homosexual?

That's exactly right.

 

[Alias]

And how does discriminating against gay couples do that? My brother and his partner had a son, via a surrogate, and raised him. He's now 22 years old and a normally adjusted young man. So please explain to me how gay couples cannot raise normal children?

I love personal stories on the internet. They're all factual and really happened.

 

[apple0154]

All that, and anything else can be accomplished by a simple contract (agreement) between the homo's....but thats not what the homo's want,.....they want to destroy the present definition of marriage that has endured from early civilization....

Homo's have the same rights as everyone else......no one can 'marry', an underage child, a person of the same sex, or an animal......

We all live by the same rules right now.....the same rights.....

But the problem is no matter how a contract is worded there will always be people trying to get around it. People will try to give preference to opposite sex couples. Remember the "equal but different" designation for Blacks? How much equality did that offer?

Unlike a rose a marriage by any other name is not a marriage.

 

[USFREEDOM911]

That's okay. They don't have to believe it. I'm just giving you where the definition of marriage comes from in our Christian culture.

Is Jesus a "HATER" because he stated marriage is between a man and a woman?

And in the approximate 2011 years since, things have been redefined; not only in marriage, but in any number of things.

 

[Billy the Great Khan]

When you have some evidence that people are born homosexual then be sure to present it. So, yes I don't believe people are born queer. Looks like your surprise at that is limited to only your opinion and not based on scientific fact. Thanks, I already knew that.

Oh, this is a lulzy post. So you were born straight? Or did you choose it?