Topic: Wow... Prop 8 just got overturned.

[*FFC*]

Not trying to start a heated debate. I just find it... interesting to say the least:

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/2010/08/04/2010-08-04_federal_judge_vaughn_walker_overturns_californias_prop_8_in_win_for_samesex_marr.html

A federal judge shot down California's ban on same-sex marriage Wednesday, ruling it unconstitutional.

"Proposition 8 fails to advance any rational basis in singling out gay men and lesbians for denial of a marriage license," U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker ruled.

"Indeed the evidence shows Proposition 8 does nothing more than enshrine in the California constitution the notion that opposite sex couples are superior to same sex couples."

The ban came into affect through a voter referendum in 2008 -- five months after the California Supreme legalized gay marriages in the state.

Vaughn's decision will not be the final ruling.

Both sides had vowed to appeal no matter what the decision, and the case is expected to go all the way to the Supreme Court.

[Caboose]

... so the people can no longer decide what it is they believe is right and wrong?

[Hammerhead]

Unreal...

[jimbo74]

stupid judge

[Hammerhead]

...or did you mean GAY judge?

[freds40]

I'm shocked. 

[IronClad]

Good.

[will.the.thrill]

not gay, don't care 

[brainlessfool]

YEAH! now just got to call GLENNY poo.  wish me luck! 

[jimbo74]

It's ok, he has issued a stay, so they can't do anything about it, and it still has to be heard by the Supreme Court

I am sure that judge just did it so he gets re-elected

[Toymin8r]

The problem is that 30 years of voting in liberal politicians has led to the entire judicial system of California to be liberal.   Liberal Judges believe in legislating from the bench.  Get used to it.  

[brainlessfool]

The problem is that 30 years of voting in liberal politicians has led to the entire judicial system of California to be liberal.   Liberal Judges believe in legislating from the bench.  Get used to it.  

  YEAH!

[blackdiamond]

I just wish the gay community would be willing to call their unions something other than marriage.  I don't care if they want to promise to be together "till death does them part" and get it on the tax benefits, but the term marriage is something that originated in the Bible and is understood to be between a man and a woman.  I'm not sure there would be nearly the fuss if they called it a Civil Union and  were givenall the same legal rights as people that are married.

There something about marriage that implies being fruitful and multiplying.  I guess one could form some type of argument regarding fruit and being able to do math, but then they would need at least a math minor to get married.

[Brandon]

Not that I'm gay but I definitely did not get married for religious reasons so I could care less if two chicks/dudes got married for the same reason as me - they found someone they want to spend the rest of their life with. I think everyone has the choice of what they want to do, no law should change that. I also know a fair amount of couples that can not have kids, so how are they different than a gay couple? Sheez, believe what you want but allow others to do the same..

[Brandon]

... so the people can no longer decide what it is they believe is right and wrong?

How in the world does a law do that? It's not illegal to smoke but I don't choose to do it as I think it's wrong but I don't think it should be outlawed etc..

[jimbo74]

How in the world does a law do that? It's not illegal to smoke but I don't choose to do it as I think it's wrong but I don't think it should be outlawed etc..

it is illegal to smoke in a lot of places...... you can only smoke outside in designated places..... you cant smoke in businesses

also, i am not 100% sure, but i beleive there may be a law about smoking in your own house if you have minor children..... as in, if you do, you get nailed with endangering a minor

[Brandon]

that's in a car, so I guess there is a law :p

[Steve_925]

Not that I'm gay but I definitely did not get married for religious reasons so I could care less if two chicks/dudes got married for the same reason as me - they found someone they want to spend the rest of their life with. I think everyone has the choice of what they want to do, no law should change that. I also know a fair amount of couples that can not have kids, so how are they different than a gay couple? Sheez, believe what you want but allow others to do the same..

x1000


i cant stand how people make everything about religion.

[Peterbuilt84]

Not trying to start a heated debate.

[IronClad]

people must be scared da big bad homo gon get dem

[*FFC* [OP]]

I just wish the gay community would be willing to call their unions something other than marriage.  I don't care if they want to promise to be together "till death does them part" and get it on the tax benefits, but the term marriage is something that originated in the Bible and is understood to be between a man and a woman.  I'm not sure there would be nearly the fuss if they called it a Civil Union and  were givenall the same legal rights as people that are married.

There something about marriage that implies being fruitful and multiplying.  I guess one could form some type of argument regarding fruit and being able to do math, but then they would need at least a math minor to get married.

My thoughts exactly.

[will.the.thrill]

It's ok, he has issued a stay, so they can't do anything about it, and it still has to be heard by the Supreme Court

I am sure that judge just did it so he gets re-elected

Judge Vaughn R. Walker was APPOINTED by George H W Bush, check your facts, newb.

http://mediamatters.org/research/201008040060

I just wish the gay community would be willing to call their unions something other than marriage.  I don't care if they want to promise to be together "till death does them part" and get it on the tax benefits, but the term marriage is something that originated in the Bible and is understood to be between a man and a woman.  I'm not sure there would be nearly the fuss if they called it a Civil Union and  were givenall the same legal rights as people that are married.

There something about marriage that implies being fruitful and multiplying.  I guess one could form some type of argument regarding fruit and being able to do math, but then they would need at least a math minor to get married.

Marriage did not originate in the bible. Plenty of people in ancient Rome (and other cultures) were married well before Christ was immaculately conceived, and therefore, well before the Bible.  The definitions change with the times, for example, in Iran (which is basically still in the middle ages) marriages are arraigned by the families of the bride and groom for economic/political gains.  

x1000


i cant stand how people make everything about religion.

x1000

[Toymin8r]

Judge Vaughn R. Walker is openly gay, this ruling was expected.

[1972TLC]

Not that I'm gay but I definitely did not get married for religious reasons so I could care less if two chicks/dudes got married for the same reason as me - they found someone they want to spend the rest of their life with. I think everyone has the choice of what they want to do, no law should change that. I also know a fair amount of couples that can not have kids, so how are they different than a gay couple? Sheez, believe what you want but allow others to do the same..

Amen to that right there.

[Toymin8r]

All the reasons for or against gay marriage is in some ways irrelevant to the actual argument.  The gay marraige subject is about re-defining the meaning of a word used in our entire legal system from top to bottom.   Instead of changeing the law, which the voters clealy will not do, proponents of gay marriage want to redefine what the word "marriage" means as it is written in our laws.  

Once this happens the first time it is just as easy for constitutional lawyers to change what a word means in a law instead of changing the actual law.   Its a means of getting around the checks and balances written into our constitution.  If you don't have the votes to change the law, find a judge to change the meaning of a word written in another law to get what you want.  

A good analogy is many times people have attempted to get around the 2nd amendment which refers to the peoples right to "keep and bear arms" with the term "Arms" meaning firearms.  Imagine what would happen if they were successful In changing what that word means.   Lawmakers know they could never get the votes to amend the US constitution but if they could get the supreme court to change what the words mean they could effectively take our guns away.   This is exactly how all of the anti gun people have tried to take them away several times.  It always comes down to a supreme court ruling on "interpreting" what the words mean.  A supreme court ruling only requires a simple majority of at least 5 of the 9 judges.  If you don't know wht it takes to amend the us constitution read it here.  http://www.usconstitution.net/constam.html .   I believe it only happened 10 times in the last 110 years.

[blackdiamond]

Marriage did not originate in the bible. Plenty of people in ancient Rome (and other cultures) were married well before Christ was immaculately conceived, and therefore, well before the Bible.  The definitions change with the times, for example, in Iran (which is basically still in the middle ages) marriages are arraigned by the families of the bride and groom for economic/political gains. 

You're technically correct that the Bible itself didn't begin the concept of marriage.  Having said that, anyone that believes in the Bible, and this is a country founded on Christian values, accepts that the first marriage was between Adam and Eve and documented in the Bible.  It doesn't matter if you personally believe in the Bible, that's were the concept of marriage originated from the Christian perspective.

[brainlessfool]

people must be scared da big bad homo gon get dem

I'm coming for ya 

[IronClad]

I'm coming for ya 

dont threaten me with a good time

[Toymin8r]

dont threaten me with a good time

  

[Sparkplug]

I say good. I have a gay sister, and although its not what I would choose, im not her, and its her life. If she wants to get "married" so be it, if it happens to be with a women, well then, thats her choice. I cant see saying marriage was invented by the bible. They might have coined the word marriage, but I doubt even that. Marriaga is when 2 PEOPLE love each other, and agree to spend the rest of their lives together, they get married. Hell if u want marriage to be sacred, vote for banning 24 hr pull ups, and bein married by elvis, that more demeaning to it then 2 people who actually love each other being wed, no?? And Ive read the bible, and it speaks of souls and all this, but it never is very clear as to whether our soul has a sex or not, no? Does god have a sex?