Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

The California ban on same sex marriage was ruled unconstitutional.
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/wire/la-mew-prop-8-judge-exerpts-20100805,0,7957358.story

So what happens now? Supreme Court and then either it's upheld or the push begins for a Constitutional Amendment. This is still years from being resolved fully.

Oh crap, now all that bad stuff might happen that would happen if gays were allowed to be married! You know, that stuff. ALL OF IT. Man, we're screwed.

The definition of insanity. Doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result.

Isn't this the third or fourth time this has happened in California?

I'm surprised the banned it in the first place. What with San Fransico and all....

Golden Eyed Scout wrote:I'm surprised the banned it in the first place. What with San Fransico and all....

While San Fran is well known for liberalism there are a lot of conservatives in California, especially in the northern half. That group usually just gets outvoted in presidential elections (Which liberals participate in more than other voting procedures like referendums) so lots of people don't notice.

Cannerus_The_Unbearable wrote:Oh crap, now all that bad stuff might happen that would happen if gays were allowed to be married! You know, that stuff. ALL OF IT. Man, we're screwed.

Technically it's the box turtles that are getting screwed, but I suppose you could say that the whole "lakes turning to blood" and "rains of fire and fishes" could metaphorically constitute how Canada has been horribly defiled by the imposition of gay marriage.

It will go to the 9th Circuit Court and probably be ruled the same way, then it will go to SCOTUS.

Step one in my master plan to become Mr. Ryan Reynolds has finally come to fruition...

LordofHats wrote:

Golden Eyed Scout wrote:I'm surprised the banned it in the first place. What with San Fransico and all....

While San Fran is well known for liberalism there are a lot of conservatives in California, especially in the northern half. That group usually just gets outvoted in presidential elections (Which liberals participate in more than other voting procedures like referendums) so lots of people don't notice.

Clearly my joke didn't come through...

Boooooooooooooooooooooooo!

Overturn the repeal.

Fateweaver wrote:Boooooooooooooooooooooooo!

Overturn the repeal.

Why

Gays should not be allowed to marry. End of.

If you want to be gay that is your prerogative. Don't expect churches and God fearing institutions to agree with your decision and get upset when they won't marry you.

youbedead wrote:

Fateweaver wrote:Boooooooooooooooooooooooo!

Overturn the repeal.

Why

Can of worms is officially open.

Open can of warms. Need to get out the boat, fishing rod and 2 cases of beer. We are going fishin' boys/girls/things.

Fateweaver wrote:Gays should not be allowed to marry. End of.

If you want to be gay that is your prerogative. Don't expect churches and God fearing institutions to agree with your decision and get upset when they won't marry you.

What about the churches that have no problem with the idea of marrying two men or women, Fateweaver?
If their vision of God is more liberal then yours are they not permitted to do what they feel is right in God's eyes? Who are you to speak for God on this issue?

Fateweaver wrote:Gays should not be allowed to marry. End of.

If you want to be gay that is your prerogative. Don't expect churches and God fearing institutions to agree with your decision and get upset when they won't marry you.

Religious views should have absolutely zero influence on politics and law making, you know that whole separation of church and state thing.

But think of the children.

Gays should not be allowed to marry. End of.

If you want to be gay that is your prerogative. Don't expect churches and God fearing institutions to agree with your decision and get upset when they won't marry you.

There are churches willing to marry gay couples, there is in fact an entire branch of christianity that has no problem with it.

Open can of warms. Need to get out the boat, fishing rod and 2 cases of beer. We are going fishin' boys/girls/things.

There was no can of worms, you just said something kinda daft.

This has reamined and should remain a states rights issue. Everywhere this has been voted on, the voters have ruled against Gay Marriage. It's by the activism of judges that this gets overturned. BTW, the judge who ruled on this is a homosexual.

youbedead wrote:

Fateweaver wrote:Gays should not be allowed to marry. End of.

If you want to be gay that is your prerogative. Don't expect churches and God fearing institutions to agree with your decision and get upset when they won't marry you.

Religious views should have absolutely zero influence on politics and law making, you know that whole separation of church and state thing.

Hit the nail on the head before I could even bring out my hammer.

Also: Gay isn't someone's perogative, it's who they are. A gay person can't choose to be gay.
I would've believed that arguement would've been thrown out as the rubbish it is.

Forgive me if my understanding of perogative is mistaken in this context.

Golden Eyed Scout wrote:

youbedead wrote:

Fateweaver wrote:Gays should not be allowed to marry. End of.

If you want to be gay that is your prerogative. Don't expect churches and God fearing institutions to agree with your decision and get upset when they won't marry you.

Religious views should have absolutely zero influence on politics and law making, you know that whole separation of church and state thing.

Hit the nail on the head before I could even bring out my hammer.

Also: Gay isn't someone's perogative, it's who they are. A gay person can't choose to be gay.
I would've believed that arguement would've been thrown out as the rubbish it is.

Forgive me if my understanding of perogative is mistaken in this context.

Close enough for common use.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Kinda suspecting this thread may see some vacation time for some of us.

efarrer wrote:

Golden Eyed Scout wrote:

youbedead wrote:

Fateweaver wrote:Gays should not be allowed to marry. End of.

If you want to be gay that is your prerogative. Don't expect churches and God fearing institutions to agree with your decision and get upset when they won't marry you.

Religious views should have absolutely zero influence on politics and law making, you know that whole separation of church and state thing.

Hit the nail on the head before I could even bring out my hammer.

Also: Gay isn't someone's perogative, it's who they are. A gay person can't choose to be gay.
I would've believed that arguement would've been thrown out as the rubbish it is.

Forgive me if my understanding of perogative is mistaken in this context.

Close enough for common use.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Kinda suspecting this thread may see some vacation time for some of us.

You get used to it after a while.

Golden Eyed Scout wrote:

youbedead wrote:

Fateweaver wrote:Gays should not be allowed to marry. End of.

If you want to be gay that is your prerogative. Don't expect churches and God fearing institutions to agree with your decision and get upset when they won't marry you.

Religious views should have absolutely zero influence on politics and law making, you know that whole separation of church and state thing.

Hit the nail on the head before I could even bring out my hammer.

Also: Gay isn't someone's perogative, it's who they are. A gay person can't choose to be gay.
I would've believed that arguement would've been thrown out as the rubbish it is.

Forgive me if my understanding of perogative is mistaken in this context.

Actually its the State itself that should but out. Keep the state out of religion (or non religion). The State can sanction the legal rights of couples, but let couples/religions/cult determine what "married" is.

Frazzled wrote:

Golden Eyed Scout wrote:

youbedead wrote:

Fateweaver wrote:Gays should not be allowed to marry. End of.

If you want to be gay that is your prerogative. Don't expect churches and God fearing institutions to agree with your decision and get upset when they won't marry you.

Religious views should have absolutely zero influence on politics and law making, you know that whole separation of church and state thing.

Hit the nail on the head before I could even bring out my hammer.

Also: Gay isn't someone's perogative, it's who they are. A gay person can't choose to be gay.
I would've believed that arguement would've been thrown out as the rubbish it is.

Forgive me if my understanding of perogative is mistaken in this context.

Actually its the State itself that should but out. Keep the state out of religion (or non religion). The State can sanction the legal rights of couples, but let couples/religions/cult determine what "married" is.

That's exactly what seperation of church and state was intended to be. No legislating about someone's God (or lack thereof).

Oh FFS,why is it that this is even an issue?

If two individuals wish to enter into a "life contract",have a ceremony committing themselves to one another,express their love for each other in a legally binding way..why is it anyone's business but theirs?

This whole affair should be a non-issue,Homosexuals should enjoy all the same rights and privileges as Heterosexuals...and that includes the right to marry.

FITZZ wrote: Oh FFS,why is it that this is even an issue?

If two individuals wish to enter into a "life contract",have a ceremony committing themselves to one another,express their love for each other in a legally binding way..why is it anyone's business but theirs?

This whole affair should be a non-issue,Homosexuals should enjoy all the same rights and privileges as Heterosexuals...and that includes the right to marry.

Said in a much more eloquent manner then I could ever hope to achieve. Thank you.

Fateweaver wrote:Don't expect churches and God fearing institutions to agree with your decision and get upset when they won't marry you.

Way to not understand the law at ALL, Fateweaver.

The law only states that gays have the LEGAL RIGHT to marry, it says nothing about where they marry and does not force churches/religious organizations to marry them if the church/religious organization does not wish to marry them.

Again, you force your way into a topic with little to no idea what you're talking about.

Wooo!
Another small step in the direction of actual separation between church and state.

Some of the people wanting these unions are not even gay. They have just been living with the same person for so long, that they want the same entitlements that married people have. Such as, claiming married filing jointly on taxes. Not all marriages/unions are about love.

youbedead wrote:

Fateweaver wrote:Gays should not be allowed to marry. End of.

If you want to be gay that is your prerogative. Don't expect churches and God fearing institutions to agree with your decision and get upset when they won't marry you.

Religious views should have absolutely zero influence on politics and law making, you know that whole separation of church and state thing.

separation of church and state. Bible should not determine our laws. is marriage covered under the pursuit of happiness? (cue cheesy joke about marriage being horrible by some guy)