CA Supreme Court nullifys gay marriages

[Machiavelli]

well, the whole issue would be null and void if marriages occured in a church or other place of worship and tax laws were decided by the government.

I guess you republicans and libertarians are suddenly in favor of government regulations again?? Instead of letting people, states, families, and communities to decide what is good for them, we should have a big government in Washington tell us what is right.... huh?

[ August 14, 2004, 12:03 AM: Message edited by: Machiavelli ]

[95fbirdkid]

My reason for being agianst gay marriage has nothing to do with not wanting them to get a tax break.

[C.O.Jones]

Originally posted by Stefan:
Thank God there is some sanity left in this country... though I do say, I'm surprised that the California Supreme Court took this stance. I had always figured it would be the usual, California vs. the rest of the country. Even there, homosexual marriage activists don't have full support. Good news to hear.

NOTE TO HYPERSENSITIVE PEOPLE: read it again, this post contained no derogatory remarks or negative statements against homosexuals. This was not a "hate" post. It was just stating that I happen to believe that marriage is a sacred union that defines family... and since a family is defined by children, couples that cannot produce children are not a family and should therefore not be given the same benefits as couples who can. Very simple concept, really.

I believe the ruling is wrong.
BEFORE YOU FLAME!!!!

The only reason that I believe the ruling wrong is to the amount of time it took for the court to rule. It has been 4 months or so? This should have been brought before the court immediately and a yes or no should have just as quickly followed.

Lets hear it for California government! [img]graemlins/twak.gif[/img]

[LD]

what is a shame is the people that waited their whole life to get married only to get it snatched away by people that need to mind their own business.
It doesn't affect anyones life except the people that are getting married. Why does everyone have to butt in.
I feel this is a step backwards for sure.
what a shame

[Merlin]

good

[imported_admin]

Originally posted by C.O.Jones:
The only reason that I believe the ruling wrong is to the amount of time it took for the court to rule. It has been 4 months or so? This should have been brought before the court immediately and a yes or no should have just as quickly followed.

?

Have you ever gone to court for anything?

You get a speeding ticket and it takes 3 months just to go to court. Something serious like this, where the state Supreme Court is challenging the actions of the Mayor of San Francisco should have taken years. Its amazing that they had this ruling this quick.

Originally posted by LD:
what is a shame is the people that waited their whole life to get married only to get it snatched away by people that need to mind their own business.

They can still get married. Just find a nice parter so you'll be husband and wife. The terms "husband and husband" or "wife and wife" were never meant to be said.

Originally posted by LD:
It doesn't affect anyones life except the people that are getting married. Why does everyone have to butt in.

Oh but it does--there are over a thousand legal and financial benefits to being legally married. Why else do you think homosexuals would want this so badly? If it didn't affect anyone else and they were just doing their thing quietly then no one would complain. Gay couples that stay in the closet and don't bother anyone else don't get bothered in return. Fair enough. But when they go out screaming and shouting about why they don't get the benefits of normal families they will get persecuted/discriminated against/legally squashed. Fair enough.

[C.O.Jones]

Originally posted by Stefan:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by C.O.Jones:
The only reason that I believe the ruling wrong is to the amount of time it took for the court to rule. It has been 4 months or so? This should have been brought before the court immediately and a yes or no should have just as quickly followed.

?

Have you ever gone to court for anything?

You get a speeding ticket and it takes 3 months just to go to court. Something serious like this, where the state Supreme Court is challenging the actions of the Mayor of San Francisco should have taken years. Its amazing that they had this ruling this quick.

Originally posted by LD:
what is a shame is the people that waited their whole life to get married only to get it snatched away by people that need to mind their own business.

They can still get married. Just find a nice parter so you'll be husband and wife. The terms "husband and husband" or "wife and wife" were never meant to be said.

Originally posted by LD:
It doesn't affect anyones life except the people that are getting married. Why does everyone have to butt in.

Oh but it does--there are over a thousand legal and financial benefits to being legally married. Why else do you think homosexuals would want this so badly? If it didn't affect anyone else and they were just doing their thing quietly then no one would complain. Gay couples that stay in the closet and don't bother anyone else don't get bothered in return. Fair enough. But when they go out screaming and shouting about why they don't get the benefits of normal families they will get persecuted/discriminated against/legally squashed. Fair enough. </font>[/QUOTE]My point is that the court is being retroactive instead of proactive. These marriages should have been stopped immediately.

[crazyralph]

I think the issue is the fact the the mayor of SF overstepped his bounds. He did something he did not have the authority to do, that is why this happened. It doesn't matter what your view is on this topic. What matters is the mayor was not right whether or not you agree with gay marriage or not. I personally do not a marriage should be a union between a man and woman.

[MTMike]

Originally posted by LD:
It doesn't affect anyones life except the people that are getting married.

Wrong. It affects ME and everyone else who disagrees with their lifestyle because it forces us to legally recongize them as a family unit.

They're free to do whatever the hell they want in their bedroom, so long as they don't force me to accept it, and allowing them to enter into a legally binding relationship does just that.

[Machiavelli]

It also affected people to accept blacks as the same class of citizens as whites - but everyone for the most part got over that, so we'll get over this too...
I just cant understand how THIS can be a polarizing issue in this country - we have more unemployed, an economy that is stalling before it was planned to, lower paid employees, domestic corporatonss going out of buisness, a war, a thinly stretched military, a presidential administration who thinks its alright to reveal the names of CIA operatives to get back at their family members, genocide in Sudan, Nukes in North Korea, more and more Americans without healthcare, horribly high prescription drug prices and we're worried about whether it is legal for 2 men to enjoy the perks from the government of a civil union.
Does this seem a bit outrageous?

[95fbirdkid]

no, some people are able to think of more than one issue at once, just b/c someone is against gay marriage doesnt mean that it is more important than any of those other issues that you just listed

[Machiavelli]

If its not any more important than any of those issues I listed - why is it the only one anyone cares about in regards to a constitutional ammendment?

[crazyralph]

Originally posted by Machiavelli:
It also affected people to accept blacks as the same class of citizens as whites - but everyone for the most part got over that, so we'll get over this too...

This is much different than the civil rights movement.We don't have bus seating labeled ***** and straight do we? We don't have separate water fountains for gays. The gays can actively demonstrate. The gays don't have to go to a separate homo school.

[95Batmobile]

Originally posted by Machiavelli:
It also affected people to accept blacks as the same class of citizens as whites - but everyone for the most part got over that, so we'll get over this too...
I just cant understand how THIS can be a polarizing issue in this country - we have more unemployed, an economy that is stalling before it was planned to, lower paid employees, domestic corporatonss going out of buisness, a war, a thinly stretched military, a presidential administration who thinks its alright to reveal the names of CIA operatives to get back at their family members, genocide in Sudan, Nukes in North Korea, more and more Americans without healthcare, horribly high prescription drug prices and we're worried about whether it is legal for 2 men to enjoy the perks from the government of a civil union.
Does this seem a bit outrageous?

When did we not have these things?
Every presidency has had it problems, no doubt about it...

And the thing about blacks... I think the only difference here is that this is more like a religious rejection rather than hate based upon ignorance. It is a rejection of a lifestyle.. yes, these people were born that way and can't just turn straight the same as a man is born black, but I would say about 98% of people in CA aren't going to go hang a gay man simply because of their sexual preference, where, based in the 60s, your *** was grass if you were a black man and stepped out of line.

Point is, this isn't really a "polarizing issue"... the only people that are making it into one are the gay people who want to be married. They know its against the law (at the moment) so why do it? Hell if I were in like Ohio or something I would wanna **** a girl in the ***, but I couldn't because sodomy is still illegal in quite a few states. It's against the law, so I won't go on a public fudge packing tour.. same thing here. Like the law or not, thats the way it is. Trying to openly break the law because of a liberal Mayor isn't going to get you anywhere.

And BTW - All your people who are against this because you are Christian or whatever.. wouldn't their marriage and what they do be between them and God? I don't think it is our place to judge..

[Th3 RiCk]

Originally posted by Stefan:
Thank God there is some sanity left in this country... though I do say, I'm surprised that the California Supreme Court took this stance. I had always figured it would be the usual, California vs. the rest of the country. Even there, homosexual marriage activists don't have full support. Good news to hear.

NOTE TO HYPERSENSITIVE PEOPLE: read it again, this post contained no derogatory remarks or negative statements against homosexuals. This was not a "hate" post. It was just stating that I happen to believe that marriage is a sacred union that defines family... and since a family is defined by children, couples that cannot produce children are not a family and should therefore not be given the same benefits as couples who can. Very simple concept, really.

So let me get this straight. (No pun intended) A family is not a family unless they can produce children? Not all straight couples can produce offspring. I know quite a few couples that can't. So now they shouldnt be given the same benefits? Maybe you should rethink your simple concepts .

Personally, I'm not gay. But in no way should I judge another person because of their beliefs. It's our own fear and ignorance to accept something out of the norm that is tearing this country apart. Everyone is taught to hate something or someone who is different. Instead maybe respect them for who they are and let it be.