Armed Polite Society
October 26, 2020, 05:08:55 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: R.I.P. Scout26
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register  
Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8] 9 10 ... 12
  Print  
Author Topic: Calif. gov.: 'We will maybe undo' Prop 8  (Read 104733 times)
freakazoid
friend
Senior Member
***
Posts: 6,161


« Reply #175 on: November 13, 2008, 12:14:30 AM »

Quote
I am rapidly approaching the same position.

Excellent. And soon we shall win you over to the dark side.



 cheesy And with that I am off to bed.
Report to moderator   Logged

"so I ended up getting the above because I didn't want to make a whole production of sticking something between my knees and cranking. To me, the cranking on mine is pretty effortless, at least on the coarse setting. Maybe if someone has arthritis or something, it would be more difficult for them." - Ben

"I see a rager at least once a week." - brimic
Ron
friends
Senior Member
***
Posts: 8,170


like a tree planted by rivers of water


« Reply #176 on: November 13, 2008, 05:47:50 AM »

I'm with those posting here that think we should get government out of the marriage business all together.

As far as civil unions and adoptions I have never spoke out against them because it is none of my business.

When a group(s) co-opts government and makes religious institutions acknowledge gay "marriage" by force of law not to mention all the doors it opens for further attacks on cultural institutions then it becomes my business.

The gay marriage issue is a Trojan horse for the advancement of cultural Marxism.
Report to moderator   Logged

The wish not to believe can influence as strongly as the wish to believe.

Who can escape their own cognitive biases?
Manedwolf
friend
Senior Member
***
Posts: 14,516



« Reply #177 on: November 13, 2008, 06:25:33 AM »

Most blacks in CA seem to have voted for Prop 8. Traditionally, homosexuality is viewed as a sin in the black community.

So why don't the "gay militant" activists attack a black baptist church in LA or something like they did the other church?

Because they know they'd be accused of hate crimes if they attacked anything but white people? Or because they know full well that the parishioners quite literally wouldn't stand for that ___, and they'd be bodily thrown out the door?
Report to moderator   Logged
roo_ster
Kakistocracy--It's What's For Dinner.
friend
Senior Member
***
Posts: 21,225


Hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats


« Reply #178 on: November 13, 2008, 08:59:50 AM »

Yeah because all of those kids adopted into homosexual families all turn into serial killers and other bad stuff.  rolleyes They would be better adopted into a family that isn't going to love them just as long as they are a straight family.
No you see the optimum family environment is a loving home.

I would liken it to adopting out children to openly alcoholic folks. 

Both groups model bad behaviors that reduce their life spans, usually damage their relationships (familial & otherwise), have high rates of work absenteeism, have higher medical bills, and engage in other activities statistically shown to be risky.

Might be better than the foster-care system, but probably much worse than a group-home or orphanage situation.
Report to moderator   Logged

Regards,

roo_ster

“Fallacies do not cease to be fallacies because they become fashions.”
----G.K. Chesterton
Matthew Carberry
Formerly carebear
friend
Senior Member
***
Posts: 5,281


Fiat justitia, pereat mundus


« Reply #179 on: November 13, 2008, 11:49:28 AM »

Quote from: jfuser
I would liken it to adopting out children to openly alcoholic folks. 

Both groups model bad behaviors that reduce their life spans, usually damage their relationships (familial & otherwise), have high rates of work absenteeism, have higher medical bills, and engage in other activities statistically shown to be risky.

Might be better than the foster-care system, but probably much worse than a group-home or orphanage situation.

Is that true for stable GBLT couples as opposed to the general GBLT population? (not addressing if it's true for them, don't care)

When you go to adopt, they look for all those kinds of markers even as a heterosexual couple.  If they aren't there, the adoption goes through.

Is that statement conflating some GBLT's behavior with something implicit in their being?



Report to moderator   Logged

"Not all unwise laws are unconstitutional laws, even where constitutional rights are potentially involved." - Eugene Volokh

"As for affecting your movement, your Rascal should be able to achieve the the same speeds no matter what holster rig you are wearing."
taurusowner
Guest
« Reply #180 on: November 13, 2008, 12:04:14 PM »

Why thank you, Tongue

Well care to explain to me how it isn't?

Well if it is done in a church then it is a marriage...? If it is done solely through the government then it is a civil union. The government should have no say in church dealings... badly worded but I think you can get what I mean.

Other than the fact that you quoted someone other than myself.  YOU are the one who made the comparison to serial killers.  Not me.

I stand by the fact that the best environment for raising children is one male and one female parent.  There are lessons, examples, different methods of interacting with children, that are part of that type of family that you do not get in single parent, or homosexual parent families.  Of course there are plenty of single parent families, and they mostly turn out ok.   But they got that way by happenstance, and they all at very least started with one man and one woman.  Adoption is a State authorized action.  It is the State creating a family.  And as such I do not believe that they should take part in the creating of less than optimum family structures.  It's one thing if 2 people have a child and break up.  The State did not create that situation.  But the State does have a big say in adoption.  And I think that means they should not actively promote the creating of families that are less then optimal from the start.

It's one thing for a child to be raised in a less than optimal family because that's the hand life delt them.  It's something entirely different for the Government to actively promote families without a father and a mother.
Report to moderator   Logged
roo_ster
Kakistocracy--It's What's For Dinner.
friend
Senior Member
***
Posts: 21,225


Hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats


« Reply #181 on: November 13, 2008, 12:21:18 PM »

Is that true for stable GBLT couples as opposed to the general GBLT population? (not addressing if it's true for them, don't care)

When you go to adopt, they look for all those kinds of markers even as a heterosexual couple.  If they aren't there, the adoption goes through.

Is that statement conflating some GBLT's behavior with something implicit in their being?

When I address homosexuality, I address behavior(s), as genetic causes can not be proved, given the number of possible genes involved.  The absolute best one could prove WRT homosexuality and genetics is correlation.  To repeat, this is a function of the large number of potential genetic contributors that make it impossible to show genetic causation to homosexual behavior.

Some may claim genetic causation, but that is a signal of that person's profound ignorance of the difficulties in assigning genetic causation to any sort of complex human behavior.

To bring it back to adoption, I would also prohibit heterosexual couples from adopting if they demonstrated such behavior.

As taurusowner wrote, adoptive families are an entirely voluntary, artificial construct of the state. 

Quote
Is that true for stable GBLT couples as opposed to the general GBLT population?

Do a little research on those "stable" couples.  The high-risk behavior is not attenuated by years-long couple status any more than heterosexual swinger couples' behavior is attenuated.

Report to moderator   Logged

Regards,

roo_ster

“Fallacies do not cease to be fallacies because they become fashions.”
----G.K. Chesterton
MicroBalrog
friend
Senior Member
***
Posts: 14,505


« Reply #182 on: November 13, 2008, 12:24:15 PM »

Quote
Do a little research on those "stable" couples.  The high-risk behavior is not attenuated by years-long couple status any more than heterosexual swinger couples' behavior is attenuated.

And swinger couples are not the same as some random irresponsible crack-sluts.
Report to moderator   Logged

Destroy The Enemy in Hand-to-Hand Combat.

"...tradition and custom becomes intertwined and are a strong coercion which directs the society upon fixed lines, and strangles liberty. " ~ William Graham Sumner
roo_ster
Kakistocracy--It's What's For Dinner.
friend
Senior Member
***
Posts: 21,225


Hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats


« Reply #183 on: November 13, 2008, 12:41:56 PM »

And swinger couples are not the same as some random irresponsible crack-sluts.

This might help:

analogy
Main Entry:
    anal·o·gy Listen to the pronunciation of analogy
Pronunciation:
    \ə-ˈna-lə-jē\
Function:
    noun
Inflected Form(s):
    plural anal·o·gies
Date:
    15th century

1: inference that if two or more things agree with one another in some respects they will probably agree in others
2 a: resemblance in some particulars between things otherwise unlike : similarity b: comparison based on such resemblance
3: correspondence between the members of pairs or sets of linguistic forms that serves as a basis for the creation of another form
4: correspondence in function between anatomical parts of different structure and origin — compare homology

#2a, especially
Report to moderator   Logged

Regards,

roo_ster

“Fallacies do not cease to be fallacies because they become fashions.”
----G.K. Chesterton
MicroBalrog
friend
Senior Member
***
Posts: 14,505


« Reply #184 on: November 13, 2008, 01:43:45 PM »


Analogous, the two are not.
Report to moderator   Logged

Destroy The Enemy in Hand-to-Hand Combat.

"...tradition and custom becomes intertwined and are a strong coercion which directs the society upon fixed lines, and strangles liberty. " ~ William Graham Sumner
makattak
Dark Lord of the Cis
friend
Senior Member
***
Posts: 12,841



« Reply #185 on: November 13, 2008, 01:52:34 PM »

Analogous, the two are not.

Wrong, you are. Similar characteristics, these have.

Blind you are to ignore them.

[/yoda off]
Report to moderator   Logged

“Wisdom is the right use of knowledge. To know is not to be wise. Many men know a great deal, and are all the greater fools for it. There is no fool so great a fool as a knowing fool. But to know how to use knowledge is to have wisdom.”
De Selby
friend
Senior Member
***
Posts: 6,324


« Reply #186 on: November 13, 2008, 03:33:20 PM »

Most blacks in CA seem to have voted for Prop 8. Traditionally, homosexuality is viewed as a sin in the black community.

So why don't the "gay militant" activists attack a black baptist church in LA or something like they did the other church?

Because they know they'd be accused of hate crimes if they attacked anything but white people? Or because they know full well that the parishioners quite literally wouldn't stand for that ___, and they'd be bodily thrown out the door?

Maybe it's because black churches don't decide the vote, since they are a minority of the electorate?
Report to moderator   Logged

"Human existence being an hallucination containing in itself the secondary hallucinations of day and night (the latter an insanitary condition of the atmosphere due to accretions of black air) it ill becomes any man of sense to be concerned at the illusory approach of the supreme hallucination known as death."
Manedwolf
friend
Senior Member
***
Posts: 14,516



« Reply #187 on: November 13, 2008, 05:20:55 PM »

Maybe it's because black churches don't decide the vote, since they are a minority of the electorate?

That isn't the point.

Okay, to play your game. Hispanics, mostly Mexicans, ARE the majority of the electorate there likely to be against homosexuality changing the institution of marriage.

Why don't they attack their churches?
Report to moderator   Logged
De Selby
friend
Senior Member
***
Posts: 6,324


« Reply #188 on: November 13, 2008, 05:27:26 PM »

That isn't the point.

Okay, to play your game. Hispanics, mostly Mexicans, ARE the majority of the electorate there likely to be against homosexuality changing the institution of marriage.

Why don't they attack their churches?

For one, because they aren't the majority in California.  It's also tricky because "white" and "hispanic" are overlapping categories there, so you'd have a hard time targeting which churches actually contain the voters you're after.

But I don't see how targeting protests at the groups more likely to have pull in the elections is a "game."  If you do target relatively powerless minorities, folks would wonder what your motivations were....because you're obviously not going to change election outcomes by targeting black baptists churches in California, so you must have some other idea in mind.

Report to moderator   Logged

"Human existence being an hallucination containing in itself the secondary hallucinations of day and night (the latter an insanitary condition of the atmosphere due to accretions of black air) it ill becomes any man of sense to be concerned at the illusory approach of the supreme hallucination known as death."
gunsmith
If an alcoholic bites you, you become one.
friend
Senior Member
***
Posts: 7,277


an aurora was seen on Uranus.


« Reply #189 on: November 13, 2008, 06:44:19 PM »

I moved back to CA for economic reasons, (wish I hadn't) am stuck here for now.

But I know how the gays feel, my 2nd amendment rights are violated all the time.
Report to moderator   Logged

Politicians and bureaucrats are considered productive if they swarm the populous like a plague of locust, devouring all substance in their path and leaving a swath of destruction like a firestorm. The technical term is "bipartisanship".

Out where there are miles and miles of miles and miles.
roo_ster
Kakistocracy--It's What's For Dinner.
friend
Senior Member
***
Posts: 21,225


Hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats


« Reply #190 on: November 13, 2008, 07:42:47 PM »

Maybe it's because black churches don't decide the vote, since they are a minority of the electorate?

They did this time, since the majority of the white voters voted against Prop 8.

Report to moderator   Logged

Regards,

roo_ster

“Fallacies do not cease to be fallacies because they become fashions.”
----G.K. Chesterton
MicroBalrog
friend
Senior Member
***
Posts: 14,505


« Reply #191 on: November 14, 2008, 03:53:17 AM »

Wrong, you are. Similar characteristics, these have.



The fact that swinger couples have N+1 sex partners does not mean that they're the same as random crack whores.

It's approximately the difference between the people who shoot guns into the air at parties (while heavily drunk) and, say, 3-gun competitors.
Report to moderator   Logged

Destroy The Enemy in Hand-to-Hand Combat.

"...tradition and custom becomes intertwined and are a strong coercion which directs the society upon fixed lines, and strangles liberty. " ~ William Graham Sumner
Hutch
friend
Senior Member
***
Posts: 2,208


« Reply #192 on: November 14, 2008, 05:58:47 AM »

I'm not sure I can offer any new insights, but I'd like to chime in, anyway.

I, like most of the "no to gay marriage" faction, do not care what consenting adults do in privacy.  At all.  I fully accept "their" absolute, inalienable, Constitutionally protected (see Am 9, and Am 10) right to engage in such behavior.  I don't approve of it, but my approval is not germaine to the question of rights.  No advertising, media blitz, popular culture icon, or pithy quote will convince me that homosexual behavior is okay, by whatever definition one assigns to "okay".  Okay?

If an employer only extends benefits to straight couples, so be it.  Employers have rights as well.  If Company A denies insurance bennies to same-sex couples, so be it.  If same-sex couples (hereafter: SSC) think that Company A is behaving "wrongly", then let the SSC's draw the public's attention to Company A policies.  Let the marketplace decide whether a "homo-antagonistic" company survives in the marketplace.  I also think employers should be free to discriminate (in the classic sense of the word) against anyone they choose, as far as employment is concerned.  With sufficient exposure of this practice, and with a sufficiently free market in employment, either the company changes, dies, or prospers.

All that being said, other than employee benefit issues, what measurable, tangible benefit do SSC's receive from calling their relationship a "marriage"? 
Report to moderator   Logged

"My limited experience does not permit me to appreciate the unquestionable wisdom of your decision"

Seems like every day, I'm forced to add to the list of people who can just kiss my hairy ass.
makattak
Dark Lord of the Cis
friend
Senior Member
***
Posts: 12,841



« Reply #193 on: November 14, 2008, 06:02:53 AM »

The fact that swinger couples have N+1 sex partners does not mean that they're the same as random crack whores.

It's approximately the difference between the people who shoot guns into the air at parties (while heavily drunk) and, say, 3-gun competitors.

In this case you are referencing the wrong analogy. The similarities exist between swingers and homosexual couples, NOT random crack whores.
Report to moderator   Logged

“Wisdom is the right use of knowledge. To know is not to be wise. Many men know a great deal, and are all the greater fools for it. There is no fool so great a fool as a knowing fool. But to know how to use knowledge is to have wisdom.”
roo_ster
Kakistocracy--It's What's For Dinner.
friend
Senior Member
***
Posts: 21,225


Hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats


« Reply #194 on: November 14, 2008, 06:12:46 AM »

Oh, yeah, here's a good way to make friends & influence people.  First, deliberately desecrate the religious symbol of a peaceful protester, then howl like queer wolves around the old lady, knocking her about with your campaign signs.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rDHL9NZ1lQQ&eurl=http://thegroundgameblog.blogspot.com/2008/11/california-cross-stomping.html


Report to moderator   Logged

Regards,

roo_ster

“Fallacies do not cease to be fallacies because they become fashions.”
----G.K. Chesterton
roo_ster
Kakistocracy--It's What's For Dinner.
friend
Senior Member
***
Posts: 21,225


Hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats


« Reply #195 on: November 14, 2008, 06:18:26 AM »

Woo-hoo, way to step up the campaign!  Those dirty Joos Mormons need to be put in their place.

By the end of all this, perhaps SCOTUS will overturn Lawrence v Texas.



White powder sent to Mormon temples in Utah, LA


LOS ANGELES (AP) - Letters containing a suspicious white powder were sent Thursday to Mormon temples in Los Angeles and Salt Lake City that were the sites of protests against the church's support of California's gay marriage ban.

The temple in the Westwood area of Los Angeles was evacuated before a hazardous materials crew determined the envelope's contents were not toxic, said FBI spokesman Jason Pack.

The temple in downtown Salt Lake City, where the church is based, received a similar envelope containing a white powder that spilled onto a clerk's hand.

The room was decontaminated and the envelope taken by the FBI for testing. The clerk showed no signs of illness, but the scare shut down a building at Temple Square for more than an hour, said Scott Freitag, a spokesman for the Salt Lake City Fire Department.

None of the writing on the envelope was threatening, and the church received no calls or messages related to the package, Freitag said.

Protests in recent days have targeted the Mormon church, which encouraged its members to fight the recently passed amendment banning gay marriage in California.

Authorities are looking into several theories on who sent the letters and why, Pack said.

Anthrax mailed as a white powder to Washington lawmakers and media outlets killed five people and sickened 17 just weeks after the attacks of September 11, 2001. Periodic hoaxes modeled on the anthrax mailings have popped up since then but usually prove harmless.
Report to moderator   Logged

Regards,

roo_ster

“Fallacies do not cease to be fallacies because they become fashions.”
----G.K. Chesterton
Manedwolf
friend
Senior Member
***
Posts: 14,516



« Reply #196 on: November 14, 2008, 06:22:04 AM »

And still, they only attack almost-entirely-white churches, because it's the only acceptable target to the violent left. They know they'd be hoist with their own petard if they attacked the churches of any of the other racial groups that overwhelmingly voted for Proposition 8. If they attacked a black congregation, if they attacked a Spanish mass... 

They're also cowards.

White? Christian? Acceptable target, no repercussions.
Report to moderator   Logged
Zardozimo Oprah Bannedalas
APS Shex Shymbol
friend
Senior Member
***
Posts: 4,365


All I got is a fistful of shekels


« Reply #197 on: November 14, 2008, 07:02:12 AM »

Quote
Maybe it's because black churches don't decide the vote, since they are a minority of the electorate?
Aren't the Mormons a minority of the vote, most everywhere outside of Utah?
Report to moderator   Logged
Racehorse
friend
Senior Member
***
Posts: 829


« Reply #198 on: November 14, 2008, 07:32:02 AM »

Aren't the Mormons a minority of the vote, most everywhere outside of Utah?

Yes, Mormons are a tiny minority of the vote in California. Blacks, hispanics, and a variety of churches that helped to pass Prop. 8 make up a much larger percentage. Mormons, however, are by far the safest target.
Report to moderator   Logged
Desertdog
friends
Senior Member
***
Posts: 1,360


« Reply #199 on: November 14, 2008, 07:51:03 AM »

Quote
Yes, Mormons are a tiny minority of the vote in California. Blacks, hispanics, and a variety of churches that helped to pass Prop. 8 make up a much larger percentage. Mormons, however, are by far the safest target.
Cowards have a way of picking targets that they think won't fight back.  Sometimes they are wrong though.

The perfect way to stop a lot of these demonstrations is for the news services to give them just a mention in the news, not a big news splash.

Everyone that went into that church should have been charged with something.
Report to moderator   Logged
Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8] 9 10 ... 12
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!