Anyone else glad that prop 8 passed?

[QUOTE="The_One_White"][QUOTE="links136"][QUOTE="The_One_White"]

What I don't understand is why marriage is such an important thing. I'm not fully aware of the exact wording but doesn't it just prohibit gay marriages. Couldn't they have their own kind of civil union? I know this could be seen as prejudice me saying that they should "get their own unions" but I have nothing wrong with homosexuals or them having some form of civil union so they can proclaim how much they love each other. I do understand people not wanting them to use the word "marriage" however, as the people have been brought up to see marriage as "mummies and daddies".

links136

because apparently peoples beliefs in matters which do not harm them are more important than peoples happiness and rights.

No, but why would you need to get married to be happy? It makes no difference, there is the romantic and officiallty side of it I suppose, but then why don't same-sex couples have their own civil union?

you get certain benefits from marriage, like assets and for loans and such, a huge list. And in most of the country thats what they're fighting for.

Ah...I see now, I wasn't really aware of the benefits. Hard luck to them :( hopefully this will change in the not too distant future. Luckily in Scotland the civil partnership that same-sex couples have gains them the same rights as regular marriage.

I have an idea: Get the government out of marriage.

Problem solved.

In california the voters overruled the supreme court and ammended the constitution to define marriage between one man and one woman. The homosexual community took to the street in protest. I don't see why homesexuals still claim that it is hateful to define marriage that way. If that is the case i guess biology is hateful for designing us that way. superheromonkey

I have nothing against gay people "marrying," if the term "marriage" upsets people they should make a new term for gay couples. that's a fair compromise, and it makes perfect sense.

It doesn't matter to me. Gay lovers will still be gay lovers.. can't stop love. But no babies will be made created - that's the downside.Mr_Cumberdale

they weren't going to be made either way 0_o

It's hard to come up with proper arguments against gay marriage.

Only between man and woman? The way marriage is portrayed in our society means this is discrimination. It's not like ministers would have to accept gay marriages inside their churches.

Not according to biology? What part of biology deals with social constructs?

Immoral, wrong, unnatural etc. etc.? Pure discrimination.

It doesn't matter to me. Gay lovers will still be gay lovers.. can't stop love. But no babies will be made created - that's the downside.Mr_Cumberdale

Umm, technically, gay people can't produce children either way.

I'm glad it passed.

I just can't inderstand why would any man fall in love with aother man.

Its disgustying.

Crazy_Soviet

The only thing thats "disgustying" is how badly you fail at spelling.

I'm happy it passed. They should just focus on improving the rights of civil unions.Silenthps

[QUOTE="Silenthps"]I'm happy it passed. They should just focus on improving the rights of civil unions.TheFlush

No, as a Christian and a patriot, it isn't any of my damn business if two gay people want to marry.

Seriously, get the hell over it.

No, as a Christian and a patriot, it isn't any of my damn business if two gay people want to marry.

Seriously, get the hell over it.

-TheSecondSign-

Glad I'm not the only Christian who doesn't care if they get married.

[QUOTE="-TheSecondSign-"]

No, as a Christian and a patriot, it isn't any of my damn business if two gay people want to marry.

Seriously, get the hell over it.

DarkPrinceXC

Glad I'm not the only Christian who doesn't care if they get married.

Yeah, same here.

I'm glad. It's wrong Religously and Biologically.FalcoLX

[QUOTE="TheFlush"][QUOTE="Silenthps"]I'm happy it passed. They should just focus on improving the rights of civil unions.Bourbons3

Well I am surprised that that country could stoop that low but whatever. At least you can use your guns against your own government :wink: I thought this is what second amendment was all about people?

In all seriousnous, it sounds like they have tried to use the old fashioned style 'religious' point of view for the ban. However, if this was logical then how come you get married athiests?

Well I am surprised that that country could stoop that low but whatever. At least you can use your guns against your own government :wink: I thought this is what second amendment was all about people?

In all seriousnous, it sounds like they have tried to use the old fashioned style 'religious' point of view for the ban. However, if this was logical then how come you get married athiests?

Leejjohno

Why can't they just accept Domestic Partnerships?

[QUOTE="Leejjohno"]

Well I am surprised that that country could stoop that low but whatever. At least you can use your guns against your own government :wink: I thought this is what second amendment was all about people?

In all seriousnous, it sounds like they have tried to use the old fashioned style 'religious' point of view for the ban. However, if this was logical then how come you get married athiests?

Bourbons3

That is the one great difference over all else between people from the UK and people from the US. Christian values and all that is pretty much out of the window here. My whole family is pretty much athiest.

Why can't they just accept Domestic Partnerships?

CleanPlayer

Maybe because a domestic partnership doesn't grant the same rights as being married?

As I've said before: No. I would go so far as to compare these state bans to the Jim Crow laws. Legalized bigotry.ThePlothole

I whole heartedly agree with this person.

[QUOTE="Bourbons3"][QUOTE="Leejjohno"]

Well I am surprised that that country could stoop that low but whatever. At least you can use your guns against your own government :wink: I thought this is what second amendment was all about people?

In all seriousnous, it sounds like they have tried to use the old fashioned style 'religious' point of view for the ban. However, if this was logical then how come you get married athiests?

Leejjohno

That is the one great difference over all else between people from the UK and people from the US. Christian values and all that is pretty much out of the window here. My whole family is pretty much athiest.

[QUOTE="FalcoLX"]I'm glad. It's wrong Religously and Biologically.TheFlush

I think we should make gay and straight people drink from different water fountains, and ride in different parts of the bus.

This whole business is depressing. Prop 8 brought us back several 100 years.

[QUOTE="Leejjohno"][QUOTE="Bourbons3"][QUOTE="Leejjohno"]

Well I am surprised that that country could stoop that low but whatever. At least you can use your guns against your own government :wink: I thought this is what second amendment was all about people?

In all seriousnous, it sounds like they have tried to use the old fashioned style 'religious' point of view for the ban. However, if this was logical then how come you get married athiests?

Bourbons3

That is the one great difference over all else between people from the UK and people from the US. Christian values and all that is pretty much out of the window here. My whole family is pretty much athiest.

Yeah it does seem that it is a good thing. In fact history shows most conflicts were religious.

[QUOTE="TheFlush"][QUOTE="FalcoLX"]I'm glad. It's wrong Religously and Biologically.FalcoLX

If it's wrong, then why do we see it? Why do we see it in other species?

[QUOTE="TheFlush"][QUOTE="FalcoLX"]I'm glad. It's wrong Religously and Biologically.FalcoLX

From a survival stand point we don't need to be reproducing right now. In fact we need to slow down. And from that same "survivor" mentality, during times of underpopulation we should allow incest to increase reproduction.Your argument is silly, stop using it.

Gay marriage doesn't restrict straight people from getting marriage. I don't understand this false "doom's day" secenario that no one will have any more babies if two men get married.

[QUOTE="TheFlush"][QUOTE="FalcoLX"]I'm glad. It's wrong Religously and Biologically.FalcoLX

from a survival standpoint we should kill all dissabled people so that they don't consume reasources since they contribute nothing to the survival of our race

[QUOTE="FalcoLX"][QUOTE="TheFlush"][QUOTE="FalcoLX"]I'm glad. It's wrong Religously and Biologically.Enosh88

from a survival standpoint we should kill all dissabled people so that they don't consume reasources since they contribute nothing to the survival of our race

Exactly. And as I have said in the other topic, there are other ways for gays to contribute to future civilizations. They can make inventions, be teachers and proffesors, be scientists, be doctors, be surgeons, be leaders, be anything! In those ways, they can help future civilizations more than some straight people.

Yeah it does seem that it is a good thing. In fact history shows most conflicts were religious.

Leejjohno

Not true.

That is the one great difference over all else between people from the UK and people from the US. Christian values and all that is pretty much out of the window here. My whole family is pretty much athiest.

Leejjohno

Depends where you go in the US, although overall the country is still very religious.

I wouldn't necessarily say that's a bad thing.

[QUOTE="links136"]

You still haven't given me any proof that marriage isn't a right, where as you have the right to walk on the streets. How is that a right and marriage isn't?

LJS9502_basic

cops are are only given power through social contract. as a human i have the right to do whatever i damn well please. regardless of what anyone else thinks. i can walk where ever i want. i agree that humans have the RIGHT to murder. i would just hope most peoples moral judgment would dictate otherwise. i agree that anyone at any given time has the right to locate me and firmly kick me in the nuts. but they should also expect that i remove their eyes with a spork.

basicly im saying no one has to accept that ticket. and i would hope they would laugh in the cops face and walk away with no ticket.

I kinda realised that that was probably not true by thinking about it, but a lot of recent wars were at least sparked by religion. No doubt in my mind that they are also the worst kind of war, because they go on for generations.

[QUOTE="Leejjohno"]

Yeah it does seem that it is a good thing. In fact history shows most conflicts were religious.

limpbizkit818

Not true.

That is the one great difference over all else between people from the UK and people from the US. Christian values and all that is pretty much out of the window here. My whole family is pretty much athiest.

Leejjohno

Depends where you go in the US, although overall the country is still very religious.

I wouldn't necessarily say that's a bad thing.

It doesn't exactly promote new age thinking, though. Besides that I actually read a lot of American soldiers pray and stuff at times of the day where anybody who is openly Christian in the British army will have had the piss taken out of him/her for it at one point or another.

Its appauling. People are entitled to live their lives and love who love the way they want to.

I don't understand why some people here are completely against homosexuals - not just in marriage but just in general it woul seem. Why does it matter who they sleep with? They're not hurting you, they're not propositioning you.

People have a right to express themselves whether you agree with it or not. Thats why many of you live in "the land of the free".

[QUOTE="TheFlush"][QUOTE="FalcoLX"]I'm glad. It's wrong Religously and Biologically.FalcoLX

[QUOTE="Danm_999"]

Marriage is counter intuitive to human biology actually.

Biology favours as much diversity in the gene pool as possible, marriage interferes with that.

Don't use biology to try and justify bigotry.

superheromonkey

that is the second worst argument i've ever heard. homosexuals can't even put their genes in the gene pool by natural means. It is irrelevant. Also, you completely overlooked the fact that i was not referring to what biology prefers, but what biology has already dictated, in the genetic makeup of gender.

Marriage is a social construction, biology doesn't dictate anything about that. Like he said, marriage interferes with that and also - why should the state be allowed to remove the freedoms of certain members of society and treat them as second class citizens? It doesn't affect you if two gay people want to get married, you bigot.