YAY Obama win BOO California, Arizona, Florida Bans Same Sex Marriage

[CptStern]

After a heated, divisive campaign, fueled by a record $73 million of spending, California voters Tuesday were backing Proposition 8, which would change the state Constitution to ban same-sex marriage.

"There are a lot of votes still to count, and we expect the race to go on late tonight and possibly beyond," said Geoff Kors, executive director of Equality California, the guiding force behind the "No on Prop. 8" campaign.

Election officials estimated there could be as many as 2 million ballots left to count after election day, mainly from mail ballots that arrived Tuesday.

Supporters of the ban stayed cautiously optimistic.

"We're confident voters did go to the polls to vote 'yes' to protect traditional marriage," said Chip White, a spokesman for the Prop. 8 campaign.

Same-sex marriage bans won easily Tuesday night in Florida and Arizona. It was a rematch in Arizona, which in 2006 became the only state to ever reject a ban on same-sex marriage.

pretty shitty way to drum up support for the republicans

On May 15, the state Supreme Court cleared the way for same-sex marriage. The court voted 4-3 to overturn Prop. 22 and the same-sex marriage ban, ruling that the state Constitution provided a right to marry that extends to same-sex couples.

After a heated, divisive campaign, fueled by a record $73 million of spending, California voters Tuesday were backing Proposition 8, which would change the state Constitution to ban same-sex marriage

pretty ****ing underhanded

The campaign in California pitted those who argued that a same-sex marriage ban was nothing more than outdated discrimination against gays and lesbians,

agreed

and conservatives and Christian groups who countered that the state and the courts have no right to unilaterally change a definition of marriage that has existed for centuries.

there's an obvious hole in their reasoning ..marriage is not exclusive to christians or conservatives, or any religion for that matter. they have NO RIGHT to claim ownership over it. their opinion of what it should be is completely besides the point. this is discrimination based on sexual orientation plain and simple


http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/11/05/MNCC13QR90.DTL&type=politics



it doesnt stop there:

Arkansas voters approved a measure 57 to 43 percent Tuesday to ban all homosexual and unmarried couples from caring for foster children, according to the Arkansas Democrat

sigh, you have a long way to go america

 

[Laivasse]

Surely you're mistaken. Obama getting elected means there are no problems with prejudice any more. That's what the nice news men were saying, anyway.

 

[CptStern]

Americans prefer muslim terrorists over sodomy. anything but the gay ..or even worse: atheist ..so until they vote in a gay black atheist woman dwarf prejudice will rule supreme

 

[VictimOfScience]

This surely is pretty sad, esp. about the forster care. :x

Yes, we have a long way to go, but one step at a time here! We can't cure the world or our country of all of its evils overnight, but we can set out down a better path and aim for better things in the coming days and years. I think this is what we have done. After all, this is a country that was founded on slavery and racism so to now have a black president is mind-blowingly incredible.

 

[CptStern]

no, I demand change NOW!

 

[VictimOfScience]

no, I demand change NOW!

Switch to Sanka. :E

 

[CptStern]

No it'll make me jittery!!!

 

[VictimOfScience]

It doesn't sound like you are ready for change, despite what you may say here. Does the "Bradley Effect" cover this or does this have to be called the "Stern Effect?"

 

[Pesmerga]

Law should never be a moral compass so long as it doesn't infringe on other's legal and human rights. Gay marriage between two humans is harmless; banning gay marriage is as unconstitutional as issues come.

 

[Kase]

in the words of glen wool *God is all knowing all Might, he can do anything, he can fight anything, he can stop anything except his urge to make gay people oooohhh i made another one i just cant help myself*

i dont see anything wrong with same sex marriage aslong as they are happy who cares.

 

[Vigilante]

I can't believe California, of all states, passed this. ****ing religious people.

 

[Atomic_Piggy]

Law should never be a moral compass so long as it doesn't infringe on other's legal and human rights. Gay marriage between two humans is harmless; banning gay marriage is as unconstitutional as issues come.

QFT. If you hate homosexuality then preach about it, but don't let your opinion affect laws.

 

[CptStern]

I can't believe California, of all states, passed this. ****ing religious people.

there's a lot of morons in california ..I mean mormons ..by which I mean morons

 

[lefty]

there's a lot of morons in california ..I mean mormons ..by which I mean morons

That's actually the case.

 

[DEATHMASTER]

You've lost karma!

 

[dfc05]

I remember them emphasizing on CNN on MSNBC last night how in California they are taking away rights that have already been given... rights that cause absolutely no harm to anyone else. Sad.

 

[delusional]

I have hopes California will turn around and allow gay marriages the next election cycle. In the 1990's there was a similar proposition that passed with 61% (It wasn't a constitutional amendment), Now Prop 8 passed with 52% of the vote. So it's slowly moving in the right direction. There was also a poll in all of the High Schools government classes and prop 8 failed. So I'm willing to bet that there will be a proposition next cycle to legalize gay marriage. These things take time. The bigoted old people just need to die and be replaced with more accepting people.

 

[Absinthe]

The bigoted old people just need to die and be replaced with more accepting people.

This is really what it boils down to. Sure, you'll still get dumb, indoctrinated youth that hates queers. But it's been steadily diminishing over time. Most kids growing up these days and a bit earlier don't have these prejudices.

Old people: Please go ****ing die.

 

[AtomicSpark]

The government shouldn't be ****ing deciding what marriage is. It should be only up to peoples faiths and religions to dictate that.

 

[CptStern]

yes but which faith and which religion? christianity? so should all non christian marriages be anulled? if it is "up to people's faith and religions" then this wouldnt be an issue because christians WOULDNT ban same sex marriage

 

[Sledgehammer]

This is pretty low. In general, the US has some issues, this being one of them. The best of luck to Barack Hussein Obama though.

 

[theotherguy]

yes but which faith and which religion? christianity? so should all non christian marriages be anulled? if it is "up to people's faith and religions" then this wouldnt be an issue because christians WOULDNT ban same sex marriage

Actually yes.

All marriages should be annulled and replaced with civil unions, and then religious sects can "marry" people as the choose.

Marriage should not be a civil affair, and should not come with any legal caveats. It should be the equivalent of declaring yourself chaste or deciding to wear a turban.

The real legal meat of marriages should only come from the state, since anything else constitutes a breach of the first amendment's establishment clause.

Thus, ban state marriage altogether and replace it with civil unions.

 

[CptStern]

could have, would have should have ..you're talking about annulling millions of legal marriages for the sake of a single religion's POV? it'll never fly. who would police what is a marriage asnd what is a civil law ..I can have as little religion in my ceremony or as much as I want, there is no single ceremony that covers all the bases. some christian groups allow same sex marriage (united church of canada) ..so does that mean that same sex marriage is allowable because in this case the religion in question chose to include it? ..you'd have to uproot tradition that goes back thousands of years and this is essentially what christianity has a problem with ..they just cant see the flipside

 

[unozero]

my whole family except my grandma voted against 8...so it aint our fault lol

 

[delusional]

my whole family except my grandma voted against 8...so it aint our fault lol

My whole family voted for 8 except me. :x

 

[Jintor]

It actually passed? Greeeeeeeeeeaaaaaaat. -___-

 

[Top Secret]

Of course it passed. The church teamed up. I am willing to bet that 85% of the people who are church goers walked into a booth and voted yes on prop 8.

 

[RakuraiTenjin]

I voted no on Proposition 102. I'm strongly against them altering the STATE CONSTITUTION to support more strongly a law already on the books.

The constitution is to be a guideline of undisputable rights, not an easily altered document in line with legislated laws.

Religious people didn't realize gay marriage was already not allowed here and just weakened the constitution of Arizona by altering it so easily.

sigh, you have a long way to go america

That said, this is the difference between states. As much as states power has been weakened over the years, you still have to recognize that we are a union OF states, not one homogonous group. I understand what you're saying about certain groups IN America but I don't like being lumped with other states.

 

[RakuraiTenjin]

I remember them emphasizing on CNN on MSNBC last night how in California they are taking away rights that have already been given... rights that cause absolutely no harm to anyone else. Sad.

I'm not supporting the ban but this is not at ALL some new turn for California.

 

[Some_God]

People voted for what they believed in. Who are you to tell them they're wrong?

 

[Vigilante]

People voted for what they believed in. Who are you to tell them they're wrong?

They are wrong. Why should gay marriage be illegal? Because it says in the Bible, some book written by some old men? If you're against gay marriage, then shut the **** up and don't get one.

 

[CptStern]

People voted for what they believed in. Who are you to tell them they're wrong?

common sense? the facts? their own moral hypocrisy that begs to be pointed out again and again and again and ..





so I guess you're all for allowing ignornce to be passed into law for the sake of placating the ignorant. right, that seems wise

If you're against gay marriage, then shut the **** up and don't get one.

this is unintentionally hilarious

you kinda imply he's gay but just doesnt want to get married

 

[jet_porkins]

I honestly don't care. I'm pretty passive when it comes to whether or not it's allowed, only if you insist on having one I'm one of the guys (probably the minority on this forum) who insists it's not a marriage.

Ice is water, by definition that they share all the same physical elements. But it's not water. We label frozen water as ice. Gay marriage is the ice to marriage's water.

I also think that it should only be decided by states. That's about as far as my position goes. If it's legal? Go ahead and legalize all the gay couples you want. Illegal? Well, that's unfortunate.

 

[CptStern]

I honestly don't care. I'm pretty passive when it comes to whether or not it's allowed, only if you insist on having one I'm one of the guys (probably the minority on this forum) who insists it's not a marriage.

Ice is water, by definition that they share all the same physical elements. But it's not water. We label frozen water as ice. Gay marriage is the ice to marriage's water.

I also think that it should only be decided by states. That's about as far as my position goes. If it's legal? Go ahead and legalize all the gay couples you want. Illegal? Well, that's unfortunate.

so you're ok with discriminating based on sexual orientation?

so you're ok with allowing a religious group to amend states constitutions to allow that discrimination to take place ... a religious based organisation amended your laws to suit their pov and you're ok with this

 

[Some_God]

Like I said before, who are you to tell people they're wrong? "Common sense" and "facts" in a case such as this (which you'll have to post for me, for information purposes) are somewhat irrelevant because it's a personal issue - people either support it or not based on their beliefs. Each state is different in regards to this issue, but it's pretty surprising to see a traditionally left-wing state such as California do a complete turnaround.

 

[Absinthe]

I vote that we execute homosexuals. Want a reason? **** you! It's my personal belief!

People will vote according to their stupid prejudices. And while they can certainly be blamed and criticized for that, it's a bit besides the point. The measure shouldn't be on the ballot in the first place.

 

[jet_porkins]

so you're ok with discriminating based on sexual orientation?

so you're ok with allowing a religious group to amend states constitutions to allow that discrimination to take place ... a religious based organisation amended your laws to suit their pov and you're ok with this

It just isn't important enough to me for me to care.

EDIT: If I had to make a choice, I'd rather see legal civil unions (equal in legality to a marriage) throughout the nation instead of a national anti-gay ban. But I'm just not passionate enough about it to start pointing fingers and yelling at the Christian right.

I'm 100% for straight people standing up for gays, after all who else will stand up for them? I'm just not passionate about it.

Now, if said religious group amends constitutions, or even the national constitution, to impose a national religion, then I'd care.

 

[CptStern]

It just isn't important enough to me for me to care.

have you seen this passage:

In Germany, the Nazis first came for the communists,

and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a communist.

Then they came for the Jews,

and I didn't speak up because I wasn't Jewish.

Then they came for the trade unionist,

and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Catholics,

and I didn't speak up because I was a Protestant,

Then they came for the homosexuals,

and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a homosexual,

Then they came for me,

and by that time there was no one left to speak for me."

--Rev. Martin Niemoeller, German Lutheran Pastor

EDIT: If I had to make a choice, I'd rather see legal civil unions (equal in legality to a marriage) throughout the nation instead of a national anti-gay ban. But I'm just not passionate enough about it to start pointing fingers and yelling at the Christian right.

I'm 100% for straight people standing up for gays, after all who else will stand up for them? I'm just not passionate about it.

Now, if said religious group amends constitutions, or even the national constitution, to impose a national religion, then I'd care.

so so long as they dont amend laws that barr the separation of church and state you're ok with the church amending laws made by the state ................


you dont see the hypocrisy here?

 

[AtomicSpark]

yes but which faith and which religion? christianity? so should all non christian marriages be anulled? if it is "up to people's faith and religions" then this wouldnt be an issue because christians WOULDNT ban same sex marriage

Well by religions, I mean all religions in the world. Of course I guess there would have to be some governmental control over that. Can't have 10 wives, or can we? :naughty:

In any case, I forsee keeping marage as a religions/spiritual/secular occasion. Institutions (IRS, insurance, etc.) would change from asking if you were single/married to single/couple (might have to determin what a couple is). This way you cut out all the debates and just make it simple. The couples that live togeather and depend on eachother can recieve benifits without having to go get married or what have you. This of course with all things, would probably get abused. Then again, that's a lot of people's arguments against gay marrage (you saw that movie right?).

 

[No Limit]

Like I said before, who are you to tell people they're wrong? "Common sense" and "facts" in a case such as this (which you'll have to post for me, for information purposes) are somewhat irrelevant because it's a personal issue - people either support it or not based on their beliefs. Each state is different in regards to this issue, but it's pretty surprising to see a traditionally left-wing state such as California do a complete turnaround.

Who are we to tell the taliban that they are wrong? I mean come on dude, these are their own personal beliefs. Leave them alone.

People have their beliefs because of the bible. They have every right to those beliefs. But guess what, not everybody subscribes to their ****ing bible, so leave that bullshit out of my ****ing government. With all the shit wrong with this country I still can not believe that there are ****ing idiots in this country that give 2 shits about who gets married. This california vote was a total disgrace to this country; shame on all of us.