Wow... Prop 8 just got overturned.

[brainlessfool]

I believe in God and evolution.. Wheres your theory now?

wow, you as confused as me! we should get together over a glass of whiskey and talk about it.


PAGE 3 IS AND MINE!

I love this page so much I'm going to marry it! MWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA I RULE THIS PAGE!

[blackdiamond]

I believe in God and evolution.. Wheres your theory now?

Are you talking about Charles Darwin fish-monkey-man evolution or micro evolution?  I've got no problem with micro-evolution.

[IronClad]

Full blown evolution.

[*FFC*]

I think the real problem here is not the moral or religious issues, which as I read the above comments, I can see both sides of the argument. I certainly have my personal opinions based on my religious and moral beliefs, but that is not what really bothers me so much about this law being overturned.

The real issue as I see it is that the homosexual community is attempting to legitimize their personal beliefs/practices and force general acceptance of them on people who have no interest in their activities, and often abhor what they are doing. Many heterosexuals find the idea of engaging in homosexual activity unnatural and plain "wrong". Why should heterosexuals be forced from a legal standpoint to accept an idea they so adamantly disagree with? Why should heterosexuals be legislated into accepting a lifestyle they find wrong?

One could make the argument that we could legalize necrophilia (sex with dead bodies), on the same principal. It really doesn't hurt the corpse at all, and the only other person involved isn't being hurt by it...right? It would be equally abhorrent to those of us who prefer sexual activity with other living people to allow this to happen. Basically, because we as a general species understand that it is just plain wrong to engage in that behavior, although there are some who do.

I'm not going to engage in the argument of whether homosexuality is right or wrong, because that is a personal moral belief that we all must make for ourselves, and everyone is entitled to his or her own opinion. The problem that I see is that once homosexuality is legitimized through the courts, then that opens the door for them to start preaching their ideas to our children in the schools, and have equal "airtime" in the discussion of human sexuality. They will want to start having ads in magazines, and TV shows demonstrating their beliefs without concern for who is seeing them. Wouldn't that be a violation of my rights? As I understand it, they already have essentially the same "benefits" as married couples do in terms of taxes, retirement and other issues. They seem to be going after the word "marriage", as it implies a legitimate and accepted institution, and they want to be a part of that.

I choose to not engage in certain behaviors because I find them wrong on whatever level. I also choose not to interact with those who engage in those activities, because it would irritate me. If the homosexual community were able to legitimize their beliefs/practices through legislation and the courts, then I am being forced to be exposed to their lifestyle. It's like the old saying goes, I don't care if someone is gay, just don't force it on me.

I agree - I haven't been real good with words lately so you kinda just took the thoughts out of my head and put them down for me hehe.

I think my biggest problem with the whole shindig is this right here:

The problem that I see is that once homosexuality is legitimized through the courts, then that opens the door for them to start preaching their ideas to our children in the schools, and have equal "airtime" in the discussion of human sexuality.

[kneedownnate]

Full blown evolution.

Ditto 

[1972TLC]

The real issue as I see it is that the homosexual community is attempting to legitimize their personal beliefs/practices and force general acceptance of them on people who have no interest in their activities, and often abhor what they are doing. Many heterosexuals find the idea of engaging in homosexual activity unnatural and plain "wrong". Why should heterosexuals be forced from a legal standpoint to accept an idea they so adamantly disagree with? Why should heterosexuals be legislated into accepting a lifestyle they find wrong?

Because when we don't make that happen things like slavery and segregation are how we live. How many people thought that African Americans were just plain wrong? Too many...at the beginning. Thankfully, we now see eye to eye with our fellow cultures and man of many colors. And because of that many people were forced to accept African Americans into our society and way of life. By your arguement that was completely wrong of us and to resolve that we would need to go back to the days before we brought African Americans to the US. I simply see that as a little ludacris.

In due time, we will see eye to eye with our brothers and sisters who are naturally attracted to the same sex. I believe it.

[abnormaltoy]

During the campaign O said he had visited all 57 states. And...gays can marry in any state in the union...they just have to marry the opposite sex!

[-Matt-]

over 1500 species of animal practice homosexuality. so i don't understand where people are getting this whole idea that its just 'morally' wrong and that it hasn't been a part of evolution.

""The problem that I see is that once homosexuality is legitimized through the courts, then that opens the door for them to start preaching their ideas to our children in the schools, and have equal "airtime" in the discussion of human sexuality.""

fist off, just because homosexuals can get married in certain states doesn't mean anythings gonna change in the school system. sex edd talks about health, reproduction, drugs and other . not about marriage or relationships. second off say is does, there's 1000s of subjects in schools that one doesn't agree with, and just because they dont agree with it doesn't mean that it should be sheltered. this argument in other terms make it seem that people are afraid that a more open society is going to make people gay. that's ridiculous. if your straight your straight, your not gonna start turning society gay.

i find it ridiculous that some of the world even thinks this is an issue in the first place.. most of the people against it don't even have any personal experience living with or being around gay people. why should your beliefs (beliefs/religion pretty much same difference) interfere in how other people live their life's when it doesn't even personally affect you. just my 

and the whole having sex with dead bodies is the worse analogy ever.

[blackdiamond]

I have a gay uncle that had a partner for over ten years before the split up.  For all practical purposes, they were married, they've been split up for around five years at this point and, I believe, still share custody of the dogs.  I'm fairly certain that my uncle told my mom that he wouldn't get married because he considered marriage to be between a man and a woman.  I'm sure he's in the minority within the gay community, but not all gays are in favor of gay marriage.

I think on of the things that bothers many of us is the "rally" gays that like to flaunt their lifestyle's to the rest of the world.  My uncle is one that you can tell that he's gay, but it's not posted on a neon sign.  This same trait applies to religious people as well.  An example would be some of the pro-choice demonstrations that show horrible pictures while harrassing people.  It's these types that give religion a bad name and it's the "rally" gays that turn people off to them.  I've seen gays in San Diego walking on the street with nothing on but a leather g-string, I don't care if you're gay or straight, that just isn't right.

It's too bad that the majority get judged by the minority.

[Rocksurfer]

Having to deal with the gay population 1st hand, given the chance they will and do flaunt it and since they could they would go over and above to show just about everything they had. PS is known for being overly gay and I had my fill of some of the stuff they'd do. It is pretty sad that I used to have to keep my girls inside so that they wouldn't be exposed to their exposure. I don't care for their lifestyle nor do I care what they do in their personal lives but when they strut it right down the street that is going too far. I really got burned out with their lifestyle being forced on us day in, day out.

I will say that not all of them were this way but it only takes a few to make the rest look bad, just like the tracks left by a careless 4 wheeler that went off the trail. Show some respect for others.

[1972TLC]

Having to deal with the gay population 1st hand, given the chance they will and do flaunt it and since they could they would go over and above to show just about everything they had. PS is known for being overly gay and I had my fill of some of the stuff they'd do. It is pretty sad that I used to have to keep my girls inside so that they wouldn't be exposed to their exposure. I don't care for their lifestyle nor do I care what they do in their personal lives but when they strut it right down the street that is going too far. I really got burned out with their lifestyle being forced on us day in, day out.

I will say that not all of them were this way but it only takes a few to make the rest look bad, just like the tracks left by a careless 4 wheeler that went off the trail. Show some respect for others.

I don't agree with hippies and people who don't bathe or shave their pits. I have to see it and have to pass it on the streets where I walk. How is that any different? Like a piece of art you can please some of the people some of the time but you can't please all of the people all of the time.

And I'm sorry but I have to say, these "rally" gays are definitely the minority of the  homosexual population. If you can't look past the fact that they are merely a small bundle of the gay community, then you are focusing on all the wrong things. Gay people like my cousin are amazing people and if you'd met her you'd not even know she was a lesbian. THAT is what the gay community is. That, is how the majority of the gay community looks. "Normal" if you will and not obnoxious and obvious. Not because they're purposefully trying to hide it, simply because they act no freaking differently than a straight couple in love!

That is all.

[-Matt-]

ya i agree,but the ones that rally and flaunt it are just the ones that get media attention. i know a few gay guys that absolutely hate that and thinks its disgusting. it doesn't matter what race, religion, or lifestyle it.. there's always gonna be the ones that are bad influences. its perfectly right to base beliefs from experiences so if your around some gay people that are way over the top, or see bad media coverage and haven't ever experienced talking with the mature ones (which is the majority of them), then i can understand that point of view but that shouldn't mean that you cant be understanding enough to not think that way . everyone on this site should feel similar about stereotyping and basing decisions on it. it pisses all of us off when we get a bad rep for the ones that mud bog through a farmers orchard. there still wheeling.. to an extend, and we will be classified together by most of the population that doesn't know the difference, but we are nothing alike and don't want anything to do with them. its all the same difference. so in other words why stereotype the same way to the gay community as the regular community does to us with wheeling.

[blackdiamond]

Sadly, it's the "rally" gays that are openly pushing things like gay marriage in the media which is why many people are against it.  Why would anyone think that this is where it would end?  Some of them are simply pushing because they enjoy the attention and Prop 8 won't solve that, it'll just force them to think of the next thing to push.

Relating this back to wheelers, if it wasn't already legal, would you expect the general population to want to make wheeling legal if all they saw in the media was the guys that are always pushing the boundaries?

[83yota]

ok... first off i think one of the first comments is to call it something else to make the religious people happy. good idea but change it for everyone in a legal stand point and you can call it what ever the hell you want on your own. now just so you know i married an atheists and my mom and good friend are gay. (not together) and I believe in a god. now my question is why is it ALOT of people that "come out" (mainly guys) feel they must change the way they talk and push it your face. my buddy came out about 3 years ago and guess what... NOTHING CHANGED (other than he was holding hands with a guy when we double dated) when my mom came out AGAIN NOTHING CHANGED. she lives with a woman but neither one of them push it on anyone and dont try to make sure everyone knows. you would never know that either one is gay but they are also not affraid to talk about it if you ask. What is funny is my good friend says that all these "gays" (his words not mine)are stupid. there is no reason for marriage. if you want the finacial bannifits then you are STUPID and it wont last. my mom and my friend both love their partners and are not afraid to show it and are not pushing for marriage.

[Plekto]

The real issue as I see it is that the religious community is attempting to legitimize their personal beliefs/practices and force general acceptance of them on people who have no interest in their activities, and often abhor what they are doing.... Why should homosexuals be forced from a legal standpoint to accept an idea they so adamantly disagree with? Why should homosexuals be legislated into accepting a lifestyle they find wrong?

It works both ways.  Just change the terms around.

Honestly, Government has no business at all in religious matters and never should have had any in the first place.   This is completely aside from what you or I believe about gay marriage.  The Government has its claws in far too much of our business as it is and anything that lessens its grip on society is a good thing.

[Toydanota]

Quote
"The problem that I see is that once homosexuality is legitimized through the courts, then that opens the door for them to start preaching their ideas to our children in the schools, and have equal "airtime" in the discussion of human sexuality"


This makes absolutly no sense to me. Im failing to see how sheltering children from the real world is going to benefit them in the future in any way. Can anyone tell me when they were faced with this monumental dicision as a child or being homosexual or hetrosexual? For me personally that moment never happened. Basically the point im trying to make is that homosexualality is something that a person is born with, its not something that is preached like a religion to convert people to practice.

[Rocksurfer]

I don't agree with hippies and people who don't bathe or shave their pits. I have to see it and have to pass it on the streets where I walk. How is that any different? Like a piece of art you can please some of the people some of the time but you can't please all of the people all of the time.

Go live in Downtown Palm Springs for a while and you will change your attitude on that thought. I'm not against gays being gay but indecent exposure is indecent. Hairy armpits may look bad but still is not what we endured.

And I'm sorry but I have to say, these "rally" gays are definitely the minority of the  homosexual population. If you can't look past the fact that they are merely a small bundle of the gay community, then you are focusing on all the wrong things. Gay people like my cousin are amazing people and if you'd met her you'd not even know she was a lesbian. THAT is what the gay community is. That, is how the majority of the gay community looks. "Normal" if you will and not obnoxious and obvious. Not because they're purposefully trying to hide it, simply because they act no freaking differently than a straight couple in love!

That is all.

I believe I did say not all.....

but in saying that enough do flaunt it inappropriately to sickening. FYI I did do side maintenance work at a private nude gay resort in PS, they were very respectfull and kept to themselves not flaunting who or what they are. Sure there was no mistaking them for gay but outside the resort they showed great restraint and respect for those that lived around the resort, unlike other public resorts in the area.

[*FFC*]

Quote
"The problem that I see is that once homosexuality is legitimized through the courts, then that opens the door for them to start preaching their ideas to our children in the schools, and have equal "airtime" in the discussion of human sexuality"


This makes absolutly no sense to me. Im failing to see how sheltering children from the real world is going to benefit them in the future in any way. Can anyone tell me when they were faced with this monumental dicision as a child or being homosexual or hetrosexual? For me personally that moment never happened. Basically the point im trying to make is that homosexualality is something that a person is born with, its not something that is preached like a religion to convert people to practice.

I have no problem with my kid knowing about homosexuality. I do have a problem with someone else (teachers) "teaching" my kid about it though.

[46&2]

I really don't care if gays get married. I guess it just bothers me that the voters of CA spoke, and because 2 people found it insulting, the voter's voice means nothing.

Also, I worry about same sex couples and adopting. Personally, I don't think they should be allowed to adopt, or reproduce via scientific means (look it up, they are working on it).

[will.the.thrill]

I really don't care if gays get married. I guess it just bothers me that the voters of CA spoke, and because 2 people found it insulting, the voter's voice means nothing.

Also, I worry about same sex couples and adopting. Personally, I don't think they should be allowed to adopt, or reproduce via scientific means (look it up, they are working on it).

then start your own orphanage and care for all the children you want to save from same sex couples, then you discriminate against homosexuals when they come to you to adopt.

do you realize how narrow minded and ignorant you sound? the voters of CA spoke and 2 people found it insulting? the voters voice means nothing when the law that passes is unconstitutional.

[*FFC*]

then start your own orphanage and care for all the children you want to save from same sex couples, then you discriminate against homosexuals when they come to you to adopt.

do you realize how narrow minded and ignorant you sound? the voters of CA spoke and 2 people found it insulting? the voters voice means nothing when the law that passes is unconstitutional.

It's not a matter of anyone being ignorant and narrow minded. This entire discussion is a matter of opinion, so please respect that. 

[will.the.thrill]

It's not a matter of anyone being ignorant and narrow minded. This entire discussion is a matter of opinion, so please respect that. 

ok, 46&2, sorry i called you narrow minded. however you are ignorant, the vote was not trumped by 2 people who found prop 8 insulting as you put it, please read up on this topic before making unfounded comments.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2010/08/07/INO61EFPES.DTL

[46&2]

then start your own orphanage and care for all the children you want to save from same sex couples, then you discriminate against homosexuals when they come to you to adopt.

do you realize how narrow minded and ignorant you sound? the voters of CA spoke and 2 people found it insulting? the voters voice means nothing when the law that passes is unconstitutional.

Okay... I'll add that to my list of to dos.  

I have first hand experience with a friend who was raised by two lesbians. I think adoption of young children by same sex couples can and does cause standing psychological damage. He claims he is straight, but we all pretty much know he is gay. He still dates women, painfully, and its just one of those situations where we don't really know how to approach it. He doesn't want to be gay, yet I have to wonder... had he been raised by a heterosexual couple, would he still be struggling with his sexuality? He is a great guy but has a lot of issues to deal with.

You really can't see how for the child's sake, it might not be the right thing to allow homosexual couples to adopt? I'm not trying to be some ignorant, "God hates fags", moron from the hills, I am looking at things from a social experiment point of view. Seeing what my friend has struggled with, I have to wonder, is he just an anomaly, or is there going to be a trend like that?

I mean , do you even know anyone who is gay? None of my gay friends want kids. As they would put it "One of the best things about being gay is you never have to worry about getting anyone pregnant!"  

In fact, I find it pretty disturbing that you think growing kids in test tubes so two gay men can have a child of their combined DNA is morally right. I find that wrong in so many ways....

ok, 46&2, sorry i called you narrow minded. however you are ignorant, the vote was not trumped by 2 people who found prop 8 insulting as you put it, please read up on this topic before making unfounded comments.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2010/08/07/INO61EFPES.DTL

Oops, my bad. Make that four people that thought it violated their constitutional rights enough to file a lawsuit in which Judge Walker made his ruling that it was unconstitutional. Other people may not have liked it, but it doesn't take away from the fact that 4 people filed the lawsuit that got it overturned. My point was, 4 people (thought it 2, sorry for the unfounded comment) over ruled the voters of California. Where does it go from here? Thats my concern. I didn't vote on Prop 8 either way, so I guess I don't really even have a say on it. It didn't really matter to me at the time. None of my gay friends care, so why should I? They are more stoked about legal pot.

Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker made his ruling in a lawsuit filed by two gay couples who claimed the voter-approved ban violated their civil rights.
Both sides previously said an appeal was certain if Walker did not rule in their favor.

Just so you know I didn't make it up, being so ignorant and all: http://www.news10.net/news/local/story.aspx?storyid=89437

[blackdiamond]

I'm sure all gays would say that they would support their children (biological or otherwise) in whatever sexual orientation choice they made, but do you really believe that they wouldn't be at least a little dissapointed if they were not straight?

My uncle and long time partner talked about adopting children and opted to not do it.  I won't speculate on the reason, but they ended up opening their home to a much younger guy that was struggling to pay his way through law school and was partially raising his sister's kids (they actually lived with his mom).  The "family unit" turned out to be my two uncles, the other guy with his mom and the sister's two kids.  Those kids couldn't have been in a more loving environment and I'm sure it was much better for them than being raised by a druggie mom.

[abnormaltoy]

I just heard today on Hugh Hewitt, that neither Cali's Gov nor Atty. Gen. (Brown...running for Gov.) would let the State defend its own Constitution. Is, or can, Swartzenager running again? No matter...I wouldn't vote for either of them if this is true!

[Stocker]

Is, or can, Swartzenager running again?

He is not running... Meg Whitman is the R. candidate against Jerry Brown.

Lord help us, what a choice we have. 

[kneedownnate]

There were better choices, at least one I felt much stronger about.

[brainlessfool]

There were better choices, at least one I felt much stronger about.

Well thank ya nate. did not know you knew about my write in campaine in the primary. obveusly the won. oh well I not bitter. just hope the moon falls from the sky and lands on her thats all.