Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 11-20-2008, 02:41 PM
 
Location: Ottawa, Canada
609 posts, read 1,174,112 times
Reputation: 173

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by saganista View Post
"Separate but equal" isn't equal. I thought we learned that already...
im i thought you learned about history as well??? There would only be a different name. all government practices and legal stuff would be the same.

this isnt like the segregated black washrooms and buses and other "black services" which would ahve required special local funding and government funding that obviosuly lacked due to rascism.

this is simply just the exact same proccess a straight couple would go through, with a change of name...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-20-2008, 02:42 PM
 
58 posts, read 307,035 times
Reputation: 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by bby07 View Post
The people passed it, get over it!
No.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-20-2008, 02:45 PM
 
Location: Ottawa, Canada
609 posts, read 1,174,112 times
Reputation: 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by saganista View Post
Yes, a court. Hopefully one comprised of learned old men and women, each possessing an intellect large enough to comprehend the issues that a vast and changing society will throw at them. Civil rights are the storehouse of what it means to be an American. These things are not to be tampered with lightly, and certainly not on the basis of something so fickle and easily manipulated as the base passions of local majorities.
well see, this sint a civil right, or at least thats what the vote decided..

in Canada, it was the last liberal (more left wing) government who chose the supreme court judges, so they are therefore automatically biased.... and how should these hudges be chosen?? through the voting of people (wait thats biased because youll have right wings voting for a judge that represents them and left wings that vote for one that represents them)

what about the president?? oh wait no he is biased because he was voted in based on his left or right wing affiliation..

so how do we choose they judges??? they will never be perfect judges because they are biased
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-20-2008, 02:47 PM
 
Location: CITY OF ANGELS AND CONSTANT DANGER
5,408 posts, read 12,660,340 times
Reputation: 2270
but that is not the case.

civil partnerships or unions do not afford the same rights as legal marriage, definitely not on a federal level. if they did, and were equally accepted as something interchangeable then i think the gays would go for it. but why have seperate civil contracts for two groups?

besides, i would rather keep marriage a civil issue. that way my brother could marry his wife on the beach without having to conform to some "religous" mumbo jumbo. and that way my gays could marry who would make them happy. whereever, whenever, however.

Quote:
Originally Posted by leangk View Post
im i thought you learned about history as well??? There would only be a different name. all government practices and legal stuff would be the same.

this isnt like the segregated black washrooms and buses and other "black services" which would ahve required special local funding and government funding that obviosuly lacked due to rascism.

this is simply just the exact same proccess a straight couple would go through, with a change of name...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-20-2008, 02:48 PM
 
Location: Austin
4,105 posts, read 8,286,106 times
Reputation: 2134
Adultery is against the bible too. But why don't we punish that with time in prison or at least outlaw it? Oh, because straight white Christian men like to cheat on their wives.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-20-2008, 02:57 PM
 
1,402 posts, read 3,500,403 times
Reputation: 1315
Quote:
Originally Posted by leangk View Post
my point is that Charol seemed to be saying that gay marriage is a civil right, and no civil right should be left up to a vote.. but then who decides??? a court? in Canada the SUpreme Court decides and they vote and whcihever ahs the majoirty obviously wins..

So id jsut like to know who charol believes should decide rights??? because rights are not a 100% thinkg, they are an opinion
yes, a court; and California isn't in canada. Who decides these things are determined by the Constitution...there is a procedure for this. And no, civil rights are not an "opinion"....all men have certain inalienable rights in these parts...

Civil rights are protected under the Constitution. The Supreme Court decideds on specific cases based on their interpretation of the Constitution.

The supreme court have ruled that regulation of marriage is a states' right, which is why there are separate debates on this matter in every state in the nation (to some extent).

Keep in mind that the bible has NO bearing on the consititution, the supeme court or government in general. To say that this is a Christian nation just because there are alot of people here that claim to be of this faith is false. The government was designed to be secular for JUST this reason: so one religious faction didn't bring down the entire shooting-match with their "majority" and begin pushing their beliefs onto everyone...sound familiar?????
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-20-2008, 03:04 PM
 
26,680 posts, read 28,657,367 times
Reputation: 7943
Quote:
Originally Posted by bby07 View Post
The people passed it, get over it! You can't marry, it's a good thing it passed. Marriage is only supposed to be between a man and a woman, it even says so in the Bible! Now that this has passed, kids won't be forced to learn about homosexual relationships, which is something little kids don't need to know about and most people are still trying to keep marriage in the traditional way, which is goo.
I think you're highly ignorant, first of all.

But maybe more importantly, conservatives have tried many times to overturn laws that they felt were too liberal. Sometimes they've been successful; sometimes they haven't. Should conservatives just "get over it" when they lose a vote?

For three years in a row, conservatives have lost in California on the question of parental notification when a minor has an abortion. Three years in a row?! And they keep losing! Why don't they just give it up?!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-20-2008, 03:05 PM
 
26,680 posts, read 28,657,367 times
Reputation: 7943
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huckleberry3911948 View Post
that would work just fine. what does not work is violently attacking those to whom you appeal.
Poor Dingleberry. He just can't come up with a new line.

Ignore List.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-20-2008, 03:08 PM
 
26,680 posts, read 28,657,367 times
Reputation: 7943
Quote:
Originally Posted by jnestorr View Post
I'm wit'chu......gay folks need to get over this. Immediately.
They have a right to go on about it for the next 50 years, if they want.

If your side is so strong, then you really don't even need to worry about "gay folks", right?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-20-2008, 03:13 PM
 
26,680 posts, read 28,657,367 times
Reputation: 7943
Quote:
Originally Posted by AuburnJack View Post
No, they don't.

They are simply showing us the true colors of the Yes on 8 crowd.

For all the arguments about "protecting" marriage, "protecting" the children, "protecting" their church, this proposition is about removing a legal right from other people simply for the sake of establishing their own brand of moral superiority.
It's so true. All one has to do is look at a few of the comments here and on Craigslist to see that the most fervent of the anti-same-sex-marriage crowd is basing most of their arguments on religion, outdated beliefs about sexual orientation, and just plain ol' ignorance and hatred of those who are different. It's pathetic.

They're also clearly less literate, when taken as a whole.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:16 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top