California ROCKS! Same Sex Marriage Legal!

mishmash · Post by **mishmash** » Fri May 16, 2008 9:23 pm

Lol I'd love to know what a moonbat actually is.
Anyway mr duncan youre absolutely right, and I now realise what a waste of time typing up my last post was.

Amar · Post by **Amar** » Fri May 16, 2008 11:59 pm

Helios, you really shouldn't try to engage in debate over something you are incapable of providing solid information for to back up your point.

Have some legitimate reasonings behind your arguments before you try it. You sound like a damn fool (and that without adding in that you dissaprove of gay marriage likely due to a closed-minded or religious-zealotry upbringing and back ground - which happens to be the background of roughly 56% of the US population.)

Zelknolf · Post by **Zelknolf** » Sat May 17, 2008 12:42 am

GF said it, and I back him up on this one:

Stop replying to PD. He's being inflamatory because he enjoys being inflamatory, and until he does something bad enough to get banned, he'll continue to. The best solution is to just not respond.

Cipher would be the one making dissenting points that expect a serious response, and to him I would ask if it is appropriate to behave unethically if the majority believes it to be acceptable, and how one reconciles the past century, which is certainly marked by a pattern of irresponsible leadership and unethical popular opinion. Moreso, I would say, than previous centuries.

Aitana · Post by **Aitana** » Sat May 17, 2008 12:59 am

I was going to post in here how sad closed minded people can be, but that is truely obvious.

So congrats to all this effects...which is everyone because everyone knows atleast someone who could benefit from this.

Congrats to Mik on the engagement.

Aitana

Mord · Post by **Mord** » Sat May 17, 2008 1:03 am

Aitana's supposed bisexuality is a lie!

Aitana · Post by **Aitana** » Sat May 17, 2008 1:25 am

Mordekai wrote:Aitana's supposed bisexuality is a lie!

I believe this was what I meant by close minded

I don't lie about what I am, nor have I ever.

If you recall I said that this great thing effects all of us... everyone has a different reason why... I being bisexual and very supportive of equality... you maybe because you great uncle is gay... whatever the reason it effects us all.. we should not be so quick to point a finger yet be quick to rejoyce when we see our country make a step in the right direction where other countries have been for so long.

Burt · Post by **Burt** » Sat May 17, 2008 1:30 am

Mordekai wrote:Aitana's supposed bisexuality is a lie!

I heard she's a goldbricker.

fluffmonster · Post by **fluffmonster** » Sat May 17, 2008 2:55 am

cpiher, it comes down to this...are you going to treat homosexuals as lesser people, or not? That's what it really comes down to. Some people don't approve of being a homosexual and so wish to discourage it, as if it were something people chose for mere money or the like. I didn't choose to be heterosexual. You didn't either. Homosexuals don't choose to be homosexuals, they just are. Like women don't get to choose to be women. Like blacks don't get to choose to be black. Are you, as a matter of public mandate, willing to condemn people for things they could not choose to avoid to something less than everyone else?

The only way to say everything you have said already, and also 'no' to the above question, is to believe that the state should not offer the status of marriage to anyone. Of course, that would let the question out of control to the will of the people where some would find other institutions to validate their marriage.

You will never be able to exclude marriage to just a man and woman without the power of the state, and to do so is inherently bigoted and discriminatory. It is not just, and that is why it will not last.

Grand Fromage · Post by **Grand Fromage** » Sat May 17, 2008 3:32 am

I don't even get why people fight against giving people rights. Take out everything and just look at the history. We've had various civil rights movements in the US over the years; how many of those have the people opposing rights won?

Hint: zero. You're wasting your time, equal rights always win in the end.

Mulu · Post by **Mulu** » Sat May 17, 2008 4:13 am

Well, it took Helios longer than 2 weeks to return to trolldom, but I knew it would happen eventually.

HATEFACE · Post by **HATEFACE** » Sat May 17, 2008 9:00 pm

mishmash wrote:Firstly, I don't know what a moonbat is.

Secondly, if somebody makes a sweeping generalisation in which they compare a religion which roughly a sixth of the world's population adhere to, a religion which they clearly have very little idea about and a religion which is a part of my own heritage, with Nazism, I don't consider it overly politically correct to take them to task about it. In fact I think I'd be insane, (as you so delicately put it), to ignore it.

Your responses, in fact your whole attitude on this subject seems typical of somebody steeped in orientalism. Have you ever taken the trouble to, say, crack open a book and look in to the religion yourself, or are your ideas about it an amalgam of all the horror stories about these "rotten pgilets that stone gay people to death, beat women & kill anyone who disagrees with their idea of a perfect islamic theocracy" which the media are so fond of showing?
I would assume the latter, considering as you are so liberal with grouping a good billion people along with nazis, and so vehement in bringing up the highly publicised "rotten piglets" as a justification.

Maybe you're not "really that stupid", maybe you're being ironic, and I just haven't picked up on it. In any case, I doubt whether you would have written

"You argue that you need to be protected from the majority. Total bullshit in this particular case. We're (Republicans and those opposed to same sex marriage.) not nazis or christians that Æ¤øØ§ hang homosexuals or stone them to death for being "different. . ." "

which is equally true in that christians like muslims are human beings and are thus capable of the most inhuman cruelty. Anyway, I'm sure this is a waste in time as I'm sure you will take nothing from it, but at least I tried...

Most of you are all a bunch of moonbats. Some more crazy than others.

I'm sorry, I made sweeping generalisations about nazis that way. Not all of them are as awful as muslim fanatics. - Some of them were just doing their duty, but hey, at least I didn't call them germans. That would be offensive.

I'm glad you feel obligated to defend that section of islam and that you are, in fact, justifying their actions around the world by seperating them from human rights abusers. It shows the truth about who you are as a person. When we take this statement; "Have you ever taken the trouble to, say, crack open a book and look in the religion yourself, or are your ideas about it an amalgam of all the horror stories about these "Rotten piglets that stone gay people to death, beat women & kill anyone who disagrees with their idea of a perfect islamic theocracy," which the media are so fond of showing?" What you're saying is this. "You don't know my religion because you never read the koran. It offends me because I'm really not like that, even though, as I type this very sentence, I'm in fact grouping my religion in with extremists of the same faith. I'm so blind that I cannot realize the fact that he isn't calling all muslims filthy piglets but the ones who do that awful sort of thing."

I also want to thank you for justifying your moonbatty percieved perception of me in your current perception of me with what you just said. It puts me at ease too know that "a good billion people" are extremists, to say this plainly, "ALL MUSLIMS ARE FILTHY PEDO-WORSHIPPING, WIFE BEATING, HOMOSEXUAL KILLING NAZIS." But that wouldn't be fair now would it? No, let's change it to this "MISHMASH IS A FILTHY PEDO-WORSHIPPING, WIFE BEATING, GAY KILLING NAZI"

That's better. That's a less generalisation of muslims. Now, you can call my attitude "orientalism" because I point my finger at muslim extremists around the world and go, "MONSTERS!" for what they do because its verified by "teh media" and "first hand eye-witness accounts." but I will not group modern christianity with the lunacy that is islamic theocratic extremism. It would be morally wrong to do so until a shit load of christians around the world suddenly started rioting, shouting "Death to so-and-so." over offensive shit. Now, don't get me wrong here, friend, I'm not justifying actions of the religious zealots in christianity either. It would be morally wrong for me to group them in with the good people of their faith. I'm just glad they have grown since their old theocratic ways and the ones that don't, really are not that big of a deal in the modern era. Those muslims who say "screw you" to the extremist and risk potential death should be commended. Mr. Rushdie, you're awesomesauce.

Look forward to hearing from you, or not, I don't really care. Moonbat, look it up!

If this is offensive? Then those actions really do apply to you.

Please feel free posting moar of jesus camp. I've only seen it 999 times, I just need to see it one more time for it to convince me how rotten they are. The kid with the mullet shows how wide spread the ideology that is tought there.

Stop replying to PD. He's being inflamatory because he enjoys being inflamatory, and until he does something bad enough to get banned, he'll continue to.

Free speech is un-american. Please allow me to continue without your snide passive aggressive wishes to get me banned. If you don't like it, don't post. - If you do like it, keep posting. I guess there is a reason they call it a "silent" majority.

I was going to post in here how sad closed minded people can be, but that is truely obvious.

I cannot apologize for people like Mishmash, Mulu, and Grand Fromage. They must do that themselves.

I don't even get why people fight against giving people rights. Take out everything and just look at the history. We've had various civil rights movements in the US over the years; how many of those have the people opposing rights won?

Hint: zero. You're wasting your time, equal rights always win in the end.

It must be ignorance! No other reason for it. . .
. . .As a nothern republican (family history included.) we have championed for social change in the past. This time its different and it doesn't take a genius to realize the difference between Mikayla and Dr. Martin Luther King and what they stand for. Homosexuals are not lesser people. - This arguement isn't about that. It's about marriage. Let me sum it up for you all. Black people don't choose to be black. Latinos don't choose to be latinos. White people don't choose to be white. Homosexuals don't choose to be homosexual. (even though that makes them different between black, white, male, or female.) Mikayla, did choose to do a shit load of stuff to himself and that is where I draw the line. I can choose to judge people for what they choose to do, indeed, by the content of their character.

Mikayla · Post by **Mikayla** » Sat May 17, 2008 9:55 pm

Helios:

Mikayla, did choose to do a sh*t load of stuff to himself and that is where I draw the line. I can choose to judge people for what they choose to do, indeed, by the content of their character.

Well, that is a BS red-herring - none of your previous posts have anything to do with my trans-status, and same-sex marriage has nothing to do with trans-people, unless those trans-people happen to be in a same-sex relationship. This is just good-old hate-mongering.

And as for me - yes, I chose to do a bunch of stuff to myself - but I did not chose to feel the way I do. When I was 3 years old and I knew I should have been a girl, I did not choose that. Infact, I tried very hard to "un-choose" that and I tried very hard, for decades, to be a boy like people said I was "supposed" to be - but, I cannot change what I am inside - and what I am inside is not a boy. I didn't get to choose that - all I got to choose was what I was going to do about it.

But, as I said, all that is beside the point - me, my issues, and my trans-status have nothing to do with same-sex marriage or your previous hateful statements. You are just striking out blindly now, attacking whatever you can. I don't really understand why, but, to each their own.

P.S. Oh, and your use of "himself" is such a lame, hateful and petty little dig at my identity its pathetic. Are you really so hateful? Why? Get over it.

Vaelahr · Post by **Vaelahr** » Sat May 17, 2008 10:17 pm

JaydeMoon wrote:If you are worried about someone 'sexin' you up in an environment where you felt you were reasonably safe from such treatment, then separate 'facilities' for those inclined to receive any potential sexual gratification if they were to use those 'facilities' together.

I'm talking showers and changing rooms. Not bathrooms or the like. A homosexual male is not turned on at the urinal.

Oh really?!

Jayde, bathroom sexual activity is quite prevalent among homosexuals.

ç i p h é r wrote:A nice summary that includes the dissenting opinions (for those of us with better things to do):

http://www.courtinfo.ca.gov/presscenter ... R26-08.PDF

I agree with Justice Corrigan's conclusions, but it's not my state so I shall leave you Californians to celebrate or commiserate, whatever the case may be.

p.s. Judicial activism can also be a form of tyranny so I suppose it's all a matter of one's perspective. For better or worse, the system is built around majority opinion (is there really any other way to decide fairly?), whatever the forum may be. Case in point, if there are enough votes for it, a constitutional amendment may follow this ruling.

It is the essence of democracy that people should be able to decide the moral rules that govern the nature of a community. If people don't have that power, then they are living under an autocracy. Sure, this majority rule is not unlimited. It is limited by what the government has the power to do. Consequently the majority cannot, in general, vote to seize the homes and accumulated savings of rich people. Leaving aside exceptional cases, government cannot mandate how parents should raise their children. These kinds of power lie outside the scope of government in a free society.

Majority rule is also circumscribed by individual rights. But these are the rights clearly specified in the Constitution. A majority of citizens cannot prevent an individual from voting because voting is a basic right, as is the right to freedom of speech and freedom of religion, and so on. The state is constitutionally prohibited from undermining these enumerated rights.

Now the high court of California has made gay marriage into a right that is immune from restriction by the majority of citizens in the state. We already know what California citizens think about gay marriage: they oppose it. A referendum outlawing gay marriage was passed with the support of the state's voters.

How, then, can a court invalidate the referendum and over-rule the will of the people? Through legal fraud. The court has to pretend that there is a right to gay marriage even though it is nowhere evident in the state constitution. Read the constitution, hold it up to the light, squeeze lemon juice on it - you won't see a right to gay marriage in there. It's simply not an enumerated right, nor is it a right that can be clearly derived from other enumerated rights.

Here we see liberal jurisprudence in its arrogant willingness to subvert the will of the people in order to achieve its ideological agenda. This has nothing to do with whether you think gays should be allowed to marry. If you think they should, go ahead and vote for candidates who support gay marriage. But you should still oppose the manufacture of bogus rights in order to reach a result that democracy would not by itself allow.

Too many young soldiers fought and died those many years ago to gain and preserve this nation's constitutional democracy. We've come a long way, with women and blacks being able to vote. And now those votes have been shit on by activist/rogue judges.

mishmash · Post by **mishmash** » Sat May 17, 2008 10:39 pm

You're pathetic mate. I really don't have any idea how you haven't been banned yet, and if your hysterics actually affected me in any way I'd make a case with admin against you, but to be honest you're just boring. And pathetic.

Arkan Bladesinger · Post by **Arkan Bladesinger** » Sun May 18, 2008 2:33 am

All I will say is congratulations, Mik, on your engagement.