Armed Polite Society

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

R.I.P. Scout26

Pages: 1 ... 5 6 [7] 8 9 ... 12

Author Topic: Calif. gov.: 'We will maybe undo' Prop 8  (Read 108017 times)

Iain

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 3,490
Re: Calif. gov.: 'We will maybe undo' Prop 8
« Reply #150 on: November 12, 2008, 06:02:01 PM »

Have we discussed tyranny by majority? I'm not sure that any of us would like a world in which decisions were made by 50.1% of the voting populace.

Not that tyranny is really relevant in this case, but I thought generally we were not in favour of direct democracy in this manner. Maybe we'd be using that argument had Prop 8 been rejected.

That said, the politicians should abide by the results of votes they instigate.

Every time, it seems to come back to the issue over the word 'marriage'.
I do not like, when with me play, and I think that you also

Matthew Carberry

  • Formerly carebear
  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 5,281
  • Fiat justitia, pereat mundus
Re: Calif. gov.: 'We will maybe undo' Prop 8
« Reply #151 on: November 12, 2008, 06:09:08 PM »

Have we discussed tyranny by majority? I'm not sure that any of us would like a world in which decisions were made by 50.1% of the voting populace.

Not that tyranny is really relevant in this case, but I thought generally we were not in favour of direct democracy in this manner. Maybe we'd be using that argument had Prop 8 been rejected.

That said, the politicians should abide by the results of votes they instigate.

Every time, it seems to come back to the issue over the word 'marriage'.

Yep, you could probably get a "civil union" law passed in every state of the union in a few years but marriage is magic and many in the GLB-whatever-else-they've-tacked-on-lately community won't settle for anything less than redefining the term.

The key factor that prevents this being tyranny of the majority is that California's Constitution explicitly allows for referenda.  If it is constitutional and the will of the people it isn't tyranny under our system.

It is up to the people of Cali to amend or repeal that right of referenda through their process if they don't like it.
"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."

Iain

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 3,490
Re: Calif. gov.: 'We will maybe undo' Prop 8
« Reply #152 on: November 12, 2008, 06:31:00 PM »

As I say, tyranny isn't relevant in this case.

Referenda are interesting though, because eventually someone always ends up arguing that the majority is wrong now, has been before and will be again and that we designed systems like republics, parliamentary democracies etc to avoid this mob rule.

It's not always sour grapes either, they often have a valid point. Which is where the whole miscegnation thing begins again and round in circles we go. What's right isn't always popular and vice versa.

Anyway, we have civil unions now and the issue has died down significantly. Ag has already pointed out an area where the law has been clearly defined or at least a clear precedent set (who is a partner and who is not). Any civil union laws in force in the separate states, or any on the way?
I do not like, when with me play, and I think that you also

Matthew Carberry

  • Formerly carebear
  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 5,281
  • Fiat justitia, pereat mundus
Re: Calif. gov.: 'We will maybe undo' Prop 8
« Reply #153 on: November 12, 2008, 06:58:14 PM »

Well, they can get rid of referenda if they want to.

Two states just legalized gay marriage, Cali just repealed it.

Again, the GLBT(?) community is now on a moral crusade to be "normal" and want not just absolutely equal status and rights under the law, but the exact same name for the arrangement.

They could have had exactly what they claim to want legally, equal treatment, but have gone beyond justice into emotion.
"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."

Ron

  • friends
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 8,923
  • like a tree planted by rivers of water
Re: Calif. gov.: 'We will maybe undo' Prop 8
« Reply #154 on: November 12, 2008, 07:22:53 PM »

Quote
They could have had exactly what they claim to want legally, equal treatment, but have gone beyond justice into emotion.

They just don't want legislation to preserve their rights, they want legislation and court orders to dictate new societal norms/mores.
The wish not to believe can influence as strongly as the wish to believe.

Who can escape their own cognitive biases?

freakazoid

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 6,176
Re: Calif. gov.: 'We will maybe undo' Prop 8
« Reply #155 on: November 12, 2008, 07:40:38 PM »

You could use that same thing against blacks or women.
"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

GigaBuist

  • friends
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 4,345
    • http://www.justinbuist.org/blog/
Re: Calif. gov.: 'We will maybe undo' Prop 8
« Reply #156 on: November 12, 2008, 07:43:45 PM »

They could have had exactly what they claim to want legally, equal treatment, but have gone beyond justice into emotion.

*scratches head*

It wasn't the GLBT community that put Prop 8 on the ballot.

roo_ster

  • Kakistocracy--It's What's For Dinner.
  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 21,225
  • Hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats
Re: Calif. gov.: 'We will maybe undo' Prop 8
« Reply #157 on: November 12, 2008, 08:03:37 PM »

Oddly enough, the huge proportion of black and hispanic folks who voted FOR Prop 8 who are, you know, actually black & hispanic, do not agree the two are in any way similar.


and wisely the heros of the revolution chose a white church to stage their event.   try a black baptist or ame church and it would be youtube fabulous

I'd pay good money to see that.  (Where is the evil smiley?)

Most black churches I visited back in the day were heavy-duty charismatic.  I'm sure they'd be just as put-out as the AME & Baptists, if they could discern the protesters in their midst from the general pandemonium of the charismatic service

Four hours of that followed by some of the best food your taste buds have ever experienced.  I didn't speak in tongues during the service, but I put mine to good use after the service.  "Soul food," indeed.
Regards,

roo_ster

“Fallacies do not cease to be fallacies because they become fashions.”
----G.K. Chesterton

MicroBalrog

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 14,505
Re: Calif. gov.: 'We will maybe undo' Prop 8
« Reply #158 on: November 12, 2008, 08:55:34 PM »

*scratches head*

It wasn't the GLBT community that put Prop 8 on the ballot.

Yes, but it is STILL THE EVIL GHEY PEOPLE'S FAULT.
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

Strings

  • APS Pimp
  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 5,164
Re: Calif. gov.: 'We will maybe undo' Prop 8
« Reply #159 on: November 12, 2008, 09:04:32 PM »

>and I don't want to open the door even further to things like greater involvement  of homosexuals with little children (including adoption)<

Nice :gays are all pedophiles!" argument. Doesn't hold.

Speaking as someone who deals with abused kids all the time, I do NOT see the problem here. So long as the adopting “parents” have been vetted (basic background check), there shouldn’t be any more of a problem with gays in that role than with straights.

>Marriage is a religious institution co-opted by the state<

That’s easy to deal with: get the government out of the marriage business!

>The arguments I have made are usually based on:
1. Biology
2. Economics
3. Equal treatment
4. The illegitimacy of comparing homosexual practice with race/ethnicity
5. Civilizational Survival
6. Resistance to vocal minorities attempting to impose thier value system on the majority
7. Respect for the COTUS and the various state constitutions and processes vs disdain for them in pursuit of some political goal<

1: Not going to get into this one: it’s already been addressed
2: Been addressed: if a business doesn’t want to provide Bruce & Steve benefits, they don’t offer bennies period
3: Is actually an argument FOR some form of civil union enterable by any group of two or more adults
4: I can kinda give you
5: I somehow doubt that gays “marrying” is going to result in the end of the human race
6: could be pointed at gun owners, too
7: I’ll leave alone

>I believe marriage should not be a government issue at all.  If people wanna go fill out some form that dictates someone else has secondary power over their lives, like possessions, health-care, etc, let them indicate who that person is.  As a Christian, I believe all marriages that are not Christian marriages are spiritually false and invalid, that includes Native American, Muslim, homosexual, etc.  I also believe that has nothing to do with government tax and power of attorney law.  While I don't agree with the degree Leftists have pushed the "separation of church and state" issue, I do believe this is one area where it applies.  Lets get government out of marriage, and let people decide for themselves who gets their crap when they die, or who holds power over them if they're in a coma, and all that.  And let's get rid of the tax benefits for "couples" altogether.  That should solve the whole "we want the same rights" issue.  Just get rid of special government rights for everyone.  I would prefer that to recognizing what I see as a deviant and invalid "marriage".<

We have a winnah!!!
No Child Should Live In Fear

What was that about a pearl handled revolver and someone from New Orleans again?

Screw it: just autoclave the planet (thanks Birdman)

Desertdog

  • friends
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1,360
Re: Calif. gov.: 'We will maybe undo' Prop 8
« Reply #160 on: November 12, 2008, 09:09:45 PM »

Quote
Anyway, we have civil unions now and the issue has died down significantly.
CA has civil unions now, and before Prop. 8, but like that does not matter.  The activist are acting like young children who do get their way and are having a temper tantrum.  This does not include the majority of the gay population

The majority of the gay community go around quietly living their lives like all other people do.

freakazoid

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 6,176
Re: Calif. gov.: 'We will maybe undo' Prop 8
« Reply #161 on: November 12, 2008, 09:20:58 PM »

Quote
CA has civil unions now, and before Prop. 8, but like that does not matter.

So what exactly did this Prop 8 do?
"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

taurusowner

  • Guest
Re: Calif. gov.: 'We will maybe undo' Prop 8
« Reply #162 on: November 12, 2008, 09:43:51 PM »

Quote
>and I don't want to open the door even further to things like greater involvement  of homosexuals with little children (including adoption)<

The optimum family environment is a father and a mother.  Of course there are single parent families for a multitude of reasons, and that is regrettable.  But we should not be encourage faulty family structures from the start.

freakazoid

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 6,176
Re: Calif. gov.: 'We will maybe undo' Prop 8
« Reply #163 on: November 12, 2008, 09:49:02 PM »

Quote
The optimum family environment is a father and a mother.  Of course there are single parent families for a multitude of reasons, and that is regrettable.  But we should not be encourage faulty family structures from the start.

Yeah because all of those kids adopted into homosexual families all turn into serial killers and other bad stuff.  ;/ 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.
"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

Desertdog

  • friends
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1,360
Re: Calif. gov.: 'We will maybe undo' Prop 8
« Reply #164 on: November 12, 2008, 10:02:16 PM »

Quote
So what exactly did this Prop 8 do?


From Wikipedia;  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Proposition_8_(2008)
Quote
Proposition 8 is a California State ballot proposition that would amend the state Constitution to restrict the definition of marriage to a union between a man and a woman. It would overturn a recent California Supreme Court decision that had recognized same-sex marriage in California as a fundamental right. The official ballot title language for Proposition 8 is "Eliminates Right of Same-Sex Couples to Marry." The entirety of the text to be added to the constitution is: "Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California."

The title of the Proposition was changed from the original title by Jerry Brown to read "The official ballot title language for Proposition 8 is "Eliminates Right of Same-Sex Couples to Marry."
« Last Edit: November 12, 2008, 10:10:40 PM by Desertdog »

GigaBuist

  • friends
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 4,345
    • http://www.justinbuist.org/blog/
Re: Calif. gov.: 'We will maybe undo' Prop 8
« Reply #165 on: November 12, 2008, 10:15:53 PM »

Quote
No you see the optimum family environment is a loving home.

I'm curious.  Can you adopt or foster children as a single person in California?  Can you do it anywhere?  If so then I don't see why people are getting their panties in a wad over gay folks adopting kids if they could just do it while single and living with a partner.

However, I doubt that's the case.

taurusowner

  • Guest
Re: Calif. gov.: 'We will maybe undo' Prop 8
« Reply #166 on: November 12, 2008, 10:52:42 PM »

Yeah because all of those kids adopted into homosexual families all turn into serial killers and other bad stuff.  ;/ 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.

Nice attempt at a straw man, but that isn't even close to what I said.

Strings

  • APS Pimp
  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 5,164
Re: Calif. gov.: 'We will maybe undo' Prop 8
« Reply #167 on: November 12, 2008, 11:17:23 PM »

So tell me why, exactly, gays in a loving committed relationship adopting kids would be necessarily bad? I seem to be having a sudden case of "dumb blonde" on this...
No Child Should Live In Fear

What was that about a pearl handled revolver and someone from New Orleans again?

Screw it: just autoclave the planet (thanks Birdman)

Matthew Carberry

  • Formerly carebear
  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 5,281
  • Fiat justitia, pereat mundus
Re: Calif. gov.: 'We will maybe undo' Prop 8
« Reply #168 on: November 12, 2008, 11:37:25 PM »

You could use that same thing against blacks or women.


No, you can't.

All they wanted was equal treatment, not to, I don't know, redefine the term "white" to include every color in the rainbow or say that the biological sex "man" would no longer refer solely to persons with both an X and a Y chromosome.

The GLBT community, as a whole, are being hijacked away from perfectly equal civil unions into a demand to redefine the word "marriage".

That is not a parallel.
"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."

Matthew Carberry

  • Formerly carebear
  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 5,281
  • Fiat justitia, pereat mundus
Re: Calif. gov.: 'We will maybe undo' Prop 8
« Reply #169 on: November 12, 2008, 11:40:22 PM »

*scratches head*

It wasn't the GLBT community that put Prop 8 on the ballot.

It is them that increasingly won't accept a perfectly equivalent "civil union" not called marriage but insisting on calling such a civil union a marriage that is creating much of the push-back from the larger community.

Again, I would bet they could have equal rights in a heartbeat if they would give up on the semantic demand.

The civil rights movement to get equal voting rights for blacks or women wasn't predicated on name changes, simply on true equality of practice.

Again, not a parallel.
« Last Edit: November 12, 2008, 11:43:34 PM by carebear »
"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."

freakazoid

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 6,176
Re: Calif. gov.: 'We will maybe undo' Prop 8
« Reply #170 on: November 12, 2008, 11:47:31 PM »

double post of fail
« Last Edit: November 13, 2008, 12:11:40 AM by freakazoid »
"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

freakazoid

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 6,176
Re: Calif. gov.: 'We will maybe undo' Prop 8
« Reply #171 on: November 12, 2008, 11:50:07 PM »

Quote
Nice attempt at a straw man,

Why thank you, :P

Quote
but that isn't even close to what I said.

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

Quote
It is them that increasingly won't accept a perfectly equivalent "civil union" not called marriage but insisting on calling such a civl union a marriage that is creating much of the push-back from the community.

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.
« Last Edit: November 13, 2008, 12:05:33 AM by freakazoid »
"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

taurusowner

  • Guest
Re: Calif. gov.: 'We will maybe undo' Prop 8
« Reply #172 on: November 12, 2008, 11:53:26 PM »

Were you trying to quote me?

freakazoid

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 6,176
Re: Calif. gov.: 'We will maybe undo' Prop 8
« Reply #173 on: November 13, 2008, 12:06:07 AM »

Yeah but I failed. Fixed it now lol :D
"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

Matthew Carberry

  • Formerly carebear
  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 5,281
  • Fiat justitia, pereat mundus
Re: Calif. gov.: 'We will maybe undo' Prop 8
« Reply #174 on: November 13, 2008, 12:07:01 AM »

Why thank you, :P

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.

I am rapidly approaching the same position.

However,

If you are offered an identical product, except for the wrapper, and you reject it because the wrapper isn't the same, you lose the right to whine about not having the product at all.

A marriage is whatever the voting majority want to call it, if they decide that indeed there should be an equivalent thing called a civil union, as long as the treatment is absolutely equal and not separate, then take the civil union and go on with your lives.

Insisting on the same name, when that name already has a definition, and when that is the only difference in the result, is petulence.
"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."
Pages: 1 ... 5 6 [7] 8 9 ... 12