Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Poll answer: NO Only because question said, "Where you live" Having been around gay couples, many are what I concider normal everyday people, but some are in your face, angry and hatefull.
Makes being accepting difficult for me personally.
In my 6 decades on the planet, I have been confronted by many, many more angry and hateful heteros than gays. Of course, IMO, my gay and lesbian friends have every reason to be angry. They've been treated as less than human by too many for too long.
Unbelievable. Needs to be overturned/successfully appealed.
Conflict of interest big-time.
Totally agree!
Much, much better to have a heterosexual decide this case - would be even better if the judge had been married and divorced a couple of times, so everyone would know that the judge was really well versed on the sanctity of marriage.
Of course this gay activist judge would spit on over 7 million voters to push the gay agenda on the people. That is the message that should be put out to the people. In California, your vote does not count!
in the United States, if you vote to discriminate against a minority, then your vote does not count.
This has been proven time and again throughout the US's history.
marriage is not a right...it is a privilege YOU PAY FOR to the government
if we went with the 14th...then MARRIAGE ITSELF is unconstitutional, as it gives and denys rights, privileges and benefits to some but not others
but you liberals dont care..you are all greedy..its about what bennies can I get from the government
So then I'm gonna take away your priviledge to marry...How the hell would you like that?
Marriage is of course a right. It has been well forever.. two people have the RIGHT to make a life and the liberty/freedom to do so. Remember that whole life liberty and happiness crap. the plaintiffs proved marriage is a right, and the judge agreed with them. So therefore it's not to be abridged.
Greedy liberal? I'd rather be a greedy liberal than a bigot conservative.
What the **** is so complicated in this? I mean seriously.
"The Gay agenda is simply to be free. If you have a problem with freedom, I suggest you should join the Democrat party." - something my FB friend mentioned just a little while ago.
You KNOW you're saying the right thing when you **** off both parties
You are wrong. Homosexuality is not an inherent characteristic, race is. The judge is trying to suggest that their are constitutional protections regarding sexual orientation, and that is not true.
You're obviously either not gay or in some serious denial, because if you were gay for even just a second you would realize that it is just about as much a choice as hair color. Wy do you think people would choose to be part of an oppressed minority group? Do you really think people who grow up in unsupportive environments would force themselves into an optional lifestyle that then either forced them to be closeted or face discrimination? Why do you think the suicide rate is higher among gay teens? Because they chose a lifestyle that made life so hard on them that they wanted to kill themselves?
It was also proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that gay couples raise children with the same intensity, love and caring as hetero couples. Children of gay marriages are just as equally adjusted. Yet another hole in your argument.
Blaming minorites does nothing except prove you're the "B" word. But thanks for keeping it up. I needed a good mental excercise this afternoon. But lets try to make it more challenging the next time.
A large, almost 25 year study was published just last month that showed children raised by lesbian parents may actually do better than their peers with straight parents:
The authors found that children raised by lesbian mothers — whether the mother was partnered or single — scored very similarly to children raised by heterosexual parents on measures of development and social behavior. These findings were expected, the authors said; however, they were surprised to discover that children in lesbian homes scored higher than kids in straight families on some psychological measures of self-esteem and confidence, did better academically and were less likely to have behavioral problems, such as rule-breaking and aggression.
He's a judge and any judge that would let their sexuality influence their ruling on a case concerning a legal question wouldn't be fit to sit on the bench. And, there is nothing to indicate this judge is unqualified.
For what it's worth, I do believe that the California judges that allowed same sex marriage were heterosexual. Seems that there is a legal consistency here not dependent on the sexuality of the judges.
I don't know how you voted on the law involved here but since when does the majority vote mean nothing? Actually this is just another nail in the coffin of me ever considering living in California. The people vote for a thing with a good majority and one single judge overturns that vote with nothing more than a grouping of words and his signature? I just can't handle that kind of thing because I see judicial activism involved. I don't care about the sexual lean of the judge who does a thing like this on his own authority.
If this guy can do that when will some judge proclaim the need to sterilize certain individuals?
Or else it would be legal to discriminate based upon sexual orientation.
@Topic: No matter what, there would have been bias.
Anyone who actually read the court transcripts can clearly see that the Prop 8. lawyers didn't have a case.
It's legal to discriminate against people, based on sexual orientation in a lot of states. It's illegal in fewer states. So both answers are right, it just depends on the state.
And I totally agree about the topic bit. It would have been biased either way. Unless maybe we got a bisexual judge, lol. Just kidding, but point is, the important thing in a judge is not sexual orientation, the important thing is to be able to maintain neutrality.
Four sperate topics tied into one another. They are tied into a death grip unseperable from one another yet they can never be fused into one.
Gotta love it!
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
