So how will California rule on Prop 8 this Tuesday....

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by DoNoHarm, May 23, 2009.

  1. DoNoHarm macrumors 65816

    DoNoHarm

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2008
    Location:
    Maine
    #1
    Originally I thought the prop 8 court case was a tactic of last resort by the left that would not work in the courts. However, the more I look into it, restricting who can marry is limiting people's rights and needs more than a 50% vote according to the CA constitution. I think Prop 8 will be struck down by the courts. I'd like to ask an open question to this forum: regardless of your opinion on prop 8, what do you think about the legality of restricting marriage to between a man and a woman. Is it restricting someone's rights?
     
  2. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #2
    Of course it is. When the court ruled marriage was a fundamental right, that pretty much means that it is definitely restricting someone's rights. Whether the court strikes down this terrible BS proposition remains to be seen. Frankly, I don't think they have the balls.
     
  3. PcBgone macrumors 6502

    PcBgone

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2008
    #3
    A 17 year legally cant go buy cigarettes. A 20 year old legally cant go buy alcohol. Their rights are restricted as well. Yet no one is screaming about this issue.

    Laws are designed to protect according to the peoples wishes. The people have already voted on this matter. The court should uphold it. If it doesnt then we should allow 14 year olds to smoke and drink, because we are restricting their right to do so.
     
  4. Zombie Acorn macrumors 65816

    Zombie Acorn

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2009
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario
    #4
    This is a terrible argument.
     
  5. PcBgone macrumors 6502

    PcBgone

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2008
    #5
    And this is a terrible argument on a terrible argument.
     
  6. Zombie Acorn macrumors 65816

    Zombie Acorn

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2009
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario
    #6
    I didn't really know how to address what you said, were you really contesting that because people can't smoke until they are 18 legally that gays shouldn't be able to get married?
     
  7. Teh Don Ditty macrumors G4

    Teh Don Ditty

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2007
    Location:
    Maryland
    #7
    Did we forget that once you hit 18 and 21 you can then LEGALLY do those things.

    Stop being a bigot and let these people get married, it's not like has any effect on you.
     
  8. zap2 macrumors 604

    zap2

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2005
    Location:
    Washington D.C
    #8
    Don't compared laws on age to laws limiting marriage.

    That argument makes it seem that if the majority of society wanted blacks enslaved, thats ok, right? We're protecting blacks from themselves!
     
  9. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #9
    How insanely ridiculous. That wasn't even a good try.
     
  10. rdowns macrumors Penryn

    rdowns

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    #10
    This is just a ridiculous analogy but if you want to deny gays the right to marry until they're 17 or 21, I say go for it. :rolleyes:
     
  11. Eraserhead macrumors G4

    Eraserhead

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2005
    Location:
    UK
    #11
    In fact I think its a great idea to restrict gay marriage until they reach a certain age, just like with hetrosexual marriage :p.
     
  12. PcBgone macrumors 6502

    PcBgone

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2008
    #12
    Your such a hypocrite. You call me a bigot, yet you yourself are a bigot because you are intolerant of my ideals and beliefs.
     
  13. Eraserhead macrumors G4

    Eraserhead

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2005
    Location:
    UK
    #13
    Yeah, but your beliefs restrict other peoples rights.
     
  14. yg17 macrumors G5

    yg17

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2004
    Location:
    St. Louis, MO
    #14
    The difference is you choose your religion and your beliefs, gay people don't choose to be gay. IMO, it's fair game to consider something you choose to believe as wrong.
     
  15. Peace macrumors P6

    Peace

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2005
    Location:
    Space--The ONLY Frontier
    #15
    I think we know what the court will say. Mayor Gavin Newsom already asked the court to wait until after the holiday week-end to announce it. That's a hint to the court upholding the voters decision.

    San Francisco did not want riots over memorial day week-end.
     
  16. jsw Moderator emeritus

    jsw

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2004
    Location:
    Andover, MA
    #16
    I don't think it matters if gay people choose to be gay or not. There's absolutely no reason to consider gay marriage to be any worse than heterosexual marriage. And the argument that marriage is intended to allow a man and a woman to raise children would suggest that only fertile couples be allowed to marry, and that any marriage that doesn't produce children should be terminated. I don't care what the religious decide, and I don't care if churches do or do not recognize gay marriages. But civil courts should.
     
  17. PcBgone macrumors 6502

    PcBgone

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2008
    #17
    This isnt what I stated at all. I simply stated that we restrict the rights of 14 year olds everywhere. Why do we draw the line at 18 or 21? Their rights are being violated as well. But you dont hear anyone complaining about that.

    Regardless of what you say, this all boils down to morals. There are people such as myself, who believe this is Immoral, and should not be allowed. Then there are people such as yourself who have no problem with such things and should be allowed.

    In the middle of said argument there is some common ground that both sides can agree upon. The problem is neither side is willing to give an inch of ground.

    Me personally I find it grotesque. But as long as it doesnt involve me I dont care what you do. The problem is that homosexuals want to call it Marriage. Marriage for me and millions of others is Holy. Regardless of what you believe about marriage. We will fight hard to keep the sanctity of Marriage preserved. Homosexuals will not be allowed to defile it.

    As I have stated before, I would be more willing to accept a Civil Union law for EVERYONE for the state. The so called Marriage benefits would be based off of this for the state. This would be your legal contract. Then those of us who would want to pursue a marriage can.

    Yes a word does mean something. Many years ago, a Man would live and die by his word. You could take his word to the bank and cash in. Many of us still believe in this.
     
  18. yg17 macrumors G5

    yg17

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2004
    Location:
    St. Louis, MO
    #18
    Sadly, I think that's what will happen. It will look bad if the court overturns the will of the voters. Of course, there is precedent for that *cough*2000presidentialelection*cough* so who knows....

    I agree, even if you choose to be gay, it's still not a reason to deny their rights, but I think the fact that they don't choose makes the wingnuts' opposition look even worse.
     
  19. Teh Don Ditty macrumors G4

    Teh Don Ditty

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2007
    Location:
    Maryland
    #19
    I think these 2 posts below sum it all up...

    Like I said, why do you get to choose or force your beliefs of morality on others?
     
  20. jsw Moderator emeritus

    jsw

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2004
    Location:
    Andover, MA
    #20
    I don't think that most people would have an issue with this - "civil unions" for everyone, "marriage" as an added term for those sanctioned in a church. In the end, the words are irrelevant if the benefits are there.
     
  21. Eraserhead macrumors G4

    Eraserhead

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2005
    Location:
    UK
    #21
    The main problem with civil unions in the US is that they don't have equal rights with marriage. Also there is "holy matrimony" for marriages in churches.
     
  22. Peace macrumors P6

    Peace

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2005
    Location:
    Space--The ONLY Frontier
    #22
    I am a staunch rights advocate. I also strongly believe in the separation of church and state as written in the constitution. If a state wants to make gay marriage legal they have that right. Now. When it comes to "holy matrimony" that is an issue that belongs in the church and should not be governed by any law by the state. It belongs within the confines of the church and should stay there without interference from the state.
     
  23. EricNau Moderator emeritus

    EricNau

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2005
    Location:
    San Francisco, CA
    #23
    Both age limits are based on statistical fact and scientific evidence; not "the will of the people." It's not safe to smoke, and therefore that "right" is restricted for minors who aren't deemed old enough to make an informed decision; similarly, alcohol is more dangerous for individuals below the age of 21, so it too is restricted.

    Please point me to a legitimate study which illuminates the negative effect of gay marriage.
     
  24. DoNoHarm thread starter macrumors 65816

    DoNoHarm

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2008
    Location:
    Maine
    #24
    Perhaps churches should set up "church sanctioned marriages". The church could then require conditions like a priest/religious authority figure would have to be the one who marries the couple, for example. They could also add any stipulation they wanted like marriage being between a man and a woman.
     
  25. swiftaw macrumors 603

    swiftaw

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2005
    Location:
    Omaha, NE, USA
    #25
    The problem, it seems, is the dual usage of the word marriage, one by the state and one by the church. Everyone should be able to get married in the eyes of the state, the church can choose who or who not to marry.

    If the church started to refer to marrages sactioned by them as 'holy matrimony' or some other term rather than 'marriage' then alot of the confusion would go away.
     

Share This Page