Prop. 8 Supporters--YOU SUCK!!!

Search
Go

Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List
Post a Reply
Messages 1 - 1192 of total 1192 in this topic
dirtbag

climber
Topic Author's Original Post - Oct 24, 2008 - 10:00pm PT
Bible-based bigotry is still bigotry!

And if your religion supports such hate, then your religion sucks.
Lynne Leichtfuss

Social climber
valley center, ca
Oct 24, 2008 - 10:15pm PT
Dirtbag, whoa....we are all people and we are all different and we are all entitled to our thoughts and opinions ....right ? lrl

Mellow is good....sharing ideas is also good....no need for virulence.
Wes Allen

Boulder climber
KY
Oct 24, 2008 - 10:17pm PT
http://www.apple.com/hotnews

No on Prop 8

October 24, 2008

Apple is publicly opposing Proposition 8 and making a donation of $100,000 to the No on 8 campaign. Apple was among the first California companies to offer equal rights and benefits to our employees’ same-sex partners, and we strongly believe that a person’s fundamental rights — including the right to marry — should not be affected by their sexual orientation. Apple views this as a civil rights issue, rather than just a political issue, and is therefore speaking out publicly against Proposition 8.
TGT

Social climber
So Cal
Oct 24, 2008 - 10:22pm PT
Flashlight

climber
Oct 24, 2008 - 10:55pm PT
http://www.protectmarriage.com/
nita

climber
chica from chico, I don't claim to be a daisy
Oct 24, 2008 - 11:01pm PT
Damn, wish i had the money to buy 2000 apple computers.
dirtbag

climber
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 24, 2008 - 11:46pm PT
"Dirtbag, whoa....we are all people and we are all different and we are all entitled to our thoughts and opinions ....right ? lrl

Mellow is good....sharing ideas is also good....no need for virulence. "


Virulence? No Lynne. But hate sucks, and there is no other way to characterize Prop 8 except as pro-hate.
MisterE

Trad climber
My Inner Nut
Oct 25, 2008 - 12:21am PT
Dirt, don't mince words - tell us what you really think.

Why is everyone Pussy-footing around so today?
hoipolloi

climber
A friends backyard with the neighbors wifi
Oct 25, 2008 - 12:32am PT
First off, I don't think the title of this thread is appropriate and conducive to changing peoples minds, although I entirely agree.

Flashlight, prop 8 is about more than the definition of the word 'marriage.' Its about civil rights, contrary to what Yes on Prop 8 camp is claiming, it is NOT about morals.

This is not a moral issue, its not about whether you agree or disagree with gay marriage, it is about civil rights.

50 years ago people were arguing that it was IMMORAL to share a drinking fountain or a bathroom with black people and people of color. This was a civil rights issue about the civil rights of people of color.

Prop 8 is about taking away civil rights. In this case they are not minorities (in the ethnic sense of the word), they are the rights of gays and lesbians.

Prop 8 does not have any effect on what is or will be taught in schools, it has no effect on the tax exempt status of churches (like the Yes on Prop 8 adds claim), it does not affect you, in fact it has nothing to do with you and it is none of your business.

Prop 8 is, and I hate to use the cliche but it is quite appropriate, about hate. This is a hateful proposition that is going to change the constitutional rights of citizens of California.

Whats the next right we decide is 'immoral' and we need to constitutionally prevent?





My two cents. Sorry for even posting on a political thread, I dislike them as much as anyone on this forum, but this topic just really gets me.
nick d

Trad climber
nm
Oct 25, 2008 - 12:37am PT
Say, isn't that a picture of Jody?
Lynne Leichtfuss

Social climber
valley center, ca
Oct 25, 2008 - 12:42am PT
Still not thinking that the rest of the bro's are sucking. Life is.....Lynne But we are entitled to our opinion.....like everyone...ya, right on.!
Jingy

Social climber
Flatland, Ca
Oct 25, 2008 - 01:39am PT
Good job Hoi in stating it clearly.

It is as you state about keeping those infidels from getting together and fornicating. And those super religious folks seem to want to tell all those who say that they are gay or lesbian from getting their own happiness.

Hey religious folks, don't get your religion on me. If you have a problem with gay or lesbian people then you have the problem, not them. How would you like it if there was a large group of Americans who claimed to be compassionate, caring and family oriented people, but wanted you to completely change your entire lifestyle so that you fit their way of thinking?

Shoe firmly placed on other foot.
dirtineye

Trad climber
the south
Oct 25, 2008 - 01:40am PT
Sure, have your idiotic opinion, but don't force other people to live by your fairy tale religion's rules.

So it's REALLY going to harm you if two gay people want to get married, is that it?

I guess it is better to have a professed fellow christian in charge of the country, who just happens to get thousands of US soldiers killed and maimed for life, and screw up the economy worse than it has been in 80 years, and give all his rich friends a lot of perks.

Yep, I can sure see the merit to this religion based politics stuff alright.
Elcapinyoazz

Social climber
Redlands
Oct 25, 2008 - 01:42am PT
"don't force other people to live by your fairy tale religion's rules."


+10
Tami

Social climber
Vancouver, Canada
Oct 25, 2008 - 02:06am PT
Where I live gays can legally marry. And divorce.

And guess what? Nobody really minds or cares. There haven't been any earthquakes. Or people wanting to marry their dog. Or their mother. Or anything else. No slippery slopes, no weirdsh#t, no nothing.

Except for a few more people getting married. ( or divorced )

Gays are just people. Who cares who they take as a lifetime partner.

MisterE

Trad climber
My Inner Nut
Oct 25, 2008 - 02:29am PT
Great points! I would also just like to add that this is an issue of whether you are narrowing or broadening your acceptance of your fellow beings.

Really, this vote will tell you straight-up.
adam d

climber
CA
Oct 25, 2008 - 02:46am PT
Do any of these political threads actually change minds?

A beer for the first person who finds evidence of minds actually being changed by any of 'em.

I'm voting no. On prop 8 and on "do political taco threads change votes"


Matt

Trad climber
primordial soup
Oct 25, 2008 - 02:48am PT
justice is blind

love is blind

tollerance is blind




































so why does religion divide people?
murcy

climber
San Fran Cisco
Oct 25, 2008 - 02:52am PT
absolutely certain that if everyone knew everyone, gay marriage would be a shoo-in.
Matt

Trad climber
primordial soup
Oct 25, 2008 - 03:00am PT
Xactly
HighDesertDJ

Trad climber
Arid-zona
Oct 25, 2008 - 04:07am PT
I'M SICK OF YOU GAYS DESTROYING MY MARRIAGE
bookworm

Social climber
Falls Church, VA
Oct 25, 2008 - 07:26am PT
"there is no other way to characterize Prop 8 except as pro-hate."

ok, dirtbag, i've asked this question before but still haven't gotten an answer...if it's ok for two men to marry, why not three men? why not allow one man to marry two, three, eight women? why not allow a brother to marry his sister or a father to marry his daughter?

if they're all mentally competent and of consenting age, what justification can you offer for denying them their "civil right" to marry? and whatever justification you might offer, doesn't it simply boil down to "hate"?

Domingo

Trad climber
El Portal, CA
Oct 25, 2008 - 11:53am PT
"ok, dirtbag, i've asked this question before but still haven't gotten an answer...if it's ok for two men to marry, why not three men? why not allow one man to marry two, three, eight women?"

Our current marriage laws prevent the last part. Can you explain how it is caused by giving a man or woman the right to marry the person they want to marry, regardless of gender?

You can't, because your argument is based on your own discomfort and bigotry.

"why not allow a brother to marry his sister or a father to marry his daughter?"

Again, this is completely unrelated to gay marriage. In this case, I would argue that the genetic product of such a marriage could POTENTIALLY (not necessarily) have consequences. That said, this is prevented by our current laws that pertain to marrying family, so changing the laws on gay marriage could not allow this to happen.

Explain to me how allowing gay marriage will cause and allow a man to marry his daughter. You can't. That's why no one can really answer YOUR questions.

"A beer for the first person who finds evidence of minds actually being changed by any of 'em. "

OHOHOH I WIN! Lois: universal health care for Americans.

edit for Fatty:

"I'm voting no on 8, I want gay couples to have the same rights. Just wish we could find another word besides marriage to describe the union..............why insult millions of religious people?"

Hmmmm, like union, perhaps? I agree... it's up to a religious institutition who can get "married" there. Unions and partnerships are a state thing only. If changing the semantics gives people rights, I'm all for it.
dirtineye

Trad climber
the south
Oct 25, 2008 - 12:01pm PT
Because millions of religious people are a large part of why the world is in such a crap situation, and they need to be poked into some real thinking instead of being allowed to go right on living (mentally at least) in the year 50 AD or so.
dirtbag

climber
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 25, 2008 - 12:03pm PT
Bookworm, to answer your question on the two, three or eight person marriage, I don't know (although the incest issue definitely has problems). I have not given it much thought.


But this one...this one I've thought about a lot. Let's focus on this one thing, just for today. That's the issue we are facing today and that's enough for now.
hoipolloi

climber
A friends backyard with the neighbors wifi
Oct 25, 2008 - 12:50pm PT
Bookworm-

First off, you CAN NOT even begin to compare homosexuality and Gay/Lesbian marriage to an incestuous relationship. That comparison voids all credibility of the argument, and I think that most people, either side, would agree to that. Now, if by making that comparison you are saying that you think, or are implying, that homosexuality is a "deviant" behavior, then I can't argue with you regardless, because there is no changing the mind, despite ration conversation and debate, of such an irrational and off-based, out of touch point of view. (I want to say ignorant view as well, but Ill leave that out, I wouldn't want to call names here).

There is a comparison between a polygamous relationship and a Marriage between two consenting adults. Marriage (either between man and woman, man and man, or woman and woman) is a union between two people based around an innate, inherent love whereas polygamous relationships are often based around social constructions (most always related to a religious view point).

Now, you might argue "well, three woman and a man could all love each other," but if we look at the overwhelming majority of polygamous relationships (I want to say all or most, but want to leave room for the small exception) there are deep-seated, social issues surrounding the formation of a polygamous relationship. There is an environment and/or belief system that supports this relationship style. It does not come from an innate characteristic or need to have more than one spouse.

In addition, polygamous relationships are (almost) always between one man and several women and are less about an equal love between all members. It seems (to me) that within a polygamy there are power struggles which tend to become more about ownership and less about a loving union.

Proposition 8 will eliminate the rights of same-sex couples to engage in marriage. A right that they currently have within the state, that means it will take this right away. Taking away rights, whether you morally agree with this or not, is unacceptable. Same-Sex couples currently are able to get married in California right now, and I have to ask, have you been affected? Has your quality of life declined?

I can tell you that their lives have been affected and their quality of life has improved. In fact they are the only people this has affected, not you, not me, not my parents marriage or my relationship with my girlfriend. So why would I want to negatively affect someone when it has no affect on me?


Adam D:

I hope this comes across with a neutral tone, I want to provide some information that may, in fact, have an effect on someone debating whether they should vote yes or no on prop 8.
seamus mcshane

climber
Oct 25, 2008 - 12:59pm PT
A hole is a hole is a hole.
Although personally I want only one sausage at my party, mine...
Hehehe.
bookworm

Social climber
Falls Church, VA
Oct 25, 2008 - 01:41pm PT
"It does not come from an innate characteristic or need to have more than one spouse."

there is NO innate characteristic or NEED to have ANY spouse...it's a CHOICE we make because it's something we WANT ...and having only one spouse does, in fact, run contrary to a man's biologically programmed urge and engineered ability to spread his seed to as many females as possible...you evolutionists would call this "survival of the fittest"...so, biologically speaking, polygamy makes far more sense than monogamy

"power struggles which tend to become more about ownership and less about a loving union"

ummm...the issue began as an "ownership" issue...homosexuals in "committed relationships" wanted the same rights of inheritance, etc. that married couples have...but if you want to talk about "a loving union" then you actually support my case...who are YOU to determine whether or not three men can have a "loving union"? or one man and five women? or a brother and sister? it seems your argument against my definition of marriage is that it doesn't match your definition even though your definition would still discriminate against people who seek "a loving union" on their own terms

"There is an environment and/or belief system that supports this relationship style"

exactly! i'll vote for legal civil unions, but i want the definition of marriage to remain "between one man and one woman"...so, you'll say, 'the environment and/or belief system' has changed...well, see previous paragraph...either marriage means something unique or it doesn't, in which case, let's just open it up to each individual's interpretation...to try to limit the definition in ANY way, makes you a hypocrite (and, according to dirtbag, a hater)

here's a thought...if men wrote the bible (which i and, i presume, most of you believe), then why did these men create marriage as a monogamous concept (man and woman become "one flesh"; genesis 2:24) in complete contradiction to their own sex drives? because the ancients were far wiser than we are--probably because they were far more in tune with themselves and the construct of society--and they recognized that women needed to be protected from men's sex drive (i'm not talking about female frailty but reality...sex means children and, without marriage, men could easily plant and move on, leaving women to rear the children alone--what would they think about our "progress"?)

i don't know how the issue will affect me, but i am concerned about how it will affect society...you want everyone to be "happy"? then let everyone who wants marry whomever they want...then, by your anecdotal evidence, we'll all be happy...but first, let's consider the consequences of some other progressive ideas intended to keep us all happy...

roe v wade? 50 million dead and counting

no fault divorce? a mockery of the entire marriage concept and disastrous to the family

sexual revolution? see both of the above and let's add the increase in sexually transmitted diseases, some of which are deadly...a culture that teaches the young that women are bitches and hos...an entire generation of kids that believe sex has nothing to do with love...the increased chance that your daughter will end up in a video, which could haunt her life in so many ways...

there's no way of foreseeing where this latest bit of "progress" might take us, so i promote patience...such significant shifts in traditional morality should be made slowly and, despite what dirtbag prefers, with lots of thinking

and consider this...i think the vast majority of people who oppose gay marriage have acknowledged that homosexuals will always be around; i think they've accepted that most homosexuals (like most heterosexuals) are good and productive citizens; but i think most are not yet ready to grant their approval of the homosexual lifestyle...so why not procede first with civil unions and then see where that leads? why do you insist on "marriage", which many people see, rightly or wrongly, as the issue being shoved in their faces?

as far as the current marriages, well, they exist by judicial fiat, not by the democratic process...if you believe in the separation of powers, you should want the current marriages revoked
Jaybro

Social climber
wuz real!
Oct 25, 2008 - 01:51pm PT
Give it up, worm, you're embarrassing yourself
seamus mcshane

climber
Oct 25, 2008 - 01:51pm PT
I love to watch conservatives squirm...even if it's only their writing.
Hehehe.
evenkeel

climber
Oct 25, 2008 - 02:52pm PT
bookworm ever date two woman at a time? Three?
From personal experince I can tell ya its not fun.
WoodySt

Trad climber
Riverside
Oct 25, 2008 - 03:03pm PT
This wasn't going to be much of an issue until the CA State Supreme Court decided to jump the gun, really stupid.
Jingy

Social climber
Flatland, Ca
Oct 25, 2008 - 04:09pm PT
Wow... A conservative, possibly religious person using some questionable evolutionary male characteristics as an argument against gay marriage... That just rich!

This is a common tactic I've heard many times since the question of gay marriage was ever posed. This idea that without the good book everyone would just run around killing, raping, and keeping multiple partners, and generally we'd all be descending into a world without law, where it really is the survival of the fittest....

I heard that before.....

Look, if you are going to say that if "we" (the rest of us who should have no say in the matter)(or "the Voter") grant a gay man or lesbian women the right to marry... Do you really think that this will lead to people all over gathering as many partners as possible and descend into a godless population......

Sorry, I don't see that happening any time soon....

Oh, and just so you know, the world is already a pretty depraved place. You can open the paper any day of the week and be told of some strange happenings... Utah for example... But these stories are not pointing out the direction we as a society are headed. I think that these anecdotal stories and extreme thought exorcises just go to show how "you" might behave if given the opportunity to marry a person of the same sex as you, or else you are just repeating something your pastor has told you and he's depraved and he's been thinking along those lines.

No, I'd like to think that our society is not headed in that direction.


Post Perusal Edit:50 Million and counting... Nice, so you think that overturning Roe V Wade will make everything alright... Don't you see, this is the rule book you have created for yourself, for your own comfort. And your comfort is not my comfort.
S.Powers

Social climber
Jtree, now in Alaska
Oct 25, 2008 - 04:16pm PT
Book worm, your argument is hollow; its passive aggressive nature only contradicts itself.

I can’t believe in this day and age, this is even an issue. If someone even thinks this will be a part of the downfall of our society, our society is at an all time low. To even ponder the idea based on religious ideals is absurd and "un-american", our country was founded based on the fact that we should not be subject to tyranny imposed by religion. The idiocy of even claiming the word "marriage" is holy or even defined is appalling, the word has nothing to do with the relationships people have, If you love someone, you should be able have a marriage, be in wedlock, have an alliance, an association, a link, a match, a civil union (whatever you want to call it, it’s all semantics) with anyone of your choosing. To have that decision made by a court or a religion impedes our growth as a society and goes against what America was built on.

Come on guys it’s time to grow up and get over it, yes your entitled to an opinion, but you’re not entitled to have your opinion affect the civil rights of another.


Edit: Nobody said your personal defitition of marriage has to change, Keep whats holy and important to yourself, and let the rest of the world decide for itself.
dirtbag

climber
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 25, 2008 - 04:24pm PT
"there's no way of foreseeing where this latest bit of "progress" might take us, so i promote patience...such significant shifts in traditional morality should be made slowly and, despite what dirtbag prefers, with lots of thinking "


Lame. Gays have been working for decades for acceptance. That's long enough.

"exactly! i'll vote for legal civil unions, but i want the definition of marriage to remain "between one man and one woman"...so, you'll say, 'the environment and/or belief system' has changed...well, see previous paragraph...either marriage means something unique or it doesn't, in which case, let's just open it up to each individual's interpretation...to try to limit the definition in ANY way, makes you a hypocrite (and, according to dirtbag, a hater) "


Of course, that's not what I said.

I said if you are against gay marriage you are a hater. There's no legitimate argument I've seen to oppose it.

You don't think gay people should have the same rights as other people.

Why?

Because you don't like them. All that other stuff you said just tries to cover up that fact.

And I don't care what your interpretation of "God's word" means.
bookworm

Social climber
Falls Church, VA
Oct 25, 2008 - 04:52pm PT
in other words, you all agree that anyone should be allowed to marry anyone(s)...if not, you must give me an answer as to why some people should not be allowed to marry whomever they please...why are you avoiding the question? why is it the best you can do is mock my beliefs? please note, that i NEVER mentioned religion...i formulated my argument on pure reason...you don't like my definition of marriage even though i can offer reasons why my definition should be preserved...you want to redefine marriage because, as you claim, my definition denies some people their "civil rights" and yet you won't grant the "civil right" of marriage to some people...see, you've found yourself on the proverbial slippery slope; let me explain...

you want to redefine marriage to allow a certain group of people a "civil right"...so, i assume your definition will be one man and one woman or one man and one man or one woman and one woman...that's still a very narrow definition...and if marriage is indeed a "civil right" then you cannot--by the very definition of a civil right--deny it to ANYONE

so why are you reluctant to allow multiple partners to marry? are you suggesting that if we allow men to marry more than one woman (as long as all the women agree) that our society will suddenly collapse? oooooo, sounds like hate-induced paranoia to me...or why shouldn't a woman be allowed to marry three men and guarantee her children financial security? and why can't a brother marry his sister? potential for children with birth defects? well, isn't that their reproductive CHOICE? or maybe you just think that kind of sex is gross--hater!

and, in case you think opposition to homosexuality can only be based on religion, go read some plato...the symposium, to be exact
Matt

Trad climber
primordial soup
Oct 25, 2008 - 04:54pm PT
"bookworm" has clearly only been worming one book
{or at least it's a bunch of similar books, all suggested by rush/hannity/coulter?)


i'm w/ jaybro (see above)







i really cannot grasp the arguments so-called conservatives make when they claim these "traditional values" of theirs are sacrosanct in some way.

the proper analogy in terms of our ongoing social evolution is not polygomy or incest, or even the sexual revolution:

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable [inalienable] Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness"
http://usinfo.state.gov/products/pubs/hrintro/declare.htm




full and equal rights to all americans, regardless of __ , that's what we are discussing here.





bookworm-
you sir, are a bigot, and one in a long and distinguished line of bigots in our nation's history.

"know thyself"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Know_thyself



emancipation
women's sufferage
civil rights movement
homosexual rights
...



people like you have long objected to the progression of equality in america-
but as your now forever tarnished icon used to like to say:
"freedom is on the march".


and as far as the thread's topic, here's another truism/cliche that fits:
if you are not part of the solution, you are part of the problem.




EDIT
bookworm-
how is your argument any different than a slave owner saying, "my definition of a black man is that he is my property, so if you give rights and freedom to my black slaves, you then have to free my horses and my chickens too, as they are also my property; slavery of blacks is an accepted traditional value in our culture and it has been so for generations!"
S.Powers

Social climber
Jtree, now in Alaska
Oct 25, 2008 - 05:02pm PT
read this next line carefully:

I DO NOT GIVE A SH#T WHO MARRIES WHO!

We are not talking about polygamy, incest or any other disturbing topic that you keep reverting to, why do you want to talk about these things so badly?????

We are talking about gay rights. Stay on subject, if you want to talk about those other things fine, but start a new hate thread and hate it there.
bookworm

Social climber
Falls Church, VA
Oct 25, 2008 - 05:13pm PT
no, we're talking about marriage, what it means, and who should be allowed this "civil right"...

and still no answers to my valid questions...with all the hatred spewing my way, you'd think i'd be the one keeping silent, but i'm trying to have a rational discussion on something that is obviously very important to our society

come on, let's have the conversation...you ask me questions about my beliefs, and i'll do my best to give you clear answers...all i ask is you do the same for me

see...this is why we can never really have a "conversation about race" either

i need to go but that will give you all some time to think about my questions
Grant Meisenholder

Trad climber
CA
Oct 25, 2008 - 05:15pm PT
What I find strange is that the vast majority of the people behind this madness are strongly conservative religious types whose churches already don't recognize marriage outside of their definition. So what's the problem? Do you think you'll be compelled to perform these ceremonies?

Also, I just heard today that one of the main financial backers is the Mormon church. Interesting in that the wording of the proposition is "between ONE man and ONE woman." Kinda like they're trying to put the stake in the perception that Mormons are polygamists...

I think if the people who are being swayed by the huge distortions being put forth by the pro-8 groups would take a minute to educate themselves on the real impact of this legislation, they'd drop it like a hot potato. No one who prizes their freedom wants government or some other authoritarian group to dictate what we can do in the privacy of our own homes if it doesn't involve taking away the civil and human rights of another. I mean, isn't that what the Taliban and other ultra-conservative groups are doing elsewhere on the planet?

Aside from it not being "condoned by god" or your own personal hang ups, what is wrong with letting 2 people commit their lives to each other? When did love become a bad thing? Your sexuality is about as easy to change as your eye color. All these people want is to be treated with some dignity and live normal lives.
Berkeley Phil

Trad climber
Berkeley
Oct 25, 2008 - 05:19pm PT
How about everyone who is against 8 making a few phone calls to family and friends, instead of posting to the board. What does it have to do with climbing? Well, we climbers are a tolerant bunch, and aren't interested in being divided in the many ways that some people want to divide us.

Cheers
S.Powers

Social climber
Jtree, now in Alaska
Oct 25, 2008 - 05:32pm PT
"and still no answers to my valid questions...with all the hatred spewing my way, you'd think i'd be the one keeping silent, but i'm trying to have a rational discussion on something that is obviously very important to our society"

Please elaborate you questions more clearly, because all the questions you have posted have been answered. In order to have a rational conversation you have to read ALL of the posts.

And which of your questions were valid? what makes them valid? The only questions I have seen you pose have been a part of an irrational (thats the opposite of rational) slippery slope argument. You cant argue against a slippery slope argument because it is based in speculation not facts.
Flashlight

climber
Oct 25, 2008 - 05:55pm PT
Bookworm...you are wasting your breath trying to explain the issue to people who don't want to see it. Marriage has been between a man and a woman for thousands of years and now people want to change that. You won't get answers to your questions, just attacks on your character.
Domingo

Trad climber
El Portal, CA
Oct 25, 2008 - 05:58pm PT
"Marriage has been between a man and a woman for thousands of years and now people want to change that."

Homosexuality has been occurring, written about, talked about, and accepted/hated (depending on the culture) for millenia, actually.

It also occurs with some amount of frequency in males and females of other organisms.

Why are you people in denial?
Flashlight

climber
Oct 25, 2008 - 06:05pm PT
Myths and Facts about Proposition 8
MYTH: Proposition 8 enshrines discrimination in our Constitution.
FACT: Proposition 8 does not discriminate against gays; it simply restores the meaning of marriage and protects it as an essential institution that has benefited mankind since the beginning of time. Every culture in the world understands that marriage is between a man and a woman. Californians from all walks of life and ethnic backgrounds, whether religious or not, agree that marriage is between a man and a woman.
Proposition 8 does not take away any rights from gay and lesbian domestic partners. Gays and lesbians in California can already enjoy all the legal rights and benefits of marriage. The California Family Code says, “domestic partners shall have all the rights, protections and benefits” of married spouses. There are NO exceptions to this. Proposition 8 will not change that.
MYTH: Allowing gay couples to legally marry does not affect anyone else.
FACT: The narrow decision of the State Supreme Court effectively renders all civil marriage meaningless and will result in tremendous confusion for children. The state Education Code (§51890) requires that teachers instruct children as young as kindergartners about marriage. If the gay marriage ruling becomes permanent, teachers will have little choice but to teach young children there is no difference between gay marriage and traditional marriage.
We should not accept a court decision that results in public school teachers teaching our kids that gay marriage is acceptable. That is an issue for parents to discuss with their children according to their own values and beliefs. It should not be forced on us against our will.
MYTH: This proposition is the work of right wing radicals and extremists to attack the rights of gays.
FACT: Proposition 8 is supported by a broad range of organizations and individuals, including faith leaders representing virtually every faith in California – and those who subscribe to no faith at all. People from every walk of life believe that marriage is between a man and a woman. Over 1.1 million Californians signed the petitions to put Proposition 8 on the ballot.
If gay marriage advocates want to change the definition of marriage, they should have to put a ballot measure before the voters to do so. This has never happened. Instead, they have gone behind the backs of voters and convinced four activist judges in San Francisco to redefine marriage for all of society. That is the wrong approach.
Proposition 8 does not interfere with gays living the lifestyle they choose. However, while gays can live as they want, they should not have the right to redefine marriage for the rest of society.
MYTH: The majority of the State Supreme Court said that gay marriage is a “right”, so the rest of us should leave the issue alone.
FACT: Ultimately, the legal meaning of marriage is up to the people to decide. Four judges on the Supreme Court declared that gay marriage is a “right” because the traditional definition of marriage did not expressly appear in the state Constitution itself. Proposition 8 overturns the court’s flawed decision by amending the state Constitution to include the common-sense definition of marriage that was previously approved by over 61% of the voters (Proposition 22, enacted in 2000, “Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California”).

From:http://www.protectmarriage.com/
Matt

Trad climber
primordial soup
Oct 25, 2008 - 06:08pm PT
quotes that support bookworm and judy:




All great movements are popular movements. They are the volcanic eruptions of human passions and emotions, stirred into activity by the ruthless Goddess of Distress or by the torch of the spoken word cast into the midst of the people.
Adolf Hitler

All propaganda has to be popular and has to accommodate itself to the comprehension of the least intelligent of those whom it seeks to reach.
Adolf Hitler

Any alliance whose purpose is not the intention to wage war is senseless and useless.
Adolf Hitler

Anyone who sees and paints a sky green and fields blue ought to be sterilized.
Adolf Hitler

As a Christian I have no duty to allow myself to be cheated, but I have the duty to be a fighter for truth and justice.
Adolf Hitler

As soon as by one's own propaganda even a glimpse of right on the other side is admitted, the cause for doubting one's own right is laid.
Adolf Hitler

By the skillful and sustained use of propaganda, one can make a people see even heaven as hell or an extremely wretched life as paradise.
Adolf Hitler

Demoralize the enemy from within by surprise, terror, sabotage, assassination. This is the war of the future.
Adolf Hitler

Generals think war should be waged like the tourneys of the Middle Ages. I have no use for knights; I need revolutionaries.
Adolf Hitler

Germany will either be a world power or will not be at all.
Adolf Hitler

Great liars are also great magicians.
Adolf Hitler

Hate is more lasting than dislike.
Adolf Hitler

He alone, who owns the youth, gains the future.
Adolf Hitler

How fortunate for governments that the people they administer don't think.
Adolf Hitler

How fortunate for leaders that men do not think.
Adolf Hitler

Humanitarianism is the expression of stupidity and cowardice.
Adolf Hitler

I believe today that my conduct is in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator.
Adolf Hitler

I do not see why man should not be just as cruel as nature.
Adolf Hitler

I go the way that Providence dictates with the assurance of a sleepwalker.
Adolf Hitler

I use emotion for the many and reserve reason for the few.
Adolf Hitler

If today I stand here as a revolutionary, it is as a revolutionary against the Revolution.
Adolf Hitler

If you tell a big enough lie and tell it frequently enough, it will be believed.
Adolf Hitler

It is always more difficult to fight against faith than against knowledge.
Adolf Hitler

It is not truth that matters, but victory.
Adolf Hitler

Make the lie big, make it simple, keep saying it, and eventually they will believe it.
Adolf Hitler

Mankind has grown strong in eternal struggles and it will only perish through eternal peace.
Adolf Hitler

Sooner will a camel pass through a needle's eye than a great man be "discovered" by an election.
Adolf Hitler

Strength lies not in defence but in attack.
Adolf Hitler

Struggle is the father of all things. It is not by the principles of humanity that man lives or is able to preserve himself above the animal world, but solely by means of the most brutal struggle.
Adolf Hitler

Success is the sole earthly judge of right and wrong.
Adolf Hitler

The art of leadership... consists in consolidating the attention of the people against a single adversary and taking care that nothing will split up that attention.
Adolf Hitler

The broad masses of a population are more amenable to the appeal of rhetoric than to any other force.
Adolf Hitler

The day of individual happiness has passed.
Adolf Hitler

The doom of a nation can be averted only by a storm of flowing passion, but only those who are passionate themselves can arouse passion in others.
Adolf Hitler

The great mass of people will more easily fall victim to a big lie than to a small one.
Adolf Hitler

The great masses of the people will more easily fall victims to a big lie than to a small one.
Adolf Hitler

The great strength of the totalitarian state is that it forces those who fear it to imitate it.
Adolf Hitler

The leader of genius must have the ability to make different opponents appear as if they belonged to one category.
Adolf Hitler

The very first essential for success is a perpetually constant and regular employment of violence.
Adolf Hitler

The victor will never be asked if he told the truth.
Adolf Hitler

Those who want to live, let them fight, and those who do not want to fight in this world of eternal struggle do not deserve to live.
Adolf Hitler

Through clever and constant application of propaganda, people can be made to see paradise as hell, and also the other way round, to consider the most wretched sort of life as paradise.
Adolf Hitler

Universal education is the most corroding and disintegrating poison that liberalism has ever invented for its own destruction.
Adolf Hitler

What good fortune for governments that the people do not think.
Adolf Hitler

Who says I am not under the special protection of God?
Adolf Hitler

Whoever lights the torch of war in Europe can wish for nothing but chaos.
Adolf Hitler

Words build bridges into unexplored regions.
Adolf Hitler
Flashlight

climber
Oct 25, 2008 - 06:08pm PT
Domingo, all kinds of immoral behavior has been occurring for thousands of years also, that doesn't make it right or acceptable.
Flashlight

climber
Oct 25, 2008 - 06:09pm PT
Well, I guess I am now the Hitler of Supertopo.
Matt

Trad climber
primordial soup
Oct 25, 2008 - 06:12pm PT
not saying YOU are HITLER, silly!





























































just saying that, like it or not, you do have some things in common, wrt the way you see this issue.



here are some quotes that do not support your point of view:
http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/m/q109075.html


Matt

Trad climber
primordial soup
Oct 25, 2008 - 06:13pm PT
and:

A genuine leader is not a searcher for consensus but a molder of consensus.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

A lie cannot live.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

A man can't ride your back unless it's bent.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

A man who won't die for something is not fit to live.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

A nation or civilization that continues to produce soft-minded men purchases its own spiritual death on the installment plan.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

A nation that continues year after year to spend more money on military defense than on programs of social uplift is approaching spiritual doom.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

A right delayed is a right denied.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

A riot is at bottom the language of the unheard.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

A riot is the language of the unheard.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

All labor that uplifts humanity has dignity and importance and should be undertaken with painstaking excellence.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

All progress is precarious, and the solution of one problem brings us face to face with another problem.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

Almost always, the creative dedicated minority has made the world better.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

An individual has not started living until he can rise above the narrow confines of his individualistic concerns to the broader concerns of all humanity.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

An individual who breaks a law that conscience tells him is unjust, and who willingly accepts the penalty of imprisonment in order to arouse the conscience of the community over its injustice, is in reality expressing the highest respect for the law.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

At the center of non-violence stands the principle of love.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

Change does not roll in on the wheels of inevitability, but comes through continuous struggle. And so we must straighten our backs and work for our freedom. A man can't ride you unless your back is bent.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

Discrimination is a hellhound that gnaws at Negroes in every waking moment of their lives to remind them that the lie of their inferiority is accepted as truth in the society dominating them.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

Every man must decide whether he will walk in the light of creative altruism or in the darkness of destructive selfishness.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

Everything that we see is a shadow cast by that which we do not see.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

Faith is taking the first step even when you don't see the whole staircase.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

Freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor; it must be demanded by the oppressed.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

Have we not come to such an impasse in the modern world that we must love our enemies - or else? The chain reaction of evil - hate begetting hate, wars producing more wars - must be broken, or else we shall be plunged into the dark abyss of annihilation.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

He who passively accepts evil is as much involved in it as he who helps to perpetrate it. He who accepts evil without protesting against it is really cooperating with it.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

Human progress is neither automatic nor inevitable... Every step toward the goal of justice requires sacrifice, suffering, and struggle; the tireless exertions and passionate concern of dedicated individuals.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

Human salvation lies in the hands of the creatively maladjusted.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

I am not interested in power for power's sake, but I'm interested in power that is moral, that is right and that is good.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

I believe that unarmed truth and unconditional love will have the final word in reality. This is why right, temporarily defeated, is stronger than evil triumphant.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

I have a dream that one day every valley shall be exalted, every hill and mountain shall be made low, the rough places will be made straight and the glory of the Lord shall be revealed and all flesh shall see it together.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

I have a dream that one day on the red hills of Georgia the sons of former slaves and the sons of former slave owners will be able to sit down together at the table of brotherhood.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

I have a dream that one day on the red hills of Georgia, the sons of former slaves and the sons of former slave owners will be able to sit together at the table of brotherhood.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

I have decided to stick with love. Hate is too great a burden to bear.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

I just want to do God's will. And he's allowed me to go to the mountain. And I've looked over, and I've seen the promised land! I may not get there with you, but I want you to know tonight that we as a people will get to the promised land.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

I just want to do God's will. And He's allowed me to go up to the mountain. And I've looked over, and I've seen the Promised Land.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

I look to a day when people will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

I refuse to accept the view that mankind is so tragically bound to the starless midnight of racism and war that the bright daybreak of peace and brotherhood can never become a reality... I believe that unarmed truth and unconditional love will have the final word.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

I submit that an individual who breaks the law that conscience tells him is unjust and willingly accepts the penalty by staying in jail to arouse the conscience of the community over its injustice, is in reality expressing the very highest respect for law.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

I submit to you that if a man hasn't discovered something that he will die for, he isn't fit to live.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

I want to be the white man's brother, not his brother-in-law.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

If a man hasn't discovered something that he will die for, he isn't fit to live.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

If physical death is the price that I must pay to free my white brothers and sisters from a permanent death of the spirit, then nothing can be more redemptive.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

If we are to go forward, we must go back and rediscover those precious values - that all reality hinges on moral foundations and that all reality has spiritual control.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

In the End, we will remember not the words of our enemies, but the silence of our friends.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

It is incontestable and deplorable that Negroes have committed crimes; but they are derivative crimes. They are born of the greater crimes of the white society.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

It is not enough to say we must not wage war. It is necessary to love peace and sacrifice for it.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

It may be true that the law cannot make a man love me, but it can keep him from lynching me, and I think that's pretty important.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

Law and order exist for the purpose of establishing justice and when they fail in this purpose they become the dangerously structured dams that block the flow of social progress.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

Law and order exist for the purpose of establishing justice, and... when they fail to do this purpose they become dangerously structured dams that block the flow of social progress.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

Life's most persistent and urgent question is, 'What are you doing for others?'
Martin Luther King, Jr.

Life's most urgent question is: what are you doing for others?
Martin Luther King, Jr.

Love is the only force capable of transforming an enemy into friend.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

Man must evolve for all human conflict a method which rejects revenge, aggression and retaliation. The foundation of such a method is love.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

Man must evolve for all human conflict a method which rejects revenge, aggression, and retaliation.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

Means we use must be as pure as the ends we seek.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

Never forget that everything Hitler did in Germany was legal.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

Never succumb to the temptation of bitterness.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

Nonviolence is a powerful and just weapon. which cuts without wounding and ennobles the man who wields it. It is a sword that heals.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

Nonviolence means avoiding not only external physical violence but also internal violence of spirit. You not only refuse to shoot a man, but you refuse to hate him.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

One of the greatest casualties of the war in Vietnam is the Great Society... shot down on the battlefield of Vietnam.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

One who breaks an unjust law that conscience tells him is unjust, and who willingly accepts the penalty of imprisonment in order to arouse the conscience of the community over its injustice, is in reality expressing the highest respect for law.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

Our scientific power has outrun our spiritual power. We have guided missiles and misguided men.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

Peace is not merely a distant goal that we seek, but a means by which we arrive at that goal.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

Philanthropy is commendable, but it must not cause the philanthropist to overlook the circumstances of economic injustice which make philanthropy necessary.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

Pity may represent little more than the impersonal concern which prompts the mailing of a check, but true sympathy is the personal concern which demands the giving of one's soul.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

Property is intended to serve life, and no matter how much we surround it with rights and respect, it has no personal being. It is part of the earth man walks on. It is not man.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

Rarely do we find men who willingly engage in hard, solid thinking. There is an almost universal quest for easy answers and half-baked solutions. Nothing pains some people more than having to think.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

Science investigates religion interprets. Science gives man knowledge which is power religion gives man wisdom which is control.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

Seeing is not always believing.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

Take the first step in faith. You don't have to see the whole staircase, just take the first step.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

That old law about 'an eye for an eye' leaves everybody blind. The time is always right to do the right thing.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

The art of acceptance is the art of making someone who has just done you a small favor wish that he might have done you a greater one.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

The first question which the priest and the Levite asked was: "If I stop to help this man, what will happen to me?" But... the good Samaritan reversed the question: "If I do not stop to help this man, what will happen to him?"
Martin Luther King, Jr.

The function of education is to teach one to think intensively and to think critically. Intelligence plus character - that is the goal of true education.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

The hope of a secure and livable world lies with disciplined nonconformists who are dedicated to justice, peace and brotherhood.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

The hottest place in Hell is reserved for those who remain neutral in times of great moral conflict.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

The limitation of riots, moral questions aside, is that they cannot win and their participants know it. Hence, rioting is not revolutionary but reactionary because it invites defeat. It involves an emotional catharsis, but it must be followed by a sense of futility.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

The means by which we live have outdistanced the ends for which we live. Our scientific power has outrun our spiritual power. We have guided missiles and misguided men.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

The moral arc of the universe bends at the elbow of justice.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

The Negro needs the white man to free him from his fears. The white man needs the Negro to free him from his guilt.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

The past is prophetic in that it asserts loudly that wars are poor chisels for carving out peaceful tomorrows.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

The quality, not the longevity, of one's life is what is important.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

The question is not whether we will be extremist but what kind of extremist will we be.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

The question is not whether we will be extremists, but what kind of extremists we will be... The nation and the world are in dire need of creative extremists.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

The sweltering summer of the Negro's legitimate discontent will not pass until there is an invigorating autumn of freedom and equality.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

The time is always right to do what is right.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

The ultimate measure of a man is not where he stands in moments of comfort and convenience, but where he stands at times of challenge and controversy.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

The ultimate tragedy is not the oppression and cruelty by the bad people but the silence over that by the good people.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

There can be no deep disappointment where there is not deep love.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

There is nothing more tragic than to find an individual bogged down in the length of life, devoid of breadth.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

To be a Christian without prayer is no more possible than to be alive without breathing.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

War is a poor chisel to carve out tomorrow.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

Wars are poor chisels for carving out peaceful tomorrows.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

We are not makers of history. We are made by history.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

We have guided missiles and misguided men.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

We may have all come on different ships, but we're in the same boat now.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

We must accept finite disappointment, but never lose infinite hope.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

We must build dikes of courage to hold back the flood of fear.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

We must concentrate not merely on the negative expulsion of war but the postive affirmation of peace.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

We must develop and maintain the capacity to forgive. He who is devoid of the power to forgive is devoid of the power to love. There is some good in the worst of us and some evil in the best of us. When we discover this, we are less prone to hate our enemies.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

We must learn to live together as brothers or perish together as fools.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

We must use time creatively.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

We who engage in nonviolent direct action are not the creators of tension. We merely bring to the surface the hidden tension that is already alive.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

We who in engage in nonviolent direct action are not the creators of tension. We merely bring to the surface the hidden tension that is already alive.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

We will have to repent in this generation not merely for the hateful words and actions of the bad people but for the appalling silence of the good people.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

We will have to repent in this generation not merely for the vitriolic words and actions of the bad people, but for the appalling silence of the good people.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

We will remember not the words of our enemies, but the silence of our friends.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

Whatever affects one directly, affects all indirectly. I can never be what I ought to be until you are what you ought to be. This is the interrelated structure of reality.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

Whatever your life's work is, do it well. A man should do his job so well that the living, the dead, and the unborn could do it no better.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

When you are right you cannot be too radical; when you are wrong, you cannot be too conservative.
Martin Luther King, Jr.
Matt

Trad climber
primordial soup
Oct 25, 2008 - 06:15pm PT
and:

Bob Marley isn't my name. I don't even know my name yet.
Bob Marley

Emancipate yourself from mental slavery, none but ourselves can free our mind.
Bob Marley

Emancipate yourselves from mental slavery, none but ourselves can free our minds!
Bob Marley

Every man gotta right to decide his own destiny.
Bob Marley

Every time I plant a seed, He say kill it before it grow, he say kill it before they grow.
Bob Marley

Get up, stand up, Stand up for your rights. Get up, stand up, Don't give up the fight.
Bob Marley

Herb is the healing of a nation, alcohol is the destruction.
Bob Marley

I don't stand for the black man's side, I don' t stand for the white man's side.I stand for God's side.
Bob Marley

I've been here before and will come again, but I'm not going this trip through.
Bob Marley

If you get down and quarell everyday, you're saying prayers to the devil, I say.
Bob Marley

In this bright future you can't forget your past.
Bob Marley

Life is one big road with lots of signs. So when you riding through the ruts, don't complicate your mind. Flee from hate, mischief and jealousy. Don't bury your thoughts, put your vision to reality. Wake Up and Live!
Bob Marley

Man is a universe within himself.
Bob Marley

Me only have one ambition, y'know. I only have one thing I really like to see happen. I like to see mankind live together - black, white, Chinese, everyone - that's all.
Bob Marley

My future is righteousness.
Bob Marley

My music fights against the system that teaches to live and die.
Bob Marley

My music will go on forever. Maybe it's a fool say that, but when me know facts me can say facts. My music will go on forever.
Bob Marley

None but ourselves can free our minds.
Bob Marley

One good thing about music, when it hits you, you feel no pain.
Bob Marley

Open your eyes, look within. Are you satisfied with the life you're living?
Bob Marley

People want to listen to a message, word from Jah. This could be passed through me or anybody. I am not a leader. Messenger. The words of the songs, not the person, is what attracts people.
Bob Marley

Rastafari not a culture, it's a reality.
Bob Marley

Tell the children the truth.
Bob Marley

The good times of today, are the sad thoughts of tomorrow.
Bob Marley

The harder the battle the sweet of jah victory.
Bob Marley

The more people smoke herb, the more Babylon fall.
Bob Marley

When one door is closed, don't you know, another is open.
Bob Marley

When you smoke the herb, it reveals you to yourself.
Bob Marley

You have to be someone.
Bob Marley
hoipolloi

climber
A friends backyard with the neighbors wifi
Oct 25, 2008 - 06:25pm PT
Flashlight:

I did not attack your character nor the character of Bookworm. I am trying hard not to do that. I am trying to help people see the bigger issue here, the civil rights issue and how that is a far more important thing than the moral issue.

Equality for all outweighs the views of a select group. Marriage may have been between a man and woman for a long time, but I suspect that was largely due to the fact that homosexuality was viewed as such an unacceptable and deviant behavior for so long (I hate to say it but we can largely look to the Catholic Church for that, as we can look at many other religious/spiritual organizations throughout history that did not condemn homosexuality to the extent the Catholic Church has). We are evolving as a society, progressing into an era where the members of our society who have found partners of the same sex with whom they wish to spend their lives should be able to enjoy all the privileges of those who found partners of the opposite sex.

Do the right thing, support civil rights, support progress towards equality.

Vote no on proposition 8.


EDIT:

Quoted from Flashlight:

"MYTH: Allowing gay couples to legally marry does not affect anyone else.
FACT: The narrow decision of the State Supreme Court effectively renders all civil marriage meaningless and will result in tremendous confusion for children. The state Education Code (§51890) requires that teachers instruct children as young as kindergartners about marriage. If the gay marriage ruling becomes permanent, teachers will have little choice but to teach young children there is no difference between gay marriage and traditional marriage.
We should not accept a court decision that results in public school teachers teaching our kids that gay marriage is acceptable. That is an issue for parents to discuss with their children according to their own values and beliefs. It should not be forced on us against our will."


This is simply NOT a true statement. The superintendent of California Department of Education has made it clear that this is simply NOT a true statement. End of story. There is no required marriage curriculum for public school teachers.

Flashlight

climber
Oct 25, 2008 - 06:28pm PT
How can a sexual choice be viewed as a "civil right".

I don't see where blacks had any choice in the matter. Homosexuals do.

Homosexuality is STILL an abnormal and deviant behavior. I think you meant to say that society has "devolved". You think because society has changed its values over the years that it is for the better? I submit that there is not one person in their right mind who can say that society, as a whole, is better today than in years past.
Matt

Trad climber
primordial soup
Oct 25, 2008 - 06:40pm PT
re:How can a sexual choice be viewed as a "civil right".

I don't see where blacks had any choice in the matter. Homosexuals do.

Homosexuality is STILL an abnormal and deviant behavior. I think you meant to say that society has "devolved". You think because society has changed its values over the years that it is for the better? I submit that there is not one person in their right mind who can say that society, as a whole, is better today than in years past.







see?
same judy as ever.
give him an opening, paybe a nudge or two, and all the ignorance and hate pours out.


hoipolloi

climber
A friends backyard with the neighbors wifi
Oct 25, 2008 - 06:42pm PT
From Flashlight:

"How can a sexual choice be viewed as a "civil right".

I don't see where blacks had any choice in the matter. Homosexuals do.

Homosexuality is STILL an abnormal and deviant behavior. I think you meant to say that society has "devolved". You think because society has changed its values over the years that it is for the better? I submit that there is not one person in their right mind who can say that society, as a whole, is better today than in years past."



Thank you Flashlight. I believe my discussion with you is now over. I absolutely disagree with you 100%, homosexuality is in no way an abnormal or diviant behavior. Homosexuality is NOT a choice, you do not wake up one day and say "Hmm, lets try men today." Society has evolved in just about every aspect. I will, and entirely IN my right mind, say that society as a whole, is better today than in years past.

Now I will attack your character: You are a racist, hateful person. To say these things is to say that we were better off 60 years ago, 100 years ago, 1000 years ago when people had far less freedoms and far less equality. This is without a doubt an ignorant and hateful view point. Your views far beyond Prop 8 just became clear with your last statement.

Thanks for coming to the Debate, you just lost. The world would be a better place without people like you. You racist, hateful biggot.
Matt

Trad climber
primordial soup
Oct 25, 2008 - 06:43pm PT
from one of my links above:

"I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ."
Mohandas Gandhi






hoip-
it's so easy to hate judy, ask around, i have been there.

he deserves our empathy and our understanding, as do all people.
his views are the products of the views of those who have influenced him, just as their views were the products of those who influenced them.




hate is learned.
ignorance can be overcome, it is not a trait but a burden.
dirtbag

climber
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 25, 2008 - 06:51pm PT
Yep. For all the high-falutin arguments about Supreme Courts trumping voters will and all that other stuff it is all just a cover for the fact they do not like gay people. If there was truly a disease that struck gay people I think a lot of them would be cheering, like Falhole did in the 80s when he and others thought AIDS would do the trick (I'm sure they were disappointed when it didn't "work").

They say they hate the "sin" and not the "sinner" but that is a lie.
Grant Meisenholder

Trad climber
CA
Oct 25, 2008 - 06:52pm PT
Flashlight sez, "I don't see where blacks had any choice in the matter. Homosexuals do"

What an ignorant statement. Do you know anything about biology and genetics? Have you spent any time in a (non-hate filled) conversation with someone who is gay about why and when they realized they were gay?

It is not a choice. Sure, there are those who find themselves curious and are "gay by choice." But they are really far and few between. And there are those who are gay and repress it because they feel ashamed and want to live a "normal" life. But ask them how happy and fulfilled they are.

When did you realize that you were attracted to women (assuming you are)? Did you make a conscious choice about that? (If you did, then maybe you should reassess your decision.) It's the same thing for homosexuality. It's not a choice, it's an instinct.

And who are you to impose your lifestyle choice on anyone else? You are free to live your life according to your convictions here in America, but no way can you impose that on anyone else. That would be immoral and anti-American.
John Moosie

climber
Beautiful California
Oct 25, 2008 - 07:13pm PT
At the center of non-violence stands the principle of love.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

I have decided to stick with love. Hate is too great a burden to bear.
Martin Luther King, Jr


Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.
Martin Luther King, Jr.


I probably don't have much room to speak as I have been vile at times, but the above quotes are the things that I have been striving to make a part of my life. I still feel hatred for some beliefs and it has been a struggle for me to come to grips with this and figure out how to Love.

My teacher teaches that Homosexuality is a choice. I believe this. It is often not a choice made in this lifetime but one made in previous lifetimes. That is why it appears to be genetic. The choice usually stems from some serious damage done by the opposite sex which leads either to a deep seated hatred or a deep seated fear or both. Imagine if you were a woman and you were raped, beaten and kept as a slave. You might grow to hate men, and yet you would still have a sexual drive and a desire to be intimate and share a oneness with another human. For a time you might sublimate your sexual energy, but ultimately it would come out.

The way forward is to understand where the hatred or the fear comes from and face it. This can be a very difficult thing, which is why I have compassion for those dealing with this and why I wont vote for prop 8. This matter is between the person and their God. I think ultimately it is wrong to pursue a homosexual relationship, but I also believe in the saying "let he who is without sin, cast the first stone". I will not cast the first stone of voting for this proposition. If I am wrong about this, then that is between me and my God.

God put us here and gave us free choice as to how we will live. I believe choices that harm no one but the person or persons involved should for the most part be left alone.

I hope those who oppose gay marriage will look a bit deeper and find compassion, and I hope that those who respond angrily towards them will think about the above quotes from a great man. Hatred will not overcome hatred.
survival

Big Wall climber
A Token of My Extreme
Oct 25, 2008 - 07:15pm PT
Ohhhhh...., we need an Ouch! right now.
S.Powers

Social climber
Jtree, now in Alaska
Oct 25, 2008 - 07:20pm PT
Don't hate the player hate the game....
Matt

Trad climber
primordial soup
Oct 25, 2008 - 07:23pm PT
JM-
i see the above as an honest and open statement of your beliefs.
still, i find the following fault(s):

individuals in our nation are NOT subject to YOUR religious beliefs. whether or not they happen to be tollerant is not relevant. for you to justify your intention to vote on the basis of your religious beliefs, indeed on the basis of a particular teacher's influence, is really no different than jody justifying his vote or his opinion in the same way.



fundamentally, you are making the same argument as he is, in that you seem to think that the rights of others should be subject to the standards of your religion-based opinions.

i could not disagree more on that point.
Flashlight

climber
Oct 25, 2008 - 07:30pm PT
For the sake of argument, lets say people ARE born with homosexual thoughts/tendencies, etc. They still CHOOSE to act on those thoughts/tendencies.

If people are BORN homosexual, how come there are ex-homosexuals?

(I know, your argument is that they probably weren't homosexual to begin with...weak)

I don't understand how you folks can say that just because I don't approve of certain behavior, that I HATE the person. One of my good friends partakes in pre-marital sex, a behavior disapprove of. Does that mean I HATE him?

Another good friend is a lesbian and has a No on Prop 8 sign in front of her house. She knows how I feel yet knows that I am the most loyal friend she has and has told me that. How can I HATE her because I don't want her to engage in homosexual behavior? You folks are really the close-minded ones here. I want to help homosexuals out of their behavior, not condone it.
John Moosie

climber
Beautiful California
Oct 25, 2008 - 07:31pm PT
Matt, Perhaps I do not understand where you are coming from. How is your position any different? Your religion/ teacher is in part science.

What else should I base my opinion on?
Flashlight

climber
Oct 25, 2008 - 07:37pm PT
Our bodies are designed(oops, sorry, have evolved) for reproduction. You are not "born" homosexual any more than you are born a pedophile, a murderer, etc. No scientific evidence of being "born" homosexual has ever been found.
andanother

climber
Oct 25, 2008 - 07:38pm PT
"I want to help homosexuals out of their behavior"

Why don't you just mind your own god damn business? Why is that so difficult?

You break the rules of the Bible and commit sins every single day. More so than many of the other atheists on this forum.
It has been noted many times before, but you are NOT a good person.
So why are so eager to overcompensate on this subject?
Matt

Trad climber
primordial soup
Oct 25, 2008 - 07:38pm PT
jody-
simple answer- social pressure, pressure to conform.


JM-
my answer is simply that under our constitution, an individual's rights trump any group's religious (or a-religious) interpretation of what those rights ought to be.

in terms of science based opinions on policy, in this case, it would not be applicable, IMO.


we are talking about persecution.

Persecution
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Persecution is the systematic mistreatment of an individual/group by another group. The most common forms are religious persecution, ethnic persecution, and political persecution, though there is naturally some overlap between these terms.



so tell me, what is the difference if the persecution is based on religious beliefs or not?
Grant Meisenholder

Trad climber
CA
Oct 25, 2008 - 07:43pm PT
-She knows how I feel yet knows that I am the most loyal friend she has and has told me that. -

Uh, yeah... Some friend. Remind me not to ask you to be my "most loyal" friend. Either that, or she's a verrrry lonely person.

-I want to help homosexuals out of their behavior, not condone it.-

You just don't get it. It's NOT a choice. Just like it's not a choice for you. You feel repulsed by seeing gays physically express affection. They feel the same way about us. And what's worse, they have to live in a world saturated in those images.

People who "are saved" from a gay lifestyle are either lying to themselves and will be not ultimately be happy, or they never were genetically gay to begin with. Feel free to try and convert all the gays you want. Just don't try to legislate your uneducated, divisive, and intrusive point of view.
WBraun

climber
Oct 25, 2008 - 07:44pm PT
I think you're all homo .....
S.Powers

Social climber
Jtree, now in Alaska
Oct 25, 2008 - 07:45pm PT
"You folks are really the close-minded ones here. I want to help homosexuals out of their behavior, not condone it."

We shouldnt force people to change their lifestyles if they dont want to. I dont think anyone here cares if someone is gay or not. Caring that someone is gay and trying to vote the "gayness" out of them is the only close minded thing here. You can belive what you want but forcing other people to "live" by your standards is just wrong (Unless they are commiting a crime, then folks like you and I have to do our jobs)

Jody, I like you as a person, dosn't mean I care for your political veiws, I would never vote for a proposition that banned your "right" to be conservative.

Matt

Trad climber
primordial soup
Oct 25, 2008 - 07:45pm PT
jody-
is the earth 6000 yrs old?

does the bible speak the true and accurate word of God?
(i.e.literal translation?)









could God have set off the big bang?
could there have been dinosaurs?
is the universe billions of years old?



















how do you know God didn't make gays gay?
and why are you afraid of peoiple who are not like you?















a simple search of *certain* internet sites, or strolls down certain city blocks in almost any american city, will clearly demonstrate that anal sex is apparently interesting to (and even enjoyable for) at least some heterosexuals.

how do you know God didn't do that on purpose?







if you want to honor God's creation, honor all of it, not just the parts that remind you of your own experiences.
Flashlight

climber
Oct 25, 2008 - 07:46pm PT
Grant, so a friend is someone who just lets you do your thing and never chastises you about anything?
Flashlight

climber
Oct 25, 2008 - 07:47pm PT
Matt, God created the person, not the activity. I honor the person, but not their activity.
Flashlight

climber
Oct 25, 2008 - 07:48pm PT
I think Werner is a homo.
John Moosie

climber
Beautiful California
Oct 25, 2008 - 07:51pm PT
" How can I HATE her because I don't want her to engage in homosexual behavior?"

Jody, you are arguing that it is a choice. They say it isn't. Therefore you appear hateful to them because you are trying to inflict a position on them that they feel they can do nothing about. If you want to do this right, then first convince them it is a choice. If you can't, then you are forcing your opinion on them with this vote, which is a hateful thing.

You believe in God. At this point, if you have followed your faith and done at least some of the work of putting off the carnal mind and putting on the mind of Christ, then for you it should feel like there is no longer any choice in believing in God. God Is, and therefore you have a knowing. Yet ultimately it is still a choice, even though it may no longer feel to you like one. You may still feel that you have a choice of whether you follow God or not, but most likely you do not feel there is any choice in believing in God because for you, God is Real.

Now imagine if someone told you you were no longer allowed to believe in God. You might be willing to die for this choice because you would not see it as a choice.

Homosexuals have that same feeling, and to force them to not honor their feelings when they hurt no one but those involved, is beyond how I believe God wants us to treat others. As long as a choice does not harm others, then Respect for free choice is one of God's highest standards.

.....................

Matt, I will have to think about what you said.
Matt

Trad climber
primordial soup
Oct 25, 2008 - 07:55pm PT
jody, bookworm, et.al.-

this is more like voting for (or against) blacks marrying whites than anything to which you have compared it. people who were viewed as less than equal had their rights restricted, legally, by a righteous majority who made identical arguments to those you now make.





JM-

suppose your teacher said that black people were angry for what had happened to them in a previous life. regardless of your conclusions based upon those teachings, why would (or should) that have anything to do with the rights that our society afforded to all black people?


(i sincerely hope my analogies are not offensive to anyone, black or white, i am trying to point out how silly i beliee anti-gay arguments are, nothing more)




edit-
JM- i wrote that before reading your last post.
let me say that i DO of course find you to be quite tollerant and loving, and i love that about you, i always have.

still, our individual rights as americans are not based upon each others religious tollerance, instead our religious tollerance is guaranteed by our individual rights as americans.


and jody-
loving the person and not their actions or their beliefs, that principle is also all that redeems you, sir.
John Moosie

climber
Beautiful California
Oct 25, 2008 - 08:02pm PT
I think that I get your point now Matt. Thanks. And I agree. Fundamental rights are protected. I'm just not certain that marriage is a basic right. I will have to think about that one.

Just so you know, my teacher teaches us to follow our own inner guidance and not rely on some outer teacher. I bring up my teacher at times because sometimes I do not trust my own understanding.
Matt

Trad climber
primordial soup
Oct 25, 2008 - 08:09pm PT
JM-
i enjoy the clarity with which you are able to communicate.
Domingo

Trad climber
El Portal, CA
Oct 25, 2008 - 08:11pm PT
Flashlight,

Why is marriage between two males or two females immoral? As in, where does the immorality stem from? Who defined it originally?
Flashlight

climber
Oct 25, 2008 - 08:12pm PT
Domingo, I have explained it many times.

Here it is again.

God created man and woman. He created them for each other. He did not create man for man or woman for woman.
seamus mcshane

climber
Oct 25, 2008 - 08:16pm PT
Are hermaphrodites a mistake by God?
Who are they created for? Larry Flynt? Hehehe.
Domingo

Trad climber
El Portal, CA
Oct 25, 2008 - 08:18pm PT
So our sole function on the earth is to reproduce?
Flashlight

climber
Oct 25, 2008 - 08:19pm PT
Never said that.
S.Powers

Social climber
Jtree, now in Alaska
Oct 25, 2008 - 08:20pm PT
No, that's our "soul" reason...
Matt

Trad climber
primordial soup
Oct 25, 2008 - 08:23pm PT
JM-
one more thing:
i found the text of the CA supreme court decision on this matter to be clear and compelling, perhaps you will agree(?):

http://www.eqca.org/atf/cf/{34F258B3-8482-4943-91CB-08C4B0246A88}/S147999.pdf




while i have enjoied this discussion, it has also reminded me of why i find this place so confoundingly redundant, so on that note- that's it for me kids. Cya, i'm going back on the wagon.
Grant Meisenholder

Trad climber
CA
Oct 25, 2008 - 08:23pm PT
-Grant, so a friend is someone who just lets you do your thing and never chastises you about anything?-

Chastising is one thing, but denying a friend a chance to live a life equal to yours with all of its benefits and basic freedoms is quite different.

I can hear it now- "She can be equal if she gives up her immoral lifestyle." That's not equal, that's a dictatorship.

Edit- I just read your reply to Domingo. If you believe in god, then you believe that god created the universe. So why didn't god create homosexuals, or anything else you consider evil? Or is your god not perfect?

That's my biggest gripe about fundamental religious zealots. They make up the rules as they go. If they don't like the way things turn out, then it's someone else's fault.
WoodySt

Trad climber
Riverside
Oct 25, 2008 - 08:25pm PT
Vote yes on 8 just to piss off Dirtbag. Imagine how he'll come screaming back onto ST if it wins. That alone would be worth the vote.
Flashlight

climber
Oct 25, 2008 - 08:26pm PT
So Grant, in your world, there are NO morals or absolutes?
Grant Meisenholder

Trad climber
CA
Oct 25, 2008 - 08:40pm PT
-So Grant, in your world, there are NO morals or absolutes?-

Of course there are, but they don't stem from some story that has been handed down and rewritten to suit the whims of totalitarian megalomaniacs.

You should read Plato's discourse on god and see why morals don't flow from religion.

Basically, if your premise is that god created the world, then there is nothing that is wrong in the eyes of god. Therefore, our sense of right and wrong is a group consensus that evolved (yes, that's right, evolved) along with us. Our sense of morality comes largely from our experiences and instincts. Not everyone shares those beliefs, which is why we have people on different sides of an issue.

Our country was founded on the principles of individual freedom and freedom to worship as we see fit. I don't choose to worship your god and I don't expect you to worship mine. And I wouldn't allow anyone to legislate the inability of either of us to do as we please in that respect, as long as what we do doesn't infringe on the civil and human rights of anyone else. Which is why we're having this debate.
dirtbag

climber
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 25, 2008 - 08:46pm PT
"Vote yes on 8 just to piss off Dirtbag. Imagine how he'll come screaming back onto ST if it wins. That alone would be worth the vote. "


Cute.

This is a serious issue though.
Flashlight

climber
Oct 25, 2008 - 08:46pm PT
Wes, you are now on my "rude and clueless" list. Or were you there already?
Flashlight

climber
Oct 25, 2008 - 08:48pm PT
I really don't think dirtbag has anything to worry about if it passes. The courts will overturn it, they always do.
Domingo

Trad climber
El Portal, CA
Oct 25, 2008 - 08:48pm PT
"God created man and woman. He created them for each other. He did not create man for man or woman for woman."

Okay so bacteria actually evolved into MALES and FEMALES, but let's go with your bit.

If what you say is true, God did a really shitty job, because there's a lot of intersexed babies born every year. Who did God create these babies for?

Why did God allow animals and other organisms to exhibit homosexual activity?
Todd Gordon

Trad climber
Joshua Tree, Cal
Oct 25, 2008 - 08:49pm PT
Ooops....so sorry.....(Climbing is kinda gay anyways....)



Flashlight

climber
Oct 25, 2008 - 09:04pm PT
Wes, what is your basis for morality?
snowey

Trad climber
San Diego
Oct 25, 2008 - 09:19pm PT
I think this is my first post in a non-climbing discussion...
------------


I used to think that the "pro-gay-marriage" crowd should just abandon their stance on calling it "marriage" and just accept a civil union type of relationship where they get all of the same rights (You can call it marriage 2.0 or whatever) just to avoid confrontation with the religious people. However, I have recently changed my view point on the subject.

I think the main reason people don't want to allow it to be called "marriage" is because they want to maintain "freak" status of gay people. They don't want to allow it to be a normal part of society and they don't want their children thinking its normal. They effectively want to maintain a separation between heterosexual people and gay people. They don't want to discriminate against them (i.e. they are willing to give them equal rights) but they definitely want to keep them separated. However, as concluded in the supreme court decision in Brown vs. Board of Education, which de-segregated schools and services, separate but equal cannot exist. In that decisions they stated that by regardless of how much money you throw at the two facilities, separate is inherently unequal. I think this decision is VERY relevant for the issue of gay marriage.


WBraun

climber
Oct 25, 2008 - 09:48pm PT
Why did God allow animals and other organisms to exhibit homosexual activity?

Independent free will is the reason. If you desire he will full fill that desire. Now .... if that desire is not dovetailed with his desire then you'll get problems.

I believe the deep-most fear for same sex marriage by the population is that it then will be confirmed that homo-sex is normal and natural.

The marriage thing is really trivial to them.

Either way, you'll be taxing your brains over this forever ......
bookworm

Social climber
Falls Church, VA
Oct 25, 2008 - 10:21pm PT
"Please elaborate you questions more clearly"

i'll condense to a single question: those who support gay marriage seem reluctanct to support (or at least admit support) for polygamy or other "loving unions" that go beyond one man and one woman, so how can you claim "loving unions" as your primary concern when you are willing to deny marriage to those who don't match your definition of marriage?

unless you're willing to allow everybody to determine for themselves what constitutes a "loving union" and, therefore, adequate grounds for a marriage, you're a hypocrite and a "hater"
Flashlight

climber
Oct 25, 2008 - 10:27pm PT
Bookworm, I'll ask also.

Should polygamy be legally acceptable?

Grant Meisenholder

Trad climber
CA
Oct 25, 2008 - 10:37pm PT
-so how can you claim "loving unions" as your primary concern when you are willing to deny marriage to those who don't match your definition of marriage? -

I wouldn't deny polygamy to consenting adults.

The problem as I see it is that polygamist marriage is one man and multiple women, I have never heard of any other arrangement in this country. And the women are almost always married while they are still children in the eyes of the law, so they by definition cannot be consenting. Furthermore, these tend to occur in very regimented, fundamentalist, patriarchal societies that serve to keep the women uneducated and subservient.

But if the above scenarios don't apply, then full speed ahead. I, for one, couldn't imagine being married to multiple free thinking women. Too much responsibility.
Flashlight

climber
Oct 25, 2008 - 10:50pm PT
But what if the guy LIKES to marry children under 18? Who are we to judge him? Why do we allow the government to dictate when the child becomes an adult? Are you going to take his happiness away? "Child under the law"? The law discriminates against polygamists who want to marry 16 year old girls. That is wrong.
Domingo

Trad climber
El Portal, CA
Oct 25, 2008 - 10:56pm PT
"The law discriminates against polygamists who want to marry 16 year old girls. That is wrong."

And in your precious Bible, people married 9-year-old girls all the time.

Now, however, we're aware that neurological development continues into the mid-to-late teens, and several states have laws allowing marriage at 16 with guardian consent. Federal law requires children to be in school until they're 16.

According to the letter of the law, a person isn't developed or educated until the age of 16.

But this is completely f*#king irrelevant to allowing two consenting adults marry one another, and you know it and that's why you're changing the topic.

Flashlight, you can't come up with one argument that isn't Bible-based, and this is the same Bible that says photography of people is a grave sin, and that you shouldn't even own a computer because you should give everything you own away, so why don't you admit that and give it a rest?
Grant Meisenholder

Trad climber
CA
Oct 25, 2008 - 11:05pm PT
Some states do consider 16 to be the age of consent, so if that's the case and the child is emancipated and fully aware and accepting of the consequences of her own free will, then the case can be made to allow it. But I guarantee you that those cases would be few and far between. I certainly don't know any 16, much less 25 y.o.s who want someone over 30. "Eeeewww!" is what they'd likely say.

When I worked in research there was one post-doc who said his dream was to live to 120 and die in bed with a beautiful 16 y.o. virgin. I laughed at him and asked, "what attractive 16 y.o. do you think would even consider going to bed with a stinky, wrinkly old prune who probably couldn't get it up anyway? And why can't you get one now?"

Nice try.
Flashlight

climber
Oct 25, 2008 - 11:08pm PT
Domingo, why do you care about the "letter of the law" when it suits your argument, but not when it doesn't? After Prop. 8 passes, it will be the letter of the law that same-sex couples can't get married...will you abide by that?

Homosexuals can legally get married, as long as it is to the opposite sex.

This is such a common-sense no-brainer that I am not sure why I am wasting my time trying to explain it to people who obviously have no values and no sense of morality when it comes to the sanctity of marriage.
Domingo

Trad climber
El Portal, CA
Oct 25, 2008 - 11:12pm PT
Yeah, let's go back to a time when slavery was the letter of the law. The law shouldn't be changed, ever!

In fact, slavery's condoned by your ever-so-moral Bible! Heck, the Bible loves it!
Flashlight

climber
Oct 25, 2008 - 11:14pm PT
Domingo, the law is going to be changed, just like you advocate.
Domingo

Trad climber
El Portal, CA
Oct 25, 2008 - 11:15pm PT
Something is amiss in your brain.
Flashlight

climber
Oct 25, 2008 - 11:17pm PT
Huh?
John Moosie

climber
Beautiful California
Oct 25, 2008 - 11:27pm PT
Well Jody, I would say he has you on the slavery issue. Why can't we own slaves? The bible says we can.

Domingo, you wrote..

" and this is the same Bible that says photography of people is a grave sin, and that you shouldn't even own a computer because you should give everything you own away, so why don't you admit that and give it a rest?"

I thought I was pretty familiar with the bible, but I don't remember anything about photography. It wasn't even invented when the Books of the bible were written. So where did you get that?

Plus, the stuff about the rich man giving away everything he owned was about the things that keep us from following God. If you are more attached to your computer then you are to God, then yes, give it away. But if God comes first in your life, then of course we can have the things of this world. They just can't come first.

Now where is that verse about photography, cause I'd like to see that.
Domingo

Trad climber
El Portal, CA
Oct 25, 2008 - 11:33pm PT
This is why truly observant religions only make geometrical art (Amish quilting is a perfect example). It's not just photography, it's paintings, sculptures, etc.

Exodus 20:4

Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth.

Deuteronomy 5:8

Thou shalt not make thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the waters beneath the earth:

John Moosie

climber
Beautiful California
Oct 25, 2008 - 11:39pm PT
LOL, Good one Domingo. Its not what that means, but I'm sure you knew that. Still, it is funny. Nice...
Grant Meisenholder

Trad climber
CA
Oct 25, 2008 - 11:49pm PT
-This is such a common-sense no-brainer that I am not sure why I am wasting my time trying to explain it...-

Can't win the argument, so you pull the classic "you're so dense that it's not worth my time" tactic. You still need to explain why having the State adopt your religious view to the exclusion of another's isn't unconstitutional.

Sanctity of marriage? Lessee, how many of your friends have gotten a divorce? How many people get married and divorced multiple times? How many "Men of the Cloth" have gotten divorces? Why isn't that against the law if marriage is so sacrosanct?

Your argument has no traction outside of your narrow world view. C'mon, try a little love for your fellow man (like Jesus preached) and stop being so judgemental. Doesn't your god say something about that being his job anyway?
Flashlight

climber
Oct 25, 2008 - 11:55pm PT
Well, I am not supposed to judge people's hearts. I can, however, judge their actions as long as I am not being a hypocrite about it. So, since I don't engage in homosexual activity, I can certainly judge those that do. If two dudes want to poke each other or whatever, I can definitely judge that to be abhorrent and deviant behavior without being hypocritical.
Grant Meisenholder

Trad climber
CA
Oct 26, 2008 - 12:20am PT
There's still a question pending....
S.Powers

Social climber
Jtree, now in Alaska
Oct 26, 2008 - 02:33am PT
unless you're willing to allow everybody to determine for themselves what constitutes a "loving union" and, therefore, adequate grounds for a marriage, you're a hypocrite and a "hater"

and again i will post again what i said with a small edit.

I COULD GIVE A SH#T WHO GETS MARRIED (as long as they are consenting adults)

No hate here, not for a thing.
bookworm

Social climber
Falls Church, VA
Oct 26, 2008 - 07:44am PT
no, i do not believe polygamy should be legally permitted, even though it's allegedly given approval in the torah, because i do believe that it is inherently detrimental to women, primarily, and society, in general

hmmm...the ancient greeks didn't have the bible but they permitted only one wife...in fact, there are many non-christian societies, past and present, that view marriage as a union between one man and one woman so it's not a christian thing

the greeks also tolerated but did not approve of homosexual behavior (again, read plato); men who engaged in the behavior were themselves divided into two categories: givers and receivers...the receivers were scorned outright and the givers were frowned upon...plato warned about indulging our appetites and he considered the sexual appetite to be the most dangerous (read some roman history)

i believe even in a completely secular society some things should remain sacred and inviolable; the comprehension of the sacred--the idea that there are some things above the human plane, beyond the material--really is the only hope we have for the salvation of our society...if our society is to survive, we must believe that it is greater than ourselves (that's why some are willing to die to preserve it)...making some people "happy" is not a good enough reason to pursue drastic changes to the fundamental tenets of our society (however, if you're really concerned about making people happy and believe in democracy, then you should be happy if prop 8 is defeated because a majority of people in cal will be "happy")

don't believe in the sacred? ok, it would make me happy to climb mt rushmore...shouldn't i be allowed to? and i'm annoyed that climbing is so restricted at hueco; it's a state park, damn it, i should be allowed to climb anywhere i want...who cares about a bunch of native graffiti? hey, i bet the federal government could get a good price for the gettysburg battlefield and a new mall would be an economic boon to that little town that currently isn't allowed to make use of a huge swath of prime land, so let's sell it and give the money to poor people...win/win/win, right? i love the vietnam memorial, so much that i'd like to see my name there, too...why can't i scratch my name on one of those panels? i love humor--it's one of the qualities that makes us human--i think the mona lisa would look hilarious with a groucho mustache, don't you? if we're in an energy crisis, why do we waste all that gas for the flame at jfk's grave? isn't that marble sarcophagous enough of a memorial? and think of all the money we waste preserving all those old pieces of paper including that silly declaration thing written by a racist...why not use the archives as a homeless shelter? they'd have a ready supply of toilet paper...
Grant Meisenholder

Trad climber
CA
Oct 26, 2008 - 10:32am PT
Hmm, an interesting argument, but ultimately non-sequitur. The issue at hand is equality for all, not happiness. Prop 8 proponents in this country will always lose the argument on constitutional grounds because the underlying precept is religion.
Domingo

Trad climber
El Portal, CA
Oct 26, 2008 - 12:54pm PT
HAHAHAHAHA, ancient Greece? Oh boy. It doesn't matter what weird tangent you go out on, you're full of sh#t.

"hmmm...the ancient greeks didn't have the bible but they permitted only one wife..."

What the f*#k language do you think it's WRITTEN in?

I like how you refer to the Torah as if it's some mystical Jew thing, even though the Torah is just Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy, which I believe you're required to follow just as much as the New Testament, except where the New Testament specifically overrides it.

"in fact, there are many non-christian societies, past and present, that view marriage as a union between one man and one woman so it's not a christian thing"

True, and there are many societies past and present that think slavery is an intelligent and acceptable economic method. There are many societies past and present that think marrying off 8-year-old girls is normal.

This is not an argument that works in your favor: most societies that don't allow civil unions between two consenting adults are third-world countries, developing nations or theocracies, and America is none of those.

"the greeks also tolerated but did not approve of homosexual behavior (again, read plato)"

I have, but apparently you haven't. The Symposium promotes homosexuality as the superior form of love. The only marriage sanctioned by The Republic is one-night marriage between two drugged warriors as a eugenics method.

"men who engaged in the behavior were themselves divided into two categories: givers and receivers...the receivers were scorned outright and the givers were frowned upon... plato warned about indulging our appetites and he considered the sexual appetite to be the most dangerous (read some roman history)"

Unfortunately, Plato wasn't Roman, and died long before Rome was Europe's primary society. Plato was Greek, and several Greek societies encouraged homosexual behavior as a method of bonding for their militaries (Sparta in particular).

His beliefs on the damaging nature of sexual appetite primarily applied to heterosexual love, as outlined by The Symposium.


UncleDoug

Social climber
Oct 26, 2008 - 01:24pm PT
" Plato was Greek, and several Greek societies encouraged homosexual behavior as a method of bonding for their militaries (Sparta in particular). "

This gives new meaning to the movie "300"!
dirtbag

climber
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 26, 2008 - 01:31pm PT
"don't believe in the sacred? ok, it would make me happy to climb mt rushmore...shouldn't i be allowed to? and i'm annoyed that climbing is so restricted at hueco; it's a state park, damn it, i should be allowed to climb anywhere i want...who cares about a bunch of native graffiti? hey, i bet the federal government could get a good price for the gettysburg battlefield and a new mall would be an economic boon to that little town that currently isn't allowed to make use of a huge swath of prime land, so let's sell it and give the money to poor people...win/win/win, right? i love the vietnam memorial, so much that i'd like to see my name there, too...why can't i scratch my name on one of those panels? i love humor--it's one of the qualities that makes us human--i think the mona lisa would look hilarious with a groucho mustache, don't you? if we're in an energy crisis, why do we waste all that gas for the flame at jfk's grave? isn't that marble sarcophagous enough of a memorial? and think of all the money we waste preserving all those old pieces of paper including that silly declaration thing written by a racist...why not use the archives as a homeless shelter? they'd have a ready supply of toilet paper..."



Wow, what a rant.

It's still just mental masturbation to cover up your dislike of gay people.


Jaybro

Social climber
wuz real!
Oct 26, 2008 - 01:55pm PT
Is there some chance of this reactionary homophobic nonsense passing?



I truly had never entertained that thought.
kelly slater

climber
Oct 26, 2008 - 02:02pm PT
vote YES on PROP 8!!!!!!!!!

UncleDoug

Social climber
Oct 26, 2008 - 02:02pm PT
"I can, however, judge their actions as long as I am not being a hypocrite about it. So, since I don't engage in homosexual activity, I can certainly judge those that do. If two dudes want to poke each other or whatever, I can definitely judge that to be abhorrent and deviant behavior without being hypocritical."

I can't wait for Jody to pull over a gay couple.......
dirtbag

climber
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 26, 2008 - 02:03pm PT
"vote YES on PROP 8!!!!!!!!! "



You suck.
dirtbag

climber
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 26, 2008 - 02:12pm PT
Rokjox wrote this about 4 months ago. I think it is one of the best things I've ever read on this topic.



"Just some notes.

I called several preachers of the Methodist persuasion, which was the religious background I hail from. They immediately started talking about waiting, counseling and MONEY to perform the cere-money. I was beginning to see the money part was quite important to them.

In Idaho at least as I understood it, the states paperwork is the legal document that declares a marriage. We filed that paper. Personally. The Clerk called us up later, and gave us some grief about it, we told her it wasn't any of her business and just deal with it as any other and file it. Eventually she did. (I think she did?)

Several people of various religious persuasions have told me either that I wasn't married legally or that I was not married in the eyes of their God. Too bad, I disagree, but couldn't care less.

I believe I am married and have been for a lot of years. My wife agrees. I anticipate no problem collecting survivor benefits, and we file taxes as married. If I do have any problems, I intend to spend every last dime I can beg borrow or steal in the lawsuit against the State or whoever else tries to deny me this most basic of human rights.

As I said, I intend to find and anticipate no problems. But anybody who tries to legally refuse me anything based in regards to how I chose to get married had better stay out of my way.


After reviewing this internally (my feeling on marriage), I realized that I have no grounds to deny anybody of any color, creed or sex the same respect, who demand it of me.

There was a time when two blacks could not legally become married. There was a time when a white and a black person of any combination of sexes could not become legally married. I am sure that this period of our history is just as foolish and will pass similarly into the dim, sad story of inequality.

Any given church can refuse to perform their ceremonies for any reason. Their ceremonies are their intellectual property. But I feel sure they defy the basic tenets of their religions when they do so.

Most states (world governments) may refuse to extend equal rights to whomever they want, and many have certainly proven that. Ours, at least in theory, may not.

Smile and be happy for the people who think they are happy with the homosexual life. They (I think) give up a lot to pursue it. But that is not my business, or concern. Just be happy for them, as they have won a hard battle to get this recognition of their marriages. A lot of happy tears are being shed over this.

And remember, they (Homosexuals and the Courts) have again shown that ALL our rights are OURS. That a government exists to recognise and protect our rights but does not grant them. We only have the Rights that WE stand up for and DEMAND. In this, what is good for one group is good for us all. We are united in our humanity.

Do not wish for the Constitution to be amended in California. It would be overruled eventually in any case at the Federal level. What we have seen is a voice and a blow for diversity, and diversity is seldom a bad thing. "


http://www.supertopo.com/climbing/thread.html?topic_id=617976&msg=622938#msg622938
kelly slater

climber
Oct 26, 2008 - 02:24pm PT
It is disappointing to see moral fibers torn to shreds over the last 20 years. (In all aspects of life) Media is the main culprit (well the overabundance of weak minds that are bred and fed today by the media)
Todd Gordon

Trad climber
Joshua Tree, Cal
Oct 26, 2008 - 02:27pm PT
dirtbag

climber
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 26, 2008 - 02:30pm PT
"It is disappointing to see moral fibers torn to shreds over the last 20 years. (In all aspects of life) Media is the main culprit (well the overabundance of weak minds that are bred and fed today by the media) "

Kelly, there is nothing immoral about homosexuality.

It is the fear and hate of people like you of people who are different from you that is the problem.

bluering

Trad climber
Santa Clara, Ca.
Oct 26, 2008 - 02:32pm PT
This nation is losing it's way. I too blame the media and the weak-souls that think they're making things better in the name of diversity and tolerance.

It's not hateful to shun immorality. It takes strength to fight against this when all around you claim you're 'intolerant'.

Saddening really. We're dying as a nation.

"Kelly, there is nothing immoral about homosexuality. "

How do you define morality, DB, where is the source for moral guidance?
Todd Gordon

Trad climber
Joshua Tree, Cal
Oct 26, 2008 - 02:36pm PT
kelly slater

climber
Oct 26, 2008 - 02:38pm PT
thanks for pointing out my fear and hate. You seem to know so much when yet you know so little. It's funny how quick you are to label someone. I feel you are the one that obviously has this fear and hate. The fear of other peoples opinions and the hate that you can't take other peoples opinions into consideration. Please do not say I hate and fear individuals.
Karl Baba

Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
Oct 26, 2008 - 02:39pm PT
"This nation is losing it's way. I too blame the media and the weak-souls that think they're making things better in the name of diversity and tolerance. "

People have been saying this for generations, about women voting, about interracial marriage, about marriages not arranged by the parents, about legal divorce, and even freeing the slaves.

Humbug. Wanna be moral? The only morality that counts is what you do in your own life, preferably as your own sacrifice. Mandating morality for others is nothing but prejudice.

Peace

karl
Karl Baba

Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
Oct 26, 2008 - 02:41pm PT
Here's something a wrote about gay marriage a few years back

"Gay Marriage promotes American Values

Most of us like to assume that we would have had the moral clarity to oppose slavery when it was still legal. Practically everyone assumes that, prior to 1920, they would have championed a woman’s right to vote. Our noble sense of ourselves tells us that, if we were alive when the country debated whether interracial couples should be allowed to marry, we would have been among those whose vision favored equality over prejudice.

It’s far more difficult however, to look at the present day and imagine what parts of our culture will be considered backward and prejudiced 50 years from now, or 200 years from now. In the year 2090, will society still consider beating another person unconscious to be a valiant sport? Nobody knows.

The issue of gay marriage is a perfect example of a topic that we may someday look back upon in hindsight with greater clarity. At the moment, it’s a perfect political wedge issue. Few common folks in America’s heartland have openly gay friends. It’s easy to deny the gay community rights that all human beings might claim as inalienable. The thought of a man kissing another man makes us uncomfortable, like watching somebody eat a beetle in China. It goes against our own polarity.

It’s easy to ignore the struggle for civil rights of a group we don’t belong to. Our blind loathing of other races, religions, cultures and lifestyles evaporates in the light of familiarity and experience. Observing the long-term relationships of several lesbian couples has taught me that their bonds are meaningful, real and noble. I’m lucky to have friends like them. I have no business denying them the rights, benefits and responsibilities that are available to me. It would be wrong of me not to support them now, as their cause is debated.

Even though there is supposed to be a barrier between church and state, conservatives are claiming that the threat posed by gay marriage is a threat to the “sanctity” of marriage. It is really just a threat to our cultural norms. After all, few of us champion returning to the marriage culture of the Bible, which was between one man, and well, several women. Moses, David, Jacob and many of the other patriarchs of our faith had several wives. The same could be said of Abraham, father of many nations, except that his first-born was with Hagar, his wife’s slave, whom he didn’t marry. There is far more support in the Bible for slavery than there is condemnation of homosexuality. Going back in time isn’t the answer.

The idea of “protecting” marriage seems misguided as well. Everybody who would consider changing sexual preferences if gay marriage was legal raise your hand! Allowing our gay brothers and sisters into the fold might better protect marriage. If gay promiscuity presents a public health problem, then marriage is a positive solution. Without commitment-fearing males in the equation, lesbian marriages might improve on the 50% divorce rate that we heterosexuals have racked up. Another idea would be encouraging the Catholic Church to allow priests to be married, just like the disciples of Jesus were.

Let those without sin cast the first stone. Perhaps the most righteous course would be to judge not…live and let live. We won’t know until after death if support of gay marriage offends God, or if supporting violence and war is the real sin. Religious folks like me would do well to remember the prejudice and persecution that their own faiths suffered during their history.

Gay Marriage costs heterosexual marriage nothing, and promotes the American values of equality, diversity and tolerance. Let the religions decide which of their members can get married; and let the state provide equal rights and protections under the law for everyone. Let’s support the inevitable now, so we don’t look back in shame 30 years from now."

Peace

Karl
bluering

Trad climber
Santa Clara, Ca.
Oct 26, 2008 - 02:41pm PT
Wade, all of the major religions hold certain similar core moral values. I don't think any religion would condone homosexuality as something to be promoted and accepted as moral behavior.

That said, it shouldn't be persecuted either.

I'm all in favor of civil unions with full rights BTW.
dirtbag

climber
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 26, 2008 - 02:43pm PT
"You seem to know so much when yet you know so little. It's funny how quick you are to label someone."


Well, that is what you have revealed. You don't like gay people, and that's what it all boils down to.

"The fear of other peoples opinions and the hate that you can't take other peoples opinions into consideration. "


Ha. I'm just calling it as I see it. I've read probably just about all the arguments for 8, and in the end, it's about discrimination and a dislike of people who are different.
Jaybro

Social climber
wuz real!
Oct 26, 2008 - 02:46pm PT
Odd,Kelly, when I read your post I thought you were against the decadence that has brought about prop 8. Dirt appears to think you meant the opposite of what I thought. Maybe he was right. I would ask if youre for freedom or oppression but that might sound biased.
Karl Baba

Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
Oct 26, 2008 - 02:50pm PT
Bluering
"I'm all in favor of civil unions with full rights BTW."

Great, I'm onboard if we get government out of the marriage business then, just do civil contracts and let religion have marriage.

Otherwise it's a true church/state breach no?

PEace

Karl
kelly slater

climber
Oct 26, 2008 - 02:51pm PT
It's not what I revealed, it's what you labeled me as. It is my opinion. When you assume the intent of other people and are wrong about their feelings, that is when you do bring hate and fear among others because when you tell people how they are when you have no idea. Just because a belief is put in place does not mean there is hate just a disagreement in what is right for each individual.
bluering

Trad climber
Santa Clara, Ca.
Oct 26, 2008 - 02:52pm PT
"Mandating morality for others is nothing but prejudice."

You're wrong. Morality is a strict thing that isn't to be watered down and 'interpreted'. It is a line you do not cross.

Once you start allowing people to dictate themselves what is moral or not, we're really screwed and dead as a society.

Is having sex with children wrong? Consenting animals who hump your leg are clearly consenting to sex, right? Maybe that should be acceptable, after all, it's consensual. It doesn't hurt anybody. In fact both are receiving love and pleasure from it...right?
Jaybro

Social climber
wuz real!
Oct 26, 2008 - 03:03pm PT
What, IS your opinion, Kelly?
kelly slater

climber
Oct 26, 2008 - 03:09pm PT
homosexuality is an abnormal behavior in the natural world. Can two men conceive after sexual relations? no. Can two women conceive after sexual relations? no. (I'd like to be there to see this one if they were both hot). Can a man and a woman conceive if they have sexual relations? YES. I guess if you guys want equality then we need to install two new bathrooms. Those for lesbians and those for gay guys. I do not want to be at the urinal having some guy trying to check out my package. I know you will come back with the hate and fear thing, and if so then men should be able to use the womens bathroom right or are you full of hate and fear that some straight man would try to get a sneak peak at something naughty in the Macy's bathroom?
S.Powers

Social climber
Jtree, now in Alaska
Oct 26, 2008 - 03:10pm PT
"Is having sex with children wrong? Consenting animals who hump your leg are clearly consenting to sex, right? Maybe that should be acceptable, after all, it's consensual. It doesn't hurt anybody. In fact both are receiving love and pleasure from it...right?"

It's such a slippery slope.

NON OF THAT HAS TO DO WITH GAYS GETTING MARRIED!!!!
Jaybro

Social climber
wuz real!
Oct 26, 2008 - 03:11pm PT
So, gayness is 'BAD', got it.

one bathroom is fine...
John Moosie

climber
Beautiful California
Oct 26, 2008 - 03:11pm PT
"You're wrong. Morality is a strict thing that isn't to be watered down and 'interpreted'. It is a line you do not cross.

No, you're wrong. Biblical morals are atrocious (child abuse, gang rape, incest, genocide, etc.) "


Blue, morals have changed. At one time it was okay to own slaves. Should we go back to that? The Bible clearly states we can own slaves.

The bible states that we can own slaves as long as they are not from our own country. I personally want to own some Mexicans. They will work for beans. Those Canadians just want to drink beer and beer is expensive.
kelly slater

climber
Oct 26, 2008 - 03:19pm PT
I do not need to change my viewpoint and acceptance. Vote yes on PROP 8 and enjoy the fact that a marriage is really between a man and a woman.
kelly slater

climber
Oct 26, 2008 - 03:21pm PT
weschrist, that might have been learned behavior your dog was displaying.


maybe leave him home on those nights
bluering

Trad climber
Santa Clara, Ca.
Oct 26, 2008 - 03:23pm PT
Slavery has nothing to do with homosexuality. 'owning' people was always wrong and we recognized that. It was a greedy endeavor.

Silly arguement.

Wes, are you saying sex with children and animals is 'a person's personal choice if both are consenting'?

This is what I mean about our society...we're dying.
HighDesertDJ

Trad climber
Arid-zona
Oct 26, 2008 - 03:24pm PT
bluering that's exactly what he's saying. Sex with children is fine so long as the kid or their parent says that it is ok. Every day I wake up and thank GOD that there are people like you standing up for what is decent and moral.
dirtbag

climber
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 26, 2008 - 03:25pm PT
"I know you will come back with the hate and fear thing,"

No need to, you just did it yourself.
dirtbag

climber
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 26, 2008 - 03:26pm PT
"Is having sex with children wrong? "


That's so disingenuous and such a scare tactic.
Ricky D

Trad climber
Sierra Westside
Oct 26, 2008 - 03:30pm PT
I grew up with a neighborhood kid who was homosexual...in the Deep South...in the 60's...back when none of us knew a "homo" from a hole in the ground.

Tim was raised like we all were - church on Sundays, hunting or fishing on Saturdays, running through the woods like little Indians the rest of the week.

So the lifestyle and the environment was the same for all of us...but even as young as 6 or 7, Tim was always a little "different". More delicate I suppose although no one could ever really pin down what that meant.

Our pack of friends stayed together into high school - playing sports, goofing off about girls...even Tim tried. But by puberty, when the rest of us were foaming at the mouth over anything with tits - Tim would be acting like whats the big deal?

I lost track of him for years when I moved to the west coast and didn't reconnect with the old gang until some 20 years later on a rare visit back home. During those years, Tim had "come out of the closet" with all of the pain, hatred and vitriol that being "homo" in the South would suggest.

He had been ostracized by his family, shunned by childhood friends, feared by co-workers and even beaten up more than a few times by "God-fearing Christians".

Oh yeah - he also was dying of AIDS.

But he was happy and content in who he was.

I asked him - when did he "decide" to be gay? His answer was that deciding had nothing to do with it. He talked about always feeling "out of sorts" even as a kid. How by the time puberty rolled around he felt none of the urges we did about girls - but did get all tingly over boys. Tim went on about how he would pray night after night not to be different and blamed himself for being so.

He said that finally after years of self-loathing he finally realized that for whatever reason he was different and the only decision he made in regards to being "homo" was to accept that fact that he was.

It never had anything to do with diet, breeding, lifestyles or any other external cause - it was just who he was from day one!

Like he told me - "Rick, do you REALLY think anyone in their right mind would ever CHOOSE to be this?"

Tim died not too long after we talked.

He was my friend and he had as much a right to be a happy person as anyone else.
kelly slater

climber
Oct 26, 2008 - 03:32pm PT
dirtbag, you are an angry person. Go out and look at your bumper, have your rainbow sticker put a smile on your face and be happy to be a liberal who talks alot but doesn't say too much. Slap another sticker for diversity on your car if you are not happy yet and show people what you support and press it upon others. I went out to my car and I was happy, not because I have a "I am straight" sticker on my car, but the fact that I don't have to advertise my beliefs and opinions for the public to see on a daily basis as well as a clean shiny bumper.
Jaybro

Social climber
wuz real!
Oct 26, 2008 - 03:35pm PT
But it does divert the topic!
dirtbag

climber
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 26, 2008 - 03:38pm PT
Angry? Not really.

But I do not like bigotry being written into our constitution.

Nor do I like that this state is considering putting something into law that treats people as second class citizen --for no good reason--NONE--but because intolerant people like YOU hate them.

dirtbag

climber
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 26, 2008 - 03:39pm PT
" I went out to my car and I was happy, not because I have a "I am straight" sticker on my car, but the fact that I don't have to advertise my beliefs and opinions for the public to see on a daily basis as well as a clean shiny bumper. "

And now, you're just babbling.
kelly slater

climber
Oct 26, 2008 - 03:46pm PT
Vote YES on PROP 8
It'll pass
S.Powers

Social climber
Jtree, now in Alaska
Oct 26, 2008 - 03:50pm PT
Kelly, are you implying that dirt has "gay pride" stickers on his car? just because he belives in equality?

If you are you are definatley an ignorant hateful bigot, and your acting immorally according to the "good book" It says somewhere in there that "thou shalt not judge" at least I think it does....


mor⋅al 

–adjective 1. of, pertaining to, or concerned with the principles or rules of right conduct or the distinction between right and wrong; ethical: moral attitudes.
2. expressing or conveying truths or counsel as to right conduct, as a speaker or a literary work; moralizing: a moral novel.
3. founded on the fundamental principles of right conduct rather than on legalities, enactment, or custom: moral obligations.
4. capable of conforming to the rules of right conduct: a moral being.
5. conforming to the rules of right conduct (opposed to immoral ): a moral man.
6. virtuous in sexual matters; chaste.
7. of, pertaining to, or acting on the mind, feelings, will, or character: moral support.
8. resting upon convincing grounds of probability; virtual: a moral certainty.

–noun
9. the moral teaching or practical lesson contained in a fable, tale, experience, etc.
10. the embodiment or type of something.
11. morals, principles or habits with respect to right or wrong conduct.

#9 is the best!
dirtbag

climber
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 26, 2008 - 03:52pm PT
S.Powers, I'm not really sure Kelly knows what he/she is saying.
kelly slater

climber
Oct 26, 2008 - 03:56pm PT
"thou shall not judge" my first post I was judged. silly liberals
dirtbag

climber
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 26, 2008 - 04:00pm PT
So, you proceed to judge?

H8er.
HighDesertDJ

Trad climber
Arid-zona
Oct 26, 2008 - 04:04pm PT
Get used to it kelly, this site is full of em.


YES on Prop 8! (Prop 102 here in Arizona)
dirtbag

climber
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 26, 2008 - 04:05pm PT
LOL!
kelly slater

climber
Oct 26, 2008 - 04:09pm PT
dirtbag, the exhaust from riding in the back of the short bus with the window down has had some repercussions. I'm sorry. Liberalism is not a family value. You are the one that judged me and slingin names around. I accepted you are just a kook. Sorry all your friends will not be able to be legally married. Maybe your just upset you won't be able to be best man at all the weddings. I know that is upsetting, but look at the bright side, not being able to get married won't take your friends love away from each other. Isn't that waht matters?
kelly slater

climber
Oct 26, 2008 - 04:12pm PT
weschrist, please for your next pooch you get, don't let him come on your Tuesday night special gathering over at Roger's place, so he won't get the same behavior as your other dog.
bluering

Trad climber
Santa Clara, Ca.
Oct 26, 2008 - 04:12pm PT
Wes, why should I accept homosuexulaity when every fiber of my being says it's not right. Men were meant to be with women is the first one.

Perverting that notion only leads to other perversions, does it not?


S.Powers

Social climber
Jtree, now in Alaska
Oct 26, 2008 - 04:13pm PT
I can judge whoever the hell I want, Im not binded by a book of fables.... jackass!
S.Powers

Social climber
Jtree, now in Alaska
Oct 26, 2008 - 04:15pm PT
Perverting that notion only leads to other perversions, does it not?

No, the slope is not that slippery.

I love how kelly cant even talk about the subject! just labels people as gay and liberals. Im suspecting troll....
nita

climber
chica from chico, I don't claim to be a daisy
Oct 26, 2008 - 04:15pm PT
Ok guy's...we can't agree..
kelly slater

climber
Oct 26, 2008 - 04:17pm PT
S powers is a kook too. Are you stoked in alaska, move up there for the ratio? Good luck and keep it away from me.
bluering

Trad climber
Santa Clara, Ca.
Oct 26, 2008 - 04:18pm PT
nita's right (well, left) and I'm done here...vote as you will, heathens!
bookworm

Social climber
Falls Church, VA
Oct 26, 2008 - 04:19pm PT
In the vice-presidential debate, moderator Gwen Ifill asked Mr. Biden directly whether he supports same-sex marriage.

"Do you support gay marriage?" she asked.

"No, Barack Obama nor I support redefining from a civil side what constitutes marriage," said Mr. Biden. "We do not support that." Were this actually Mr. Biden and Mr. Obama's position, they would be for Proposition 8. But they are not.

"If I lived in California, I'd clearly vote against Prop. 8," Mr. Biden told Miss DeGeneres.

say it ain't so joe...or say it is so...just make up your mind

by the way, dirtbag, which joe biden are you voting for?

"Blue, morals have changed. At one time it was okay to own slaves. Should we go back to that?"

yes, morality does change because morality is, by definition, determined by the majority; so i think it's smarter to make a distinction between morals and ethics, with ethics being a system that does not change...it's better to live one's life according to an unchangeable ethical code, not a changing moral code...see, according to your preferred moral relativism, if morality changed again and the majority determined that we could own slaves, you'd agree...but i believe what's wrong is wrong...now that doesn't mean i'm always (or mostly) able to live up to my code, but my weakness does not diminish the standard...like my inability to climb 5.12 does not make the goal any less worthy

so let's look at the consequences of a changing moral code: are we better off that women are now free to act with the same sexual brazenness that once only men could display? are we better off now that marriage is not considered a societal prerequisite for having children? are we better off now that the sanctity of marriage has been reduced to a simple contract without even the binding power of a gym membership? are we better off now that any child who can log onto a computer can gain access to the most brutal and vile pornography available? are we better off now that our inclination to "define deviancy down" has provided a mass market for "artists" who produce misogynist "music" that influences 6-year-olds to refer to their female classmates as hos and bitches? of course, i could go on, but you get my point

now, on a side note, i could be wrong (i'm no expert on religions) but i think christianity was the first religion to declare slavery wrong...it was certainly a christian (william wilberforce) inspired by his christianity that is responsible for abolishing slavery (at least in the western world, not to suggest that makes us better or anything)
kelly slater

climber
Oct 26, 2008 - 04:20pm PT
Vote YES on PROP 8!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Everybody get out and enjoy your day
S.Powers

Social climber
Jtree, now in Alaska
Oct 26, 2008 - 04:26pm PT
S powers is a kook too. Are you stoked in alaska, move up there for the ratio? Good luck and keep it away from me.


BWAHHHHAAAAAhahhahahah!!!!!!!

HighDesertDJ

Trad climber
Arid-zona
Oct 26, 2008 - 04:31pm PT
bluering- You sure that isn't just your anus tingling?
dirtbag

climber
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 26, 2008 - 04:52pm PT
"dirtbag, the exhaust from riding in the back of the short bus with the window down has had some repercussions. I'm sorry. Liberalism is not a family value. You are the one that judged me and slingin names around. I accepted you are just a kook. Sorry all your friends will not be able to be legally married. Maybe your just upset you won't be able to be best man at all the weddings. I know that is upsetting, but look at the bright side, not being able to get married won't take your friends love away from each other. Isn't that waht matters? "


LOL!

I never said it was a value.

But love, tolerance: those are family values. Maybe not in your family, or under your God, but they are.

Judge you? Sure I judge people. I called you a hater, because that is what I see. You don't like gay people, I stand by that.

SO go ahead, call me a kook.

I call you a Bible thumping fundamentalist twit. So there.
bluering

Trad climber
Santa Clara, Ca.
Oct 26, 2008 - 04:57pm PT
I don't think anybody here hates gay people. I didn't hear anybody invoke the hate word.

Just don't want marriage perverted. They can have civil unions with full rights. What's wrong with that?

Marriage has and always should be defined as the the union of a man and a woman. You want something else, call it something else.
Jaybro

Social climber
wuz real!
Oct 26, 2008 - 05:01pm PT
Seperate but equal still doesn't work.
bluering

Trad climber
Santa Clara, Ca.
Oct 26, 2008 - 05:06pm PT
Jay, it's a different, 'not equal', kind of relationship. It's not equal. Not everthing is. And if we go there, where does it stop?


That is the definition of perversion isn't it?
S.Powers

Social climber
Jtree, now in Alaska
Oct 26, 2008 - 05:39pm PT
Jay, it's a different, 'not equal', kind of relationship. It's not equal. Not everthing is. And if we go there, where does it stop?

I almost slipped and fell down...
bookworm

Social climber
Falls Church, VA
Oct 26, 2008 - 05:43pm PT
just like men and women are NOT equal, and thank god (or evolution, if you prefer) for that
bluering

Trad climber
Santa Clara, Ca.
Oct 26, 2008 - 05:46pm PT
What amazes me is the the proponents of tolerance use 'skank' and 'not worthy of skin' refernces to women. (Wes and Riley referring to Cindy McCain and Palin).

I shudder when I think what would happen if 'your kind' made decisions for all of us less worthy people. Maybe Christians are so intolerant they should be put into re-education camps and if they don't submit to your tolerance, they should be eliminated.

I mean, that's getting rid of judgemental and intolerant people, right? Judging others on their behavior is bad and intolerant. We should stop that at all cost. If they will not submit to our tolerance, they should be eliminated.

Domingo

Trad climber
El Portal, CA
Oct 26, 2008 - 05:48pm PT
"I shudder when I think what would happen if 'your kind' made decisions for all of us less worthy people. Maybe Christians are so intolerant they should be put into re-education camps and if they don't submit to your tolerance, they should be eliminated. "


Reminds me of where Christians put their homosexual children, except Christianity is a chosen way of life, and homosexuality isn't.
S.Powers

Social climber
Jtree, now in Alaska
Oct 26, 2008 - 07:11pm PT
PROP 8 SUPPORTERS YOU SUCK!!!!!
Flashlight

climber
Oct 26, 2008 - 07:12pm PT
Uncle Doug, did anybody ever tell you that you were an idiot? What your comment about me pulling over a gay couple had to do with the discussion is beyond me. You are a fool and I will no longer respond to your crap.

Weschrist, you need to get a better handle on what the Bible actually teaches beforer you go spouting off drivel that it teaches child rape, etc., as morals. You are a fool also.
bluering

Trad climber
Santa Clara, Ca.
Oct 26, 2008 - 07:24pm PT
"Reminds me of where Christians put their homosexual children, except Christianity is a chosen way of life, and homosexuality isn't. "

Where do they put them, in your mind? Do they execute those little heathens? I'm curious what you think of Christians, Domingo?
Domingo

Trad climber
El Portal, CA
Oct 26, 2008 - 07:48pm PT
Bluering:

Here's an article about one of the camps I was referring to: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/faith/article4893735.ece

I have no problem with anyone's creed, as long as it preaches love and not fear, and as long as those followers listen as much as they profess. I have plenty of friends and family members from many religions. I see my somewhat blanket statement about Christians was misleading, and I apologize for the offense.
Flashlight

climber
Oct 26, 2008 - 07:59pm PT
Domingo, where does Christianity teach fear and does "love" mean condoning everybody's actions?
Domingo

Trad climber
El Portal, CA
Oct 26, 2008 - 08:16pm PT
I'm not saying it's taught by Christianity. I'm saying that people of all creeds (and in this case with some people here who happen to be Christians) use their religions as a method to force a bigoted, fearful agenda onto other people so that they don't have to see things they are uncomfortable with.

There are murders, rapes, genocides, famines, incidences of child abuse, and all sorts of other preventable CRIMES happening right now, and instead you spend your energy fighting something that that will not create genocide, that does not increase famine, that does not abuse children AS IT IS BETWEEN TWO CONSENTING ADULTS, that will not induce rape (as rape already happens, is predominantly heterosexual, and unchanged by a law about marriage), and (as you point out) will not add to the number of starving unloved children on this earth.

As for murder, humans are murdered because some among us think they are less than human. A vote for gay unions speaks to a belief that these are human beings who deserve the same rights other adult, mutually consenting human beings have.
bookworm

Social climber
Falls Church, VA
Oct 26, 2008 - 08:19pm PT
"Christianity is a chosen way of life, and homosexuality isn't."

actually, all sexuality is a chosen way of life...most married people choose to be monogamous...some people choose to be chaste...many people choose to be promiscuous...some people choose to act on all of their sexual urges...most people choose not to act on all of their sexual urges...some people choose to pursue sex purely for pleasure...some people choose to pursue sex primarily as a means of procreation...nobody can control their desires, but we can all choose whether or not to act on those desires
S.Powers

Social climber
Jtree, now in Alaska
Oct 26, 2008 - 08:39pm PT
choice or not, you have no right to choose the way people live out their personal lives.
Flashlight

climber
Oct 26, 2008 - 08:42pm PT
When it affects how my children are taught about marriage it does give me the right.
S.Powers

Social climber
Jtree, now in Alaska
Oct 26, 2008 - 08:49pm PT
It dosnt affect your children, you and you alone are responsible for teaching your children these types of things. The lie put forth by supporters about teachers in public schools teaching their students about marriage has fallen flat on its face, google it.

Teach love and respect and your views on marriage to your children, dont force your belifs onto those that are not your responsibility. free choice right?
HighDesertDJ

Trad climber
Arid-zona
Oct 26, 2008 - 09:03pm PT
bluering- What is the difference between marriage and civil unions?
JuanDeFuca

Big Wall climber
Stoney Point
Oct 26, 2008 - 09:05pm PT
some men like to take it in the ass. What are we to do?
I know it is disgusting, but this is California.
If Dirt wants to have another man that is his right.

Juan
dirtbag

climber
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 26, 2008 - 09:06pm PT
"actually, all sexuality is a chosen way of life...most married people choose to be monogamous...some people choose to be chaste...many people choose to be promiscuous...some people choose to act on all of their sexual urges...most people choose not to act on all of their sexual urges...some people choose to pursue sex purely for pleasure...some people choose to pursue sex primarily as a means of procreation...nobody can control their desires, but we can all choose whether or not to act on those desires "



So you chose to be a heterosexual?
Wade Icey

Trad climber
www.alohashirtrescue.com
Oct 26, 2008 - 10:38pm PT
was anyone here taught anything about marriage in public school? At any grade level?

pure fear based fabrication. and if your kids are in a Christian school what are you worried about? or afraid of?



Karl Baba

Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
Oct 26, 2008 - 10:40pm PT
Baba
"Mandating morality for others is nothing but prejudice."

Bluering
"You're wrong. Morality is a strict thing that isn't to be watered down and 'interpreted'. It is a line you do not cross. "

Where do you get your morality Bluering? If I look at what Jesus specifically said to do and not do, I don't find this stuff.

and as we saw, the old testament condoned lots of offensive things (polygamy, slavery, killing women and children in battle, and so on)

Jesus did say, take the speck out of your own eye before you worry about other's sins and I figure we still have some specks left to go.,

Peace

Karl
Ricky D

Trad climber
Sierra Westside
Oct 26, 2008 - 10:46pm PT
Jesus Jumping Christ on a Stick - how many more days until November 4th when we can put this figgin thread out of our misery!

Let the poor SOBs marry for crying out loud - what the hell do you think is going to happen if they do - you make it sound like we will all be forced to wear butt plugs and molest the neighbor's kids just because two people love each other enough to want to be together.

Shitsakes - the gay couples I know have been together longer and have stronger relationships than most of the freaking heteros you a-holes are painting as saints.

Besides - since they can't breed - think of the positive things they can do towards over-population!!!!!!!!!!!

T2

climber
Cardiff by the sea
Oct 26, 2008 - 10:52pm PT
LOL !! Ricky D, I feel the exact same way.
Flashlight

climber
Oct 26, 2008 - 11:06pm PT
Wade, ever check out the curiculum in a public school health education class?

California Education Code 51890

51890. (a) For the purposes of this chapter, "comprehensive health
education programs" are defined as all educational programs offered
in kindergarten and grades 1 to 12, inclusive, in the public school
system, including in-class and out-of-class activities designed to
ensure that:
(1) Pupils will receive instruction to aid them in making
decisions in matters of personal, family, and community health, to
include the following subjects:
(A) The use of health care services and products.
(B) Mental and emotional health and development.
(C) Drug use and misuse, including the misuse of tobacco and
alcohol.
(D) Family health and child development, including the legal and
financial aspects and responsibilities of marriage and parenthood.



Flashlight

climber
Oct 26, 2008 - 11:19pm PT
Churches might be sued and lose their tax-exempt status if they refuse to allow same-sex "marriage" ceremonies.

If a minister preaches against same-sex "marriage", he might get charged with hate-speech. It already happened in Canada.

What about photographers, caterers, etc. if they refuse to work a gay "wedding"? What about doctors who refuse artificial insemination?

Want more examples?
Flashlight

climber
Oct 26, 2008 - 11:21pm PT
This book about gay marriage was read to second-graders in Massachusetts after gay "marriage" was legalized there.

Domingo

Trad climber
El Portal, CA
Oct 26, 2008 - 11:24pm PT
yep. famines and genocides and you're sitting here terrified you won't be able to teach children the right thing to hate.
Flashlight

climber
Oct 26, 2008 - 11:34pm PT
Not much more important to teach children than morality. Domingo, you have a one-track mind. It is not about hate. The only hate I see exhibited here is the hate you and others show towards people who dare to stand up for morality. that is the problem with your type, if someone doesn't conform to your standards, they "hate".

By the way, what are YOU doing about genocide and famine, other than just squawking about it?
Domingo

Trad climber
El Portal, CA
Oct 26, 2008 - 11:37pm PT
yep bla bla bla same thing no rational response to questions of logic posed to you no response to questions you have no intelligent answer to pretending you know how to read important books by plato bla bla bla

by the way i work here

http://www.kzoolf.org/
Flashlight

climber
Oct 26, 2008 - 11:44pm PT
Domingo, you are angry and irrational. Your last post demonstrates that. How about YOU answering my questions coherently?


Good for you, at least you ARE doing something about hunger.
Flashlight

climber
Oct 26, 2008 - 11:52pm PT
Jesus never spoke explicitly about homosexuality. He never spoke explicity about the evils of bestiality, incest, pedophilia, rape, slavery, wife-beating, or substance abuse. In fact, there are very few things that Jesus specifically condemned. Would it not be foolish to assume that just because Jesus did not specifically condemn something that it would be okay? Jesus did shift from the old-covenant laws and regulations to moral principles.

Remember Jesus's conversation with the adulterous woman? She wasn't treated as some poor helpless woman who couldn't resist her sinful desires. She was treated as a person able to choose the right path. Jesus didn't make excuses for her mistake or condone her behavior. Showing compassion, he forgave her and said, "Go and sin no more."






Domingo

Trad climber
El Portal, CA
Oct 26, 2008 - 11:54pm PT
But Jody, I specified you weren't answering "questions of logic", which aren't ones you're posing.
Ricky D

Trad climber
Sierra Westside
Oct 26, 2008 - 11:55pm PT
I accidentally shook hands with a homosexual once.

Ever since then I walk around the house naked except for my rock harness and keep tying the dog up with my rope.

I think Jesus hates me.
Domingo

Trad climber
El Portal, CA
Oct 26, 2008 - 11:55pm PT
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_a7jkcMVp5Vg/SP5I_5D7puI/AAAAAAAAHKY/TbcFYFPXWPI/s1600-h/fragged.jpg

Flashlight

climber
Oct 26, 2008 - 11:57pm PT
Okay Domingo, what questions of "logic" were you posing?

Just answer my questions, and why are they not questions of logic also?
Domingo

Trad climber
El Portal, CA
Oct 27, 2008 - 12:00am PT
Weschrist posted this a while ago:

"You likely haven't got an answer because it is a stupid question... are you 8?

If it is okay to drink one beer... why not a whole keg every night of your life?

If it is okay to have one dog... why not 3000 dogs all stuffed into your back yard?

If it is okay to shoot guns in the woods... why not shoot them wherever you want?

If it is okay for Flashlight to have guns... who is going to stop him from getting nuclear weapons?"
Karl Baba

Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
Oct 27, 2008 - 12:00am PT
"In fact, there are very few things that Jesus specifically condemned. "

Yes but he DID condemn some things and I can just bet that you wouldn't dream of passing laws to keep people from indulging their greed and selfishness, the main sins of practical morality that commie Jesus preached.

Which morality should we Taliban enforce with the law and which morality should people be free to adopt or reject according their faith and conscious?

Peace

karl
Flashlight

climber
Oct 27, 2008 - 12:09am PT
If it doesn't hurt anyone else, why does the FDA have policies prohibiting men who have sex with other men from donating blood?

http://www.fda.gov/Cber/faq/msmdonor.htm

Domingo, you still have answered any of my recent questions.
HighDesertDJ

Trad climber
Arid-zona
Oct 27, 2008 - 12:15am PT
Holy crap Jody that was really pro. You cited the FDA policy on donating blood because of the extremely high rate of HIV among the homosexual male population as a way of marginalizing gays! You also omitted all of the HETEROSEXUAL sexual behavior (anal sex, multiple sexual partners, recent unprotected sex) that the FDA ALSO uses to eliminate blood donors. You are truly the master. Do you write for Sean Hannity?

I guess by the same logic there is something inherently harmful about living in Africa (extremely high HIV rate), or being Black/Hispanic (extremely high incarceration rate) or simply being poor!

Teach me oh great one!
Flashlight

climber
Oct 27, 2008 - 12:17am PT
100% of men who have sex with other men are prohibited. A small percentage of heterosexual behaviors are prohibited.
Flashlight

climber
Oct 27, 2008 - 12:25am PT
jstan

climber
Oct 27, 2008 - 12:27am PT
This thing is going places where I would not choose to set foot.
nita

climber
chica from chico, I don't claim to be a daisy
Oct 27, 2008 - 12:31am PT
Jody, would you please take the sick cow comment down on the halloween thread, I don't know what your talking about.
HighDesertDJ

Trad climber
Arid-zona
Oct 27, 2008 - 12:37am PT
"100% of men who have sex with other men are prohibited. A small percentage of heterosexual behaviors are prohibited. "



Because it all falls into a high risk category for contracting HIV not because there is something inherently "wrong" with homosexual men. Immigrants from sub saharan Africa (33% HIV rate) would ALSO be prohibited. That doesn't mean there is something inherently BAD about sub saharan Africans.
Flashlight

climber
Oct 27, 2008 - 12:43am PT
Wade, I just don't want the idea that homosexuality is normal to be even mentioned to my kids.

Nita, see the Halloween thread for an explanation. :) Just a little joke.
nita

climber
chica from chico, I don't claim to be a daisy
Oct 27, 2008 - 12:49am PT
Jody, I will repeat my request..listen..Please take down the sick cow comment, i didn't say it.. your joke -not mine. It- Was a fun thread.
MisterE

Trad climber
My Inner Nut
Oct 27, 2008 - 01:28am PT
My God. How you have so changed my mind. Thank you for the blessing of this wonderful input.
HighDesertDJ

Trad climber
Arid-zona
Oct 27, 2008 - 01:43am PT
Jody if you're restricting other people's freedoms that's hardly "just wanting your kids to not think its normal." If you don't want them to think it's normal then tell them it isn't. Don't oppress other people.

I probably wouldn't find a lot of things about your lifestyle "normal." That doesn't mean I'm going to try to ban them or punish you by restricting aspects of your life to try to somehow condemn you. If you aren't hurting others then whatever you do is your business.
dirtineye

Trad climber
the south
Oct 27, 2008 - 03:49am PT
Since homosexuality occurs in about 10% of populations of just about all species, I don't see how it can be anything but normal.

Maybe it's not the most desirable thing to wind up as, given all the grief you have to endure from the other 90%, but that's another matter.

OF course if you think Homosexuality is a choice, then all bets are off on the above, but you're going against a LOT of scientific evidence.
bookworm

Social climber
Falls Church, VA
Oct 27, 2008 - 07:02am PT
"choice or not, you have no right to choose the way people live out their personal lives."

ahhh, there you have it; marriage is not "personal" or private; it's PUBLIC...i don't care what people do in the privacy of their own bedrooms, but the marriage issue is not a bedroom matter
dirtbag

climber
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 27, 2008 - 09:00am PT
"OF course if you think Homosexuality is a choice, then all bets are off on the above, but you're going against a LOT of scientific evidence. "


Other Dirt, here's the thing. Generally speaking, they are a crowd that doesn't like, don't understand, and are a little fearful of science. They are, by and large, the same crowd that believes the world is 6000 years old and think global warming is a hoax. It's like talking science with Sarah Palin: forget it.
S.Powers

Social climber
Jtree, now in Alaska
Oct 27, 2008 - 11:51am PT
"ahhh, there you have it; marriage is not "personal" or private; it's PUBLIC...i don't care what people do in the privacy of their own bedrooms, but the marriage issue is not a bedroom matter"

What? That is just ridiculous, it is a PERSONAL choice to want to get married, I don’t get a say in who you marry, hell I don’t even know if you’re married because it’s a PERSONAL matter and I dont care if your married, even if it is to your dog/cat/hamster/salamander/cow/man/woman/stapler/watermelon. It's none of my business who you or anyone else marries because it is a PERSONAL piece of information. Do you think gays are going to be walking down the street (other than a parade setting) yelling, "Hey look at us were married!" do you do that with your wife? I don't do it with mine.

EDIT: It's only a public matter because people like you think it should be.
Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
Oct 27, 2008 - 11:58am PT
Anyone know how long "marriage" has been around, western culture wise? Wasn't it started in Europe only a couple hundred years ago?
Why is a couple of drunk 20 years old getting married in Las Vegas more special than a homosexual couple that have been living together succesfully for 40 years and want to marry?
salad

climber
Escondido
Oct 27, 2008 - 12:12pm PT
they can have their marriage...

I JUST WANT THE RAINBOW BACK!!!!!!!!!
HighDesertDJ

Trad climber
Arid-zona
Oct 27, 2008 - 12:40pm PT
"ahhh, there you have it; marriage is not "personal" or private; it's PUBLIC...i don't care what people do in the privacy of their own bedrooms, but the marriage issue is not a bedroom matter "


Bookworm, better logic has never been expressed as to why the government should ban your posting.


(also lol salad)
Chaz

Trad climber
So. Cal.
Oct 27, 2008 - 12:51pm PT
I saw a Prius in Joshua Tree yesterday with a "Yes On 8" sticker next to an Obama sticker.

No sh#t.
dirtineye

Trad climber
the south
Oct 27, 2008 - 01:16pm PT
Norton wrote:
"Anyone know how long "marriage" has been around, western culture wise? Wasn't it started in Europe only a couple hundred years ago?
Why is a couple of drunk 20 years old getting married in Las Vegas more special than a homosexual couple that have been living together succesfully for 40 years and want to marry? "


That's a really good question. The last one.
salad

climber
Escondido
Oct 27, 2008 - 01:30pm PT
Some of the prop 8 supporters in my city are keeping their kids out of school today in protest. There were 12 of 19 kids in my daughter's kindergarten class this morning.

I guess the CTA has put $250,000 towards the campaign againts 8 so the 8 supporters want to keep their kids home so the schools don't get funding for daily attendance.

Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
Oct 27, 2008 - 01:39pm PT
The Bible: Think about the source. Written in stages by people who were convinced the earth was flat, many of whom had never been more than 20 miles from their place of birth. Delusional.
dirtbag

climber
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 27, 2008 - 02:14pm PT
Also, none of the texts of the New Testament were written by people who even knew Jesus. In fact, contemporary evidence that Jesus even existed is lacking.

Anyway, Horus = Jesus.
the Fet

Knackered climber
A bivy sack in the secret campground
Oct 27, 2008 - 03:02pm PT
Prop. 8 Supporters--YOU SUCK!!! BIG TIME!!

I just got word that some bigot a-hole put a Yes on 8 yard sign in MY yard! A friend of ours saw it and removed it. The nerve of these brainwashed idiots.

I see these people holding signs that are outright lies. "8= religious freedom" "8=free speech" etc.

If you have to lie about it, do you think that maybe you are on the wrong side of the issue? Keep your stupid brainwashing to yourselves, and don't discriminate against a minority which should be treated equal. This is America, if you want religous bullshit in your goverment move to Iran or become a Taliban!
Gene

climber
Oct 27, 2008 - 03:36pm PT
Forget about Prop 8. It only is a "gateway" initiative to the final goal: Abolition of Shrimp!

These shall ye eat of all that are in the waters: whatsoever hath fins and scales in the waters, in the seas, and in the rivers, them shall ye eat.

And all that have not fins and scales in the seas, and in the rivers, of all that move in the waters, and of any living thing which is in the waters, they shall be an abomination unto you


Leviticus 11:9-12 (King James Version)

dirtbag

climber
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 27, 2008 - 03:40pm PT
As long as they don't try to marry...
bookworm

Social climber
Falls Church, VA
Oct 28, 2008 - 09:03am PT
three cheers for an "evolving" morality...

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/28/health/28well.html?_r=2&oref=slogin&oref=slogin

Domingo

Trad climber
El Portal, CA
Oct 28, 2008 - 09:08am PT
Obviously, increased infidelity the world over is the fault of the gays.
dirtbag

climber
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 28, 2008 - 09:11am PT
Many of those problems with heterosexual marriages can be traced to the rise in gay marriages.
Matt

Trad climber
primordial soup
Oct 28, 2008 - 01:29pm PT
booknematode-

the secret (are you ready for this?) to having a marriage without infidelity on either side, is exactly the same as the secret to truely understanding the prop8 debate, or the whole gay marriage debate!




if you pay attention to YOUR OWN marriage, rather than worry so much about everyone else and what they do or do not do in their lives or their marriages, bingo, vwuaa -laa! somehow, amazingly, things in your life might be just fine!
dirtbag

climber
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 28, 2008 - 03:24pm PT
You guys still suck.
GDavis

Trad climber
Oct 28, 2008 - 03:29pm PT
California Family Code section 297.5


"Registered domestic partners shall have the same rights,
protections, and benefits, and shall be subject to the same
responsibilities, obligations, and duties under law, whether they
derive from statutes, administrative regulations, court rules,
government policies, common law, or any other provisions or sources
of law, as are granted to and imposed upon spouses."


http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=fam&group=00001-01000&file=297-297.5

So, if it isn't about rights, what's it about?



Vote yes on Proposition 8. You can be tolerant of others lifestyles without embracing it.
dirtbag

climber
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 28, 2008 - 03:32pm PT
Oh I see, GDavis.

Gay people just aren't good enough--well, at least as good as you are--to deserve marriage.

Separate but equal.

Yeah, right.
GDavis

Trad climber
Oct 28, 2008 - 03:37pm PT
Dirtbag, they have all the intended rights as a registered domestic couple. This keeps judges five hundred miles away from saying what you can and cannot do in your own town (which, by the way, has been done already).


GDavis

Trad climber
Oct 28, 2008 - 03:40pm PT
Yes, Wes, play the crazed Leftist card all you want. Anyone that disagrees with you is a racist, or hates gays, or hates women. Diabolical.

I agree with facts and common sense, not useless hate-spin. I've changed my mind on this topic, and several others, by people presenting me with honest facts and realities, NOT anti-religious spew and wanton destruction of beliefs that don't fall in line with the current, MTV lifestyle that those on the far far left decide we all should live by.
dirtbag

climber
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 28, 2008 - 03:40pm PT
Funny, but people in the south used to resent interference from northerners a thousand miles away.
GDavis

Trad climber
Oct 28, 2008 - 03:41pm PT
Exactly, they didn't get to vote on it, did they ;D


Here's what we can do, why don't we have Austin, TX decide this for us?
dirtbag

climber
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 28, 2008 - 03:43pm PT
Lame.
graniteclimber

Trad climber
Nowhere
Oct 28, 2008 - 03:43pm PT
Marriage provides legal and economic benefits that domestic partnership does not. Marriages are recognized by the the federal government and many other states, domestic partnerships are not.
dirtbag

climber
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 28, 2008 - 03:45pm PT
"Yes, Wes, play the crazed Leftist card all you want. Anyone that disagrees with you is a racist, or hates gays, or hates women. Diabolical. "


Well, that's what is underlying it. You don't like gay people, feel uncomfortable with them, and that is what justifies holding them back from fulfilling what for many would be a lifetime dream. You don't like them. Separate but equal suits you just fine.
graniteclimber

Trad climber
Nowhere
Oct 28, 2008 - 03:48pm PT
"Separate but equal" in theory is "separate but NOT equal" in practice.


GDavis

Trad climber
Oct 28, 2008 - 03:48pm PT
Dirtbag

I have gay friends. They know my stance. Sorry, everyone that disagrees with you will not fit your stereotypes. In fact, most liberals I know personally are open minded, friendly family men and women.

Discuss the issues.



Granite

I have not heard that, that is interesting and good to know. My question would be, in those states that do not recognize domestic partnerships, do they recognize a same sex marriage?
dirtbag

climber
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 28, 2008 - 03:57pm PT
So why are you potentially denying your gay friends the lifetime of happiness (or misery) that some of them may seek?

graniteclimber

Trad climber
Nowhere
Oct 28, 2008 - 04:05pm PT
Gdavis,

What you are saying is reasonable and is what I believed for a long time. Gay marriage does not bother me personally, but I know it is disturbing to many people, so I thought that domestic partnership was good enough. If gays get the same rights under domestic partership as heterosexuals get under marriage, they're getting the same thing and we don't have to legally call it marriage to avoid offending some people.

It was only after I learned that gays do NOT get all the same rights under domestic partership that I changed my mind.

"My question would be, in those states that do not recognize domestic partnerships, do they recognize a same sex marriage?"

I was just googling this up and it seems tha tmost states have passed laws preventing same sex marriages from being recognized. Also the federal government now does not recognize gay marriage and still does not recognize domestic partnerships. My information was outdated.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Same-sex_marriage_in_the_United_States
GDavis

Trad climber
Oct 28, 2008 - 04:11pm PT
Thanks for the link, Granite. I appreciate it.

I think step #1 is to get the federal government to recognize domestic partnerships.
dirtbag

climber
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 28, 2008 - 04:17pm PT
And again I ask, why are you potentially denying your gay friends the lifetime of happiness (or misery) that some of them may seek?
micronut

Trad climber
fresno, ca
Oct 28, 2008 - 04:48pm PT
I'm curious how prop 8 No voters view homosexuality.
Do you think Homosexuality is a choice?
A tendency?
Healthy?
These are the questions at the heart of the matter.
The "Civil Rights" argument is interesting depending on how you look at these three questions.
Please let me know what some of you think. Then I might jump into the fray and join the conversation.
bwancy1

Trad climber
Here
Oct 28, 2008 - 04:51pm PT
What do I think about homosexuality?

I couldn't care less. It doesn't affect me in the slightest. I cannot figure out what it would take for me to be so bothered by it that I would deny marriage to strangers.
the Fet

Knackered climber
A bivy sack in the secret campground
Oct 28, 2008 - 05:16pm PT
"Do you think Homosexuality is a choice?"

No. Why would you choose to be part of a minority that is discriminated against, has hate crimes against, and all the other difficulties associated with it? People are obviously born that way.

"A tendency?"

No that's bi.

"Healthy?"

Yes, if someone is gay I imagine it would be much healthier to accept it and be gay. Fighting it leads to misery in many people, who after many years finally live as their true selves and are much happier.

Anti-gay people say 1% of people are gay. Gay advocates say 10% are gay. It's probably somewhere in the middle. So 5% of people are born attracted to the same sex. That is natural.

Is a gay couple the same as a hetero couple? No. Is it as good a family unit for raising children? On the whole no, but many gay parents are better than many straight ones.

To deny people rights and to discriminate against them is UnAmerican.

All men are created equal is one of the foundations of American government. Vote no on 8.
Matt

Trad climber
primordial soup
Oct 28, 2008 - 05:50pm PT
GD-
you seem like a nice enough guy, and i do believe your heart is in the right place.

here is another take:
while you are weighing the appropriate components of the argument, perhaps you are not quite breaking it down into the same level of scrutiny or detail that some others (perhaps those whom are smarter than either of us?) have?

from the CA supreme court decision:
http://www.eqca.org/atf/cf/{34F258B3-8482-4943-91CB-08C4B0246A88}/S147999.pdf


(let me quote what i think is the important part, from the end of page 8 and into page 9):
8
Under the current
statutes, the state has not revised the name of the official family relationship for all
couples, but rather has drawn a distinction between the name for the official
family relationship of opposite-sex couples (marriage) and that for same-sex
couples (domestic partnership). One of the core elements of the right to establish
an officially recognized family that is embodied in the California constitutional
right to marry is a couple’s right to have their family relationship accorded dignity
and respect equal to that accorded other officially recognized families, and
assigning a different designation for the family relationship of same-sex couples
while reserving the historic designation of “marriage” exclusively for opposite-sex
couples poses at least a serious risk of denying the family relationship of same-sex
couples such equal dignity and respect. We therefore conclude that although the
provisions of the current domestic partnership legislation afford same-sex couples
most of the substantive elements embodied in the constitutional right to marry, the
current California statutes nonetheless must be viewed as potentially impinging
upon a same-sex couple’s constitutional right to marry under the California
Constitution.
Furthermore, the circumstance that the current California statutes assign a
different name for the official family relationship of same-sex couples as
contrasted with the name for the official family relationship of opposite-sex
couples raises constitutional concerns not only under the state constitutional right
to marry, but also under the state constitutional equal protection clause.






so you see, you are weighing constitutionally guaranteed rights (or the denial of them) vs. any other interest (such as preserving the so-called "traditional definition of marriage"), and i believe that you sir, are not adequately considering which of the two is more significant in our system of government.

i think it's just that simple, but i'd ask that, at a minimum, anyone who considers themselves to NOT be a bigot at least READ the decision of the CA supreme court (see link above).

after all-
what is there to be afraid of-
INFORMATION?


kelly slater

climber
Oct 28, 2008 - 05:55pm PT
Dirtbag,

If not being able to get married will lead them to a lifetime of misery then they shouldn't be together in the first place. Love will stay either way and not being able to get married shouldn't have an impact on their relationship (just on their taxes etc.)
VOTE YES PROP 8
keep integrity in marriage
Domingo

Trad climber
El Portal, CA
Oct 28, 2008 - 06:07pm PT
While I agree love remains, not allowing people to have civil unions makes it almost impossible to:

-Get a loan for a house/car/business, which married couples have much less trouble getting
-Adopt a child, which is much simpler for married couples regardless of the quality of their marriage
-Have joint possessions, especially since the government can repossess property that was not passed on to a direct relative. That means if I hand all my climbing gear down to my friend Chris, the government can decide whether this was lawful using almost no guidelines and take it from him

among many other things.
kelly slater

climber
Oct 28, 2008 - 06:15pm PT
Loan-many people go in on houses with friends/relatives so no problem getting a loan.
adoption-no comment
belongings-cover your ass from the government
dirtbag

climber
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 28, 2008 - 06:17pm PT
"Dirtbag,

If not being able to get married will lead them to a lifetime of misery then they shouldn't be together in the first place. Love will stay either way and not being able to get married shouldn't have an impact on their relationship (just on their taxes etc.)
VOTE YES PROP 8
keep integrity in marriage "



Kelly, let's take a different approach. I'm assuming marraige is important to you. What if you were prohibited from being married because someone thought you weren't good enough for marriage? Sure you could still have a long term relationship, but to many couples, there is something about being married that is very important. Yet you would still be held back by others to something called a civil union. It's like saying you are a 2nd class citizen.
dirtbag

climber
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 28, 2008 - 06:19pm PT
BTW, I'm sure we all know many straight people who have done more to damage the integrity of marriage than homosexuals have ever done.
micronut

Trad climber
fresno, ca
Oct 28, 2008 - 06:20pm PT
Those are some good points Domingo, but getting a bank loan and adopting a child are far from being in the same zip code. We adopted last year, and are doing it again as we speak and the truth is, ALL couples should have to jump through a year of silly hoops to have a kid. Its crazy but quite an idiot filter. One thing we really need to take into account here are children. Yes, I know two loving gays can take better care of a child than a wifebeater and a coked out mom, but kids really often suffer in same gender marriages. There is some really solid social data on this one as far as childhood depression, learning disorders, anger issues, sexual identity issues, early drug use, unhealthy sexual relationships etc... It's often a rough go for these kids. In my opinion, one of the Pandora's Box issues is that of gay "families" rather than gay "married" couples without children.
Domingo

Trad climber
El Portal, CA
Oct 28, 2008 - 06:25pm PT
"Kids really often suffer in same gender marriages."

Give me your sources. I'm also curious as to whether these children suffer more because their parents are the same gender, or whether these children suffer more because they're aware of how complicated/hurtful the world is. It is hard to love a parent that the world says you should hate.

I agree that children should be the most protected, and the adoption process should be rigorous.
dirtineye

Trad climber
the south
Oct 28, 2008 - 07:07pm PT
One more time, BIGOTRY is prejudice with no knowledge of the thing you are prejudiced against.

In other words, if you know no Homosexuals, and prossibly hate them and think things like they should not be allowed to marry, THEN you are a BIGOT.

But, if yo udo know some homos, gays, queers whatever, and for some reason or other your experience with them leads you to think they are sub human and do not deserve the same rights as heterosexuals, THEN you are prejudiced, which is bad enough in itself, but you are not really a bigot, which is some ways is a bit worse than simple prejudice.




As for the claimed bit of humor in the title: "Prop. 8 Supporters-YOU SUCK!!!", I finally get it. HAHAHAHAAHAHAHA! Sorry to be sooooo sloooooowwwww

I bet a lot of them do suck, and they probably do it pretty well, although I am not intending to find out personally, LOL.





BTW, I heard recently that the bible didn't even start mentioning bad stuff about homosexuality til sometime around the King James version, which is also the one that seeks to include justification for divine right (that the KING is ruling because god wants him to, and the king is sort of the hand of god, basically). Funny how 'christians' seem to just rewrite the bible to justify whatever they want at various points in history.








Jaybro

Social climber
wuz real!
Oct 28, 2008 - 07:15pm PT
What about visiting/not being allowed to visit, a life partner in the ICU? Is a restrictive gender prejudice relevant? Does deciding that, for someone else, really put you right with your god, Kelly?
Karl Baba

Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
Oct 28, 2008 - 07:22pm PT
Since Christianity is at the root of gay marriage resistance, it's worth considering that Jesus was not married (most disciples were) at a time when priests and rabbis didn't have a tradition of remaining single and celibate. It's not unlikely that he faced prejudice from not following the expected cultural pattern.

Then, sometime after Christianity caught on in the pagan world, it was oppressed and Christians were fed to lions and such.

Just with that history, and Christ's teaching about compassion for even sinners, should call for a "live and let live" attitude towards other groups. Let folks seeking extra righteousness practice it for themselves rather than enforcing it on others via laws.

Peace

Karl
graniteclimber

Trad climber
Nowhere
Oct 28, 2008 - 07:23pm PT
Kelly Slater: "VOTE YES PROP 8
keep integrity in marriage"

How does Prop 8 "keep integrity in marriage?"

If Proposition 8 passes will men and women in traditional marriages cheat less or get divorced less?

Will Prop 8 make them love each other more and cheat less?
ontheedgeandscaredtodeath

Trad climber
San Francisco, Ca
Oct 28, 2008 - 07:23pm PT
It's un-American to use a constitution to limit rights between individuals, regardless of what one thinks of gay marriage.

Further, restrictions like this do not withstand the test of time. See, e.g, slavery, women's voting, separate but equal, and the prohibition of alcohol. So even if it passes it will be a pyrrhic victory.

HighDesertDJ

Trad climber
Arid-zona
Oct 28, 2008 - 07:38pm PT
VOTE YES ON PROP 8!! VALIDATE MY DISCOMFORT WITH HOMOSEXUALITY!
Mighty Hiker

Social climber
Vancouver, B.C.
Oct 28, 2008 - 07:41pm PT
Not a thread I have much to say about. But dirtineye did mention that "I heard recently that the bible didn't even start mentioning bad stuff about homosexuality til sometime around the King James version." Which is interesting in that there is some debate in the historical community as to whether James I was bisexual. He was married and had children, but had a long history of close relationships with other men. Probably impossible now to know the truth, but still interesting.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_I_of_England
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_relationships_of_James_I_of_England
Domingo

Trad climber
El Portal, CA
Oct 28, 2008 - 08:01pm PT
Off-topic on the KJB: The King James Bible also introduced the word "Lord" as a synonym for God; this is pretty inaccurate as far as the translations from the original languages go. The only reasonable explanation for this is those in power at the time wanted to permanently relate and link God with the Kings and Lords of England.
Scott Wayland

climber
Oct 28, 2008 - 08:04pm PT
Okay, maybe one post on this sucka:

I'm especially annoyed at claims regarding the "integrity" of marriage. If Phred and Fred get married, how in any possible way does it affect my marriage--going on 15 years now? Seriously? Whatever integrity exists is in our hands, what we do day in and day out with our spouses, and no other marriage has any effect, regardless of the junk the couples may be hauling around between their legs.

What it comes down to is that Pro 8 people just don't like the idea of same sex couples--period. As a comfortably straight male, I get a little squirmy thinking about same sex couples, but that's MY problem, and not a big one at that as I have friends, colleagues and such who are most certainly in same sex relationships, one in particular who just got married. I saw the certificate. She is one of the happiest, friendliest people I know. I'm sincerely happy for her. Who are you narrow-minded jerks to deny her and her partner some happiness that--NOW GET THIS!!--that in no measurable way affects you? You just don't like the idea of it? Well big freakin' deal. Grow up. People are different.

I'm deeply bothered by the idea that a large number of people actually think Sara Palin would make a great vice president and, by extension, a president. And that's something that CAN have a real effect on my life--unlike this Adam and Steve having a little ceremony and a kiss at the end. Here's the clincher: I'm not advocating for a Constitutional ban on Caribou Barbies running for national office. Sorry, I gotta believe that Jesus would be standing with the gays on this one.

Grow the hell up people, fer cryin' out loud!

Rant off.

Continue.

Scott
Josh

Trad climber
Watsonville, CA
Oct 28, 2008 - 08:11pm PT
I'm feeling really optimistic about the way California and the country are heading. I'm sorry if you're on the other side of the fence, and are discouraged by it - I know that feels bad, having just endured that for a while. Trust in God and everything will work out! No on 8!
Gene

climber
Oct 28, 2008 - 08:15pm PT
Scott,

Who are you narrow-minded jerks to deny her and her partner some happiness...

Wouldn't spouse be a better term that partner.

GM
nita

climber
chica from chico, I don't claim to be a daisy
Oct 30, 2008 - 10:53pm PT
I really didn't want to bring this thread back up but I was so moved at my friend's wedding yesterday that I wish to quote the words my husband spoke at the ceremony.



"J and I were friends and co-workers more than 24 years ago in Yosemite. In 1984 we both met the loves of our lives there. Before the decade was over; my love, Nita and I exchanged wedding vows and, like J & J, we are still together.

I remember when Nita and I went to our city courthouse to legally bind us together without a thought that some did not have the freedom to marry the one they love, knowing the love that J & J have shared with each other for these 24 years has been as enduring as ours.

With the passing of years and our beloved pets, we often find ourselves gauging our relationship with other friends who have been together as long.......so now that leaves J & J.

So it is with great warmth, love, joy and pleasure to stand here today to express Nita's and my love and appreciation to both of you. We are So HAPPY!!!!
dirtbag

climber
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 30, 2008 - 11:08pm PT
Nice Nita. That's what it's all about.




To the Pro 8 people:

Being able to marry means a lot to a lot of people who are different than you are.

Some of you say you have gay friends. Are you prepared to say, to their faces, that they aren't good enough to be married, to enjoy the same rights you enjoy? Are you prepared to tell them, to their faces, that you think you are better people than they are?

Because that is exactly what you will be saying when you step in the booth and vote for prop 8.
JEleazarian

Trad climber
Fresno CA
Oct 31, 2008 - 02:24pm PT
I think people have spoken well enough on this topic, so let me ask about the "OT -- King James" thread.

I'm curious about the statement that the KJV essentially introduced badness into the Bible. What were the translation errors that bring this about?

I must confess that whenever I hear people quoting (and often literally thumping) from the KJV, my knee jerks in opposition, but I was unaware of any gross translating errors.

The rendering of the Tetragammaton as "LORD" rather than "YHWH" seems quite interesting. I'm curious how it's rendered in ancient biblical translations (which is a confession that I'm unfamiliar with the Septuagint, the Vulgate, the Armenian "Astvadzeeshoontz," etc.) Anyone know?

John
Gary

climber
Desolation Basin, Calif.
Oct 31, 2008 - 02:29pm PT
Why shouldn't they be as miserable as everyone else? Serves 'em right, i say.
Matt

Trad climber
primordial soup
Oct 31, 2008 - 04:15pm PT
8 = HATE
JEleazarian

Trad climber
Fresno CA
Oct 31, 2008 - 04:33pm PT
Wes,

You are correct. I was referring to the "bad stuff about homosexuality" to use the words earlier in this thread; I was just too lazy to quote the whole thing, for which I now get my just punishment. In any case, I had (and have) more interest in the historical translation of the Tetragammaton.

John
HighDesertDJ

Trad climber
Arid-zona
Oct 31, 2008 - 05:52pm PT
Domingo- The KJB introduced the concept of Jesus as Monarch across the board as I understand it. It's the first place that he was referred to as King or Lord and other monarchical references were made. My friend has a PHD in theology and she doesn't allow the KJB in her classrooms because it is such a departure from every other text.



Also: MY MARRIAGE IS ON THE ROCKS VOTE YES ON PROP 8 TO SAVE IT
Buckwheat

Big Wall climber
No. Cal
Nov 1, 2008 - 01:08pm PT
The American people have a right to create any law that we deem good for society. A we have a right to vote no on any law. People like dirtbag spewing hate will never change this. Marriage is about one man and one woman having a family creating stability. What after gay marriage?? Brother and sister, man and sheep, man and a 5 year old girl???? Get over it gays can do whatever in there own privacy and have equal rights and benifits, leave well enough alone.

Domingo

Trad climber
El Portal, CA
Nov 1, 2008 - 01:20pm PT
I always find it interesting reading the sh#t that passes for Bibles... it's all translated from the original languages with an agenda. Have an objective scholar translate a few chapters of verse and you'll see what I mean.
bookworm

Social climber
Falls Church, VA
Nov 8, 2008 - 02:26pm PT
hmmmmm...according to polling data, white people in cali narrowly voted against prop 8 and black people overwhelmingly voted for it...now, following typical ST logic, dirt's a racist because he thinks black people suck
wilcox510

climber
Nov 8, 2008 - 03:05pm PT
"Marriage is about one man and one woman having a family creating stability." According to whom? You and the Bible? I personally don't care what an ancient book written by humans (not God)who needed something to believe in says about the matter. I just don't understand how gays getting married affects any homophobic couples. Will you suddenly not be able to reproduce because the concept of marriage has been tainted? Will God strike us all down (not that I believe there is a God). Your prejudices and fears should not keep others from becoming happy, particularly because IT DOES NOT AFFECT YOU IN ANY WAY!
setherbugs

Boulder climber
Leuven, Belgium
Nov 8, 2008 - 03:49pm PT
You know what, I think all people should be able to use whatever restrooms they feel most comfortable using as well. Why discriminate? When I'm feeling manly I'll go to the men's and when I'm feeling sensitive, I'll go to the women's.

Gay's wanting to get married makes a mockery of what marriage was created to be, and now finally "officially" is according to the Constitution of California thanks to the vote of the people of California, the union of one man and one women. I know it's hard for gays to comprehend this, but the people take offense at gays wanting to be married, because that is not what marriage was ever meant to be. If you want to be leagally recognized as a couple, I'm sure you can get a law passed to do so, but PLEASE, stop trying to ruin marriage!

It's a shame that a law that's been on the books for all these years finally needs to be clarified because people can no longer discerns things for themselves.

It would not have been a civil right taken away except for the California Supreme court made the mistake of making a liberal judgement. Now everyone is up in arms because that temporary right (which everyone knew was temporary) is gone and rightfully so.

There is nothing stopping gays for making a life commitment to each other, they just can't call it marriage, because that's not what marriage is!
sirloin of leisure

Big Wall climber
boise,id
Nov 8, 2008 - 04:08pm PT
I'm sick of hearing about the poor queers all the time..boo hooo
sirloin of leisure

Big Wall climber
boise,id
Nov 8, 2008 - 04:16pm PT
by the way,I despise religeon,queers just creep me out a bit,like wandering eyes,hair lips,super fat people,and tucker tech.
bookworm

Social climber
Falls Church, VA
Nov 8, 2008 - 04:42pm PT
wilcox, making some people "happy" (especially a small % of people) is not a good enough reason to make a new law, especially one that will destroy a tradition that has served humanity for millenia...tell me, if homosexuals can have all the legal rights of marriage through civil unions, why isn't that good enough? civil unions prove that homosexuals have been accepted by society, but same-sex marriage demands society's approval...maybe in a hundred years, but not now

also, your claim that it won't affect me is impossible to prove; you have no way of predicting how same-sex marriage will affect society, which has a huge affect on ME...consider the no-fault divorce, designed to make people happy who were unhappy in their marriage; the no-fault divorce has had no direct effect on me (my parents will celebrate 50 years next month), but the effects on marriage have been devastating because it reduces marriage to a contract that lacks the binding power of the typical gym membership; the effects on society are visible through the 50% divorce rate, emotionally traumatized kids, single-parent homes, etc...

even in a entirely secular society, some things should be preserved as sacred...marriage is one of those things
Jingy

Social climber
Flatland, Ca
Nov 8, 2008 - 05:11pm PT
Discrimination is discrimination plane and simple, no excuse for it and reason for it.

I'm not sure, because I didn't live in that time, and I have not done the research to back up what I'm about to say, but I seem to remember that there was a law in place that made it illegal for a White to marry a Black.

If we are fair in our assessment of these things, we will see that there was no reason for it.
Years from now, those of you that voted to block gay/lesbian marriage will have will have to answer to your grandchildren who may look at you with disdain, asking you the same question..."Why?"

This world could be a better place.

I've relaxed my grip on things that I think I can control in this life because I love my life, and I can let it go.

Too bad more people don't just let it go....
Largo

Sport climber
Venice, Ca
Nov 8, 2008 - 06:09pm PT
I keep reading how gay "marriages" will destroy traditional marriages, or undermine their sacred value, and how this is all a huge threat to straight folk, but I haven't yet read how any of this treat is supposed to play out and how it's going to taint my marriage or mean any damn thing to me or mine? HOW is this threat supposed to materialize?

Come on . . .
sirloin of leisure

Gym climber
X
Nov 8, 2008 - 06:17pm PT
first they send out the gay ninjas,it progresses from there you see...
Captain...or Skully

Social climber
Yer gonna die fer sure, dude
Nov 8, 2008 - 06:38pm PT
sirloin of leisure

Gym climber
X
Nov 8, 2008 - 07:08pm PT
they tend to prefer an attack from behind
Karl Baba

Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
Nov 8, 2008 - 10:07pm PT
Largo wrote
"I keep reading how gay "marriages" will destroy traditional marriages, or undermine their sacred value, and how this is all a huge threat to straight folk, but I haven't yet read how any of this treat is supposed to play out and how it's going to taint my marriage or mean any damn thing to me or mine? HOW is this threat supposed to materialize? "

Here's how society will fail it's traditional values of anal retention (maybe that's the wrong metaphor):

First, Boys in high school will discover strong sexual feelings but the high school girls won't be easy to score, but, since Gay Marraige will have made queerhood more respectable, they'll discover that other guys are EASY! Pretty soon, they'll be all used to easy gay sex without all the needless dating, sensitive talk and fuss.

Second, Girls in high school will discover their interest in guys becomes disappointing when the guys only seem to want sex and not dating, sensitive talk and fuss, but that other girls are masters of those things. Sorry guys, you're too crude for the girls who mature faster.

Third, allowing gay marriage is a step in the wrong direction, which will be to outlaw homosexuality and abortion at the same time (cause gays have lots of abortions) In the righteous society of the future, both types of sinners will be fed to lions in large stadiums in massive after-church events. It will be bloodier than MMA but with the same flair. (Lions with snappy names and outfits)

Once Obama shows his true colors (maybe that's the wrong metaphor) interracial marriage will also join banned unions. If God wanted races to mix, he wouldn't have color coded us.

;-)

Karl
setherbugs

Social climber
Leuven, Belgium
Nov 9, 2008 - 03:49am PT
ok here's one problem i find with allowing gay marriage in relation to it's affect on society. allowing gay marriage opens the door to polygamy and here's why. if you allow gay marriage, then you must also consider other sexual preferences (we can't descriminate against them either). i won't even mention animal lovers. so why polygamy, well why should a bisexual only be able to marry one of their partners? can you imagine the emotional distress this would cause? it would be like the days in p.e. class when they are picking teams and you don't want to be the last one picked. the other partner is left in the cold. and what about hermaphrodites? they should be able to pick two partners as well, shouldn't they? and what about a bisexual hermaphrodite? they deserve at least 4 spouses. so if the aforementioned happens, we can only conclude the the mormons will also want to reinstate polygamy. and once polygamy is generally accepted, Hugh Hefner, if he's still alive, will become the next president. in some african tribes, the chief shows he's authourity by how many wives he has (an we all can see what a wonderful state africa is in). i can only imagine that hugh or warren jeffs are best positioned to benefit from this occurance. so if you want either of these two as president, please by all means continue to support gay marriage!
Karl Baba

Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
Nov 9, 2008 - 05:42am PT
the only solution is to get government out of the marriage business.

Hefner can already have 4 girlfriends and enter into various contracts with multiple individuals. I'm sure he'd be relieved that he can't marry them all.

All the slippery slope arguments are kinda lame. We allow people to own guns but not plastic explosive nor napalm bombs or nukes.

We allow boxing but not fights to the death

We didn't allow women and blacks to vote but now we do but not dogs and cats

as much as people fear the return to biblical marriage values like polygamy, it's unlikely to happen and just as easy to do without being official.

Folks should look up the old arguments, fought long and hard, against freeing slaves, letting women and blacks vote, and so on, and figure how much of the predicted harm came to pass.

Perhaps the fact that we now have a mixed race president will assure some and confirm the fears of others

PEace

karl


Chaz

Trad climber
So. Cal.
Nov 9, 2008 - 10:53am PT
Karl's 100% right when he says:

"the only solution is to get government out of the marriage business."

YES.

The Government ought not make any distinction at all whatsoever between married Americans and non-married Americans.

That's why I didn't vote on Prop 8. I figured a vote either way said The Government HAS a legitimate authority to insert itself between people at their most basic level; the family.
wilcox510

climber
Nov 9, 2008 - 12:06pm PT
"the no-fault divorce has had no direct effect on me (my parents will celebrate 50 years next month), but the effects on marriage have been devastating" - I don't understand the concept of "the effects on marriage". I am married, whatever the divorce rate is does not affect me or my marriage. If the divorce rate increases, it does not make my marriage weaker, neither will allowing gay marriages. As far as opening the door to polygamy, that's kind of stretching it don't you think? It would be easy and reasonable to have laws specify that marriage is between two (and only two) individuals regardless of gender. The Merriam-Webster dictionary has already acknowledged gay marriage, why can't you?

mar·riage - 1 a (1): the state of being united to a person of the opposite sex as husband or wife in a consensual and contractual relationship recognized by law (2): the state of being united to a person of the same sex in a relationship like that of a traditional marriage b: the mutual relation of married persons : wedlock c: the institution whereby individuals are joined in a marriage2: an act of marrying or the rite by which the married status is effected ; especially : the wedding ceremony and attendant festivities or formalities3: an intimate or close union
HighDesertDJ

Trad climber
Arid-zona
Nov 9, 2008 - 02:39pm PT
I'd be troubled too if people kept telling me that my parents were evil and that I was going to be screwed up because of them.
Tami

Social climber
Vancouver, Canada
Nov 9, 2008 - 03:17pm PT
About children of gay marriages - some anecdotal evidence.

I work teaching circus arts to children. I teach about 150 different kids between the ages of 6 and 18. They come from all socioeconomic backgrounds. They are a sea of varied faces with ancestry from all corners of the globe. Some have one parent, some have two, some are married, some are not. Some have straight married parents, some have gay married parents. Gay marriage is legal in my province.

The children I teach who are most at risk for screwedupness are children who have learning difficulties which remain unattended to by parents.

In ten years of teaching kids from gay & straight families I have witnessed NO correlation between screwedupedness and the sexual preference of their parent(s).

Just sayin'.
bookworm

Social climber
Falls Church, VA
Nov 9, 2008 - 03:29pm PT
again, wilcox, you're making a selfish argument...it's all about YOU...the no-fault divorce has been detrimental to marriage and society through the reasons i listed...your reference to the dictionary also points out your hypocrisy...you say my definition of marriage is wrong but only because it doesn't match your definition...you clearly want to discriminate against people who have their own definition of marriage, which might include marrying multiple partners or maybe even a sibling...ok, you claim same sex marriage won't hurt marriage or society, then explain how polygamy will hurt marriage or society...if you can't (without using my arguments against same-sex marriage because you clearly they're invalid) then the only way to prevent marriage "discrimination" is to allow everyone to define marriage however they please

the claim of discrimination is also weak...banning interracial marriages was clearly wrong because people have no control over their race...you will probably claim that sexual orientation is genetically determined, but we have complete control over our behavior...so even though i am genetically designed to spread my seed to multiple partners--which you evolutionists must approve--and have a very natural urge to do so, society encourages me to control my behavior because it is better for society and ME to do so

for states that have put the marriage question to ballot, the record is 30-0 against same-sex marriage...do you believe in democracy?

again, why not accept civil unions? call it a pilot program; 50 years from now, the facts might change people's minds...the people might finally be ready to move from acceptance to approval of same-sex marriage
Karl Baba

Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
Nov 9, 2008 - 03:46pm PT
Well here's a video that shows how the family will be affected by the breakdown of traditional marriage

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y-_JhRJ0tWA&feature=channel

peace

karl
sirloin of leisure

Gym climber
X
Nov 9, 2008 - 04:41pm PT
a good tight rear naked choke,lights out
WBraun

climber
Nov 9, 2008 - 04:45pm PT
Hey ????

Hahahaha you guys still here, hahahah
setherbugs

Social climber
Leuven, Belgium
Nov 9, 2008 - 04:48pm PT
seriously, why would supporters of gay marriage, not also support a bisexual being married to two people at the same time? is bisexual less of a sexual preference than the other? the thing about discrimination is that it has to start/stop somewhere, what people are saying now is that it should stop here, and remain how it has always been. a world without discrimination is not one that i would like to live in.
sirloin of leisure

Gym climber
X
Nov 9, 2008 - 04:56pm PT
werner,how are things?the climbing here sucks,but the mountain biking kicks ass..
WBraun

climber
Nov 9, 2008 - 05:05pm PT
sirloin

Lot's of old guys running around this weekend trying to climb the Nose. They have so far only gotten to the Ahwahnee for lunch.

Later they will go to El Cap meadows for the size-up ........

sirloin of leisure

Gym climber
X
Nov 9, 2008 - 05:08pm PT
I was always strong on the size up...
WBraun

climber
Nov 9, 2008 - 05:13pm PT
Gotta get some photos of these guys standing around the meadow ....
Chaz

Trad climber
So. Cal.
Nov 9, 2008 - 05:16pm PT
You might not want to put those pics in the Gay Marriage thread, Werner. People could get the wrong idea.
sirloin of leisure

Gym climber
X
Nov 9, 2008 - 05:17pm PT
does no one climb anymore....HELLO is anybody out there
bluering

Trad climber
Santa Clara, Ca.
Nov 9, 2008 - 05:22pm PT
and I didn't get to climb yesterday or today, so I'm super pissed at gays. F*#king gays!!!!
sirloin of leisure

Gym climber
X
Nov 9, 2008 - 05:23pm PT
so what did ya do details
bluering

Trad climber
Santa Clara, Ca.
Nov 9, 2008 - 05:27pm PT
OMG!!1111!! ruok? TBL!!! LMAO!11!! LOL1!
Chaz

Trad climber
So. Cal.
Nov 9, 2008 - 05:38pm PT
How many Obama supporters voted yes on 8 ?

Had to be a bunch, seeing how he beat McCain by about 2 - 1 in the California popular vote.
sirloin of leisure

Gym climber
X
Nov 9, 2008 - 06:09pm PT
sounds delightfull,last time I went climbing, here at the local place,I started on a rugged yet beautiful face,and grabbed handfulls of decomposeing rock,sandblasting my way to the summit,of some disapointing turd shaped rock...
Karl Baba

Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
Nov 9, 2008 - 06:13pm PT
"seriously, why would supporters of gay marriage, not also support a bisexual being married to two people at the same time? is bisexual less of a sexual preference than the other? "

Guess what, as a "government leave our personal lives alone" kinda guy, I don't even care if somebody is married or civil unioned to multiple people as long as it's not a tax, benefit, or immigration scam.

Freedom means freedom to be some way that the majority isn't particularly comfortable with.

Peace

karl
sirloin of leisure

Gym climber
X
Nov 9, 2008 - 06:15pm PT
I went climbing with a gay guy once...he seemed nice
Captain...or Skully

Social climber
Upper Bench
Nov 9, 2008 - 06:23pm PT
Well, sure he did.....he's watching your butt!
wilcox510

climber
Nov 9, 2008 - 06:36pm PT
Bookworm - Exactly what about my statements are selfish? I am not gay, so by allowing gay marriage it does not benefit my (nor does it harm me). I am simply in favor of allowing two people who love each other, regardless of gender, to be married. How is that selfish? How has the increase in divorces affected you? I don't even understand how it really affects society? Are you, or whatever you consider to be society, somehow diminished or harmed every time someone gets divorced? Personally, my world does not come crumbling down when someone gets divorced. As far as civil unions, I think that would be acceptable if the gave the couples all of the same legal rights that married couples have (in which case why not just call it a marriage).
jack splat

climber
Nov 9, 2008 - 06:48pm PT
Hey FLASHLIGHT - this picture is from the link you posted. You're a photographer - what does it say?




This is what I think it says:

I don't want my son to turn gay.
sirloin of leisure

Gym climber
X
Nov 9, 2008 - 06:50pm PT
I vote for jack
jack splat

climber
Nov 9, 2008 - 07:00pm PT
When I was about as old as this boy in this picture:



My mom rented out one of our spare bedrooms to a very nice man named Arthur. She explained that he was gay and what that meant. I remember thinking that it was ok for men to want to be with other men, and that I had a choice.

This might surprise some people, but a few years later, I decided I liked girls!

Who would have thought that?
bluering

Trad climber
Santa Clara, Ca.
Nov 9, 2008 - 07:28pm PT
"This might surprise some people, but a few years later, I decided I liked girls! "

Wow, really? That gives you way more credibility! Dude, I'm switching my vote on 8. How could I have been such a bigot?

Thanks, man.
Karl Baba

Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
Nov 9, 2008 - 07:42pm PT
I always say, everybody who thinks they could go gay if society only were nice to gays and allowed gay marriage raise your hand!

Otherwise STFU about the non-choice we're really talking about.

Peace

karl
bookworm

Social climber
Falls Church, VA
Nov 9, 2008 - 08:32pm PT
wilcox, i say you're selfish because you keep repeating that the issue doesn't affect YOU

how has divorce affected society? first, i suppose you think a 50% divorce rate is a good thing...now, marriage used to mean something; whether a public contract or a vow before god, marriage was a promise of commitment "for better or worse"; by entering a marriage, you were holding yourself accountable not just for your happiness but for somebody else's; now, that accountability, that personal responsibility is gone...people can walk away from a marriage easier than they can cancel a cell phone contract...not sure how it has affected society? take off your blinders and look around...seen any kids emotionally traumatized by divorce? noticed any pattern of children of divorces having more divorces themselves? know of any women whose husbands walked out on them and their children? noticed an increase in the number of people who "live together" and read any of the studies that show such convenient relationships are usually detrimental to the women, financially as well as emotionally? noticed an increase in the number of single women with children? think their lives might be a little easier with a man who believes in keeping promises? noticed an increase in the number of women who walk on their families?

but, none of this affects YOU so let people do whatever makes them happy
Jim E

climber
Nov 9, 2008 - 08:51pm PT
Seems like the heteros aren't doing much to protect marriage.



Divorce Rate - U.S.A.
Divorce rate in America has shot up to unexpectedly high level. The rising trend in US divorce rates has caused concern in political, social and religious circles of the country.

According to the current divorce rate statistics, 50% of the marriages end in divorce. National center for Health’s divorce rate statistics foresaw a downward trend in US divorce rates i.e. up to 43%. But in 2002, census bureau revised the predicted divorce rate in America back to 50%. However, some recent divorce rate statistic shows the predicted US divorce rates as approximately 40%.

According to divorce rate statistics of 2003, divorce rate in America fell by 5.6%. This might seem to be a big decrease in divorce rates in US as per divorce rate statistics. But this drop is mainly because of the decrease in collective divorce rate of American states of Washington, North Carolina, New Jersey, Massachusetts, Iowa, Colorado, Rhode Island, Minnesota and Nevada.
Statistics of Divorce Rate in America
Statistics of divorce rate in America show that in the years 2002-2003 US divorce rate dropped by 30.04% in Nevada.

An increase in the US divorce rates in the state of Delaware showed a significant rise. Here, divorce rate statistics show an increase of 64.72%.

Divorce rate statistics show that couples without children have a higher divorce rate in America. US divorce rates in couples who have children is slightly lower.

The children of divorced parents are prone to divorcing 4 times more than the children of couples who are not divorced.
Divorce Rate Statistics of 1st, 2nd and 3rd Marriages
Various studies on US Divorce rate show significant differences when a comparison is made in 1st, 2nd and 3rd marriage, divorce rate in America.

* Divorce rate in America after first marriage is from 41% to 50%.
* US divorce rate after second marriage is from 60% to 67%
* After 3 marriages the US divorce rate is from 73% to 74%
Karl Baba

Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
Nov 9, 2008 - 09:12pm PT
Folks are just hanging on to the imagined past out of fear.

Anybody want to stand up and outlaw interracial marraige? Come on, fess up! Bet there was a huge righteous debate about it at the time.

Anybody want to go by the strict religious standard of No Divorce Ever for any reason that some preachers like Brother Camping (nationwide figure) teach?

Who wants their parents to choose their wife for them? It still happens worldwide and was a big part of most every country until modern times.

Try to turn back the clock all you like, If you turn it back to far, you'll find yourself back with polygamy and concubines like the bible heros had.

Gay Marriage was never an issue before. People had to have kids whether they were gay or not. Part of "social Security" No need for marriage. Times have changed. Folks with inside knowledge of more conservative, religion following societies, (you know, the religions you don't like) can tell you that strict religious rules just make hypocrites acting underground.

peace

karl


Largo

Sport climber
Venice, Ca
Nov 9, 2008 - 10:27pm PT
Who here is going to swear that they arrived at their sexual orientation by choice, as opposed to instinct?

JL
MisterE

Trad climber
My Inner Nut
Nov 9, 2008 - 10:38pm PT
It's the same old crap. people can't figure out why their marriages are not working out, so instead of seeking the answer within, they strike out toward that which they do not choose to take the time to understand. It fills the gap of their own shortcomings.

Lashing out and blaming others is SO much easier.

Yawn. Next?
dirtbag

climber
Topic Author's Reply - Nov 10, 2008 - 02:27am PT
They still suck.
setherbugs

Social climber
Leuven, Belgium
Nov 10, 2008 - 03:14am PT
"Who here is going to swear that they arrived at their sexual orientation by choice, as opposed to instinct?"

Let's all just obey what are instincts are telling us, cuz that is always what's right...
HighDesertDJ

Trad climber
Arid-zona
Nov 10, 2008 - 04:31am PT
The only reason that my fiance and I have avoided getting married is because of a fear that gays would get married and then ruin it. Now that the Arizona Constitution forbids them we might now feel safe enough to venture into marriage.
dirtbag

climber
Topic Author's Reply - Nov 10, 2008 - 08:55am PT
"Let's all just obey what are instincts are telling us, cuz that is always what's right... "


There's nothing wrong with homosexuality.
coiler

Trad climber
The Rock Monkey Ranch
Nov 10, 2008 - 09:12am PT
It has become so tiresome... having the Cristians tell me how to live every aspect of my life. Telling me what I can and cannot do. Don't they remember that their anscenstors came here because the Brits kept telling them what to do... and they didn't like it? Now I guess they've forgotten that. Everywhere I go I'm told,"god bless this or that" or "pray for this or that" ENOUGH!
AMERICA- is based on FREEDOM. We are all here to "persue our happiness" if that means some guy or girl wants to marry his/her gay lover.. who am I to tell him no. who are YOU to tell him no. If it's OK to legislate no gay marraige. I say let's legislate no more Cristianity. After all, Cristianity has been the root of just about every war EVER. Surely this religion is a dangerous and uncontrollable threat. It must be stopped. BAN CRISTIANITY- SAVE THE WORLD! SAVE FREEDOM!
MY MESSAGE TO CRISTIANS- KEEP YOUR RELIGION TO YOURSELF! KEEP IT IN YOUR CHURCHES AND IN YOUR HOMES, AND OUT OF MINE AND EVERYONE ELSES LIVES! ENOUGH ALLREADY! I AM NOT CRISTIAN, YOUR RULES DON'T APPLY TO ME! ENOUGH!


BESIDES- doesn't our government have more important things to be thinking about.. like our trillions of dollars of deficit and a war that appears to have no end?
More Air

Big Wall climber
S.L.C.
Nov 10, 2008 - 10:24am PT
"BAN CRISTIANITY- SAVE THE WORLD! SAVE FREEDOM!"

Now that's an oxymoron
Chaz

Trad climber
So. Cal.
Nov 10, 2008 - 10:38am PT
After seeing all the little tantrums the gay activists are throwing because they didn't get their way, I'm wishing I had voted in favor of Prop 8.
dirtbag

climber
Topic Author's Reply - Nov 10, 2008 - 11:18am PT
Yeah, buncha whiners bitching because their rights were taken away and they are treated like 2d class citizens.
Karl Baba

Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
Nov 10, 2008 - 11:32am PT
"After seeing all the little tantrums the gay activists are throwing because they didn't get their way, I'm wishing I had voted in favor of Prop 8."

Yeah, WTF. Why don't they STFU and return to the back of the bus. Whining liberals!

It's not like Obama threatened to raise their taxes!

;-0

Karl
coiler

Trad climber
The Rock Monkey Ranch
Nov 10, 2008 - 11:41am PT
Chaz... Let's get this straight. I'm not a gay activist. I'm totaly straight, married to a hottie little blonde woman with blue eyes. Just what the Cristians say is marraige right? But I am a FREEDOM activist. Telling people who they can and cannot marry is not freedom, no matter if 100% voted for prop 8. Prop 8 is in direct violation of the state, and federal constitutions. That was my JOKE about banning Cristianity. I'm fine with Christianity. We all need some way to explain what happens when we cash out our chips in this life. Some tribesman beat on a drum and dance around a fire chanting," uga booga, ooga booga". Praying to their many gods for whatever they need; rain, a good harvest, fertility etc. Some people go to a church and ask thier "one true god" to forgive them for the bad things they did in this life and "pray" that they get into this "heaven", where it's all peaches and cream for eternety. Again, others believe if they throw some bones on the ground, the way they land will tell them how some things will play out. In the end, they are all little imaginary friends who help them wake up and go about thier little lives. Personaly I don't care about all these religions. I have my beliefs, and they aren't even important. I'm just sick of the religious right in this country running around bossing everybody into what they believe. Like I said, It doesn't matter if 100% of us voted for prop 8. It's none of our business if people want to marry thier gay lovers, or their parrots, or dogs... or hot little blonde women. Prop 8 was about telling someone else, they are not allowed to persue their happiness, which is VERY un-AMERICAN, and pissess me off.
bookworm

Social climber
Falls Church, VA
Nov 10, 2008 - 11:47am PT
once again...sexual orientation MIGHT be genetically determined, but our sexual behavior is completely our choice...again, as a man, i am genetically predisposed to have sex with, literally, thousands of females during my life...my reproductive system is designed (or has evolved) for it; however, i CHOOSE to be monogamous...that's right, i CHOOSE to ignore sexual drive, desires, instinct, design, evolution, etc. because i believe simply following my apetites (like an animal) would be detrimental not only to me but, more importantly, to society

karl introduces a new point...arranged marriages; now, the concept of romantic love and marrying for love is rather new, beginning during the high middle ages...prior to that time, marriage was considered a more spiritual union...the purpose of marriage was not happiness but a higher level of fulfillment manifested in children...the marriage was believed to be more important than either of the individuals involved

consider: "i married you because i love you" vs. "i love you because i married you"

what's the difference? the first statement is selfish; it's all about the speaker...in the second statement, the speaker subjugates himself/herself to the union

read Brideshead Revisited...hint: it's a HAPPY ending!
dirtbag

climber
Topic Author's Reply - Nov 10, 2008 - 11:52am PT
"once again...sexual orientation MIGHT be genetically determined, but our sexual behavior is completely our choice...again, as a man, i am genetically predisposed to have sex with, literally, thousands of females during my life...my reproductive system is designed (or has evolved) for it; however, i CHOOSE to be monogamous...that's right, i CHOOSE to ignore sexual drive, desires, instinct, design, evolution, etc. because i believe simply following my apetites (like an animal) would be detrimental not only to me but, more importantly, to society "


Why should gay people fight it? There's nothing wrong with being gay.

Interestingly, you keep bringing up monogamy, yet opposing gay marraige discourages long-term monogamy.
Karl Baba

Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
Nov 10, 2008 - 11:54am PT
Bookworm wrote
"prior to that time, marriage was considered a more spiritual union...the purpose of marriage was not happiness but a higher level of fulfillment manifested in children...the marriage was believed to be more important than either of the individuals involved "

This is total BS. (although it's true that the couple was considered unimportant and also their happiness was unimportant.) Arranged marriage was a practical societal means of controlling family wealth and stability by keeping people marrying within their neighbor tribes, castes and economic class. There was no social security so people had to have kids, not because they wanted to share their love, but to promulgate help around the farm or family business. (I'm sure they loved their kids)

Then he writes

"consider: "i married you because i love you" vs. "i love you because i married you"

what's the difference? the first statement is selfish; it's all about the speaker...in the second statement, the speaker subjugates himself/herself to the union "

Huh? The second statement is more of a surrender to destiny that they have no control over. I spent a year in India where nearly all marriages are arranged. A HUGE theme of many, many Indian movies concerns couples that are dying to get married but their families don't approve, are of different castes, or want them to marry different people. This theme is central to thousand of Indian Films.

Are you married Bookworm? How would you feel about your folks setting you up with a bride with the awareness of how their choice would affect their socio-economic status.

Peace

Karl
Blight

Social climber
Nov 10, 2008 - 11:57am PT
"I'm fine with Christianity"

This is one of the key lies of atheism: the pretence that atheists just don't care about religion. It's just a lie, intended to cover up the obvious truth: not only do atheists care about religion, almost all of them are absolutely obssessed by it.

How many of the threads about religion here are started by believers? Almost none. In fact 99% of them are started by atheists to scream, rant and whine about how religion is big and nasty and they just don't like it.

Perhaps you should face facts, although I doubt you have the courage to: saying "Personaly I don't care about all these religions immediately followed by "I'm just sick of the religious right in this country running around bossing everybody into what they believe" is self-contradictory nonsense.

You either care about it - in which case you'll be admitting that religion gets to you and you can't just dismiss it - or you don't, in which case quit bitching and shut your face.
dirtbag

climber
Topic Author's Reply - Nov 10, 2008 - 11:59am PT
Blight, you're still nuts.
Karl Baba

Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
Nov 10, 2008 - 12:18pm PT
Bookworm
"once again...sexual orientation MIGHT be genetically determined, but our sexual behavior is completely our choice...again, as a man, i am genetically predisposed to have sex with, literally, thousands of females during my life...my reproductive system is designed (or has evolved) for it; however, i CHOOSE to be monogamous...that's right, i CHOOSE to ignore sexual drive, "

So you make these choices. How about if somebody else was making those choices for you. Would you resent somebody saying you should be celibate for life because they didn't respect your freedom to choose? Because that's what you are advocating.

Coiler was making a joke but it hasn't always been. Christians were thrown to lions and considered very negative for society at large. That alone should advise caution when religious folks decide to control morality and groups.

And hey, why don't we just legislate that couples only have one child (like china) having too many kids could also be argued as one of the most pressing problems the world has. Why not put it into law?

Peace

Karl
Chaz

Trad climber
So. Cal.
Nov 10, 2008 - 12:28pm PT
"Why not put it into law?"

Get a petition started, Karl.

See how far you get.

Maybe that's "Why not".

HighDesertDJ

Trad climber
Arid-zona
Nov 10, 2008 - 12:37pm PT
Chaz: So your reasoning for legislating against gay marriage is "because we can?"
Chaz

Trad climber
So. Cal.
Nov 10, 2008 - 12:44pm PT
HiDesertDJ,

When was I "...reasoning for legislating against gay marriage"?

Karl Baba

Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
Nov 10, 2008 - 12:49pm PT
Chaz wrote

"Why not put it into law?"

Get a petition started, Karl.

See how far you get.

Maybe that's "Why not".

How about if we get a proposition on the ballot that dramatically raises state income tax for anyone making a million bucks a year and distributes that money directly to everyone making under $100,000 a year. I'm not talking a bit of economic stimulus or Alaska style bonus, but some serious money. Maybe people would be tempted to legislate their own selfish interests at the expense of others?

You see, the minority always needs protection from the majority.

Peace

karl
Buckwheat

Big Wall climber
No. Cal
Nov 10, 2008 - 02:25pm PT
There is ZERO evedence of homosexuality in any species...only humans. Most birds mate for life, show me two male birds humping for life, it does not happen. Just because a dog is so doped up on hormones and wants to hump anything in site including a male doesnt mean it is actually born gay.

Human minds have a tendency to look for pleasure anywhere: (climbing, weird sex, drugs, money, power, politics, etc, etc)

dirtbag

climber
Topic Author's Reply - Nov 10, 2008 - 02:35pm PT
"There is ZERO evedence of homosexuality in any species...only humans. Most birds mate for life, show me two male birds humping for life, it does not happen."




WRONG.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality#Homosexual_behavior_in_animals

(I know it's a wikipedia article, but the sources are sound.)


But so what? It exists in hunans.
DJS

Trad climber
Nov 10, 2008 - 02:45pm PT
Homosexual Behavior Largely Shaped By Genetics And Random Environmental Factors:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/06/080628205430.htm

Genetics Has A Role In Determining Sexual Orientation In Men, Further Evidence:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/11/071107170741.htm
Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
Nov 10, 2008 - 02:47pm PT
I have been an atheist since about age 7, I also had the same problems with the tooth fairy and santa. I am not obsessed with religion, in fact I never think about it at all. How would a non atheist have any idea what an atheist thinks or believes?
You wouldn't, just like I don't know or care what is going through believer's heads. I am not contemptuous of you and your beliefs, I respect everyone's right to believe or not believe.
People once believed the earth was flat, then that women or Indians or Blacks should not be allowed to vote in this country.
Homosexual marriage will someday, maybe 50 years or whatever, be fully legal in all 50 states. Progress against ignorance takes time, the more ignorance to overcome means all the more time.
Chaz

Trad climber
So. Cal.
Nov 10, 2008 - 02:56pm PT
How many times has homosexual marriage been voted on in state initiaves across the country?

How many times has it won?

Any?

I don't see what makes you sure about seeing it legal in all 50 states, Norton.
Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
Nov 10, 2008 - 03:15pm PT
Chaz, I believe gay marriage will someday be legal because I believe in an inevitably more educated human race. The entire history of progress happens because the old ones with intolerant and uneducated beliefs eventually die off and thus can not vote any more. The proof is seen in young people's attitudes nowadays, they are more educated, more used to seeing races and homosexuals mingle in society, and therefore much more tolerant and understanding that diversity IS NORMAL. It takes generations for gradual social changes to take effect, this is no different.
More Air

Big Wall climber
S.L.C.
Nov 10, 2008 - 03:56pm PT
"I'm fine with Christianity"

This is one of the key lies of atheism: the pretence that atheists just don't care about religion. It's just a lie, intended to cover up the obvious truth: not only do atheists care about religion, almost all of them are absolutely obssessed by it.

How many of the threads about religion here are started by believers? Almost none. In fact 99% of them are started by atheists to scream, rant and whine about how religion is big and nasty and they just don't like it.

Perhaps you should face facts, although I doubt you have the courage to: saying "Personaly I don't care about all these religions immediately followed by "I'm just sick of the religious right in this country running around bossing everybody into what they believe" is self-contradictory nonsense.

You either care about it - in which case you'll be admitting that religion gets to you and you can't just dismiss it - or you don't, in which case quit bitching and shut your face.


I agree.

With all of the flaming of Christians on the Taco, that is so common place, where's the tolerance?
Jingy

Social climber
Flatland, Ca
Nov 10, 2008 - 04:05pm PT
There have been some fine points made here, but I still say discrimination is discrimination, plain and simple.

A religious person may say "They are going against Gods word" - Who decided this? Is this a personal bias, or opinion?

I'm still saying that 20 years from now, those of you who are opposing this measure will be pointed at as discriminatory in your views. Again, it was once illegal to marry black and white! Now it is the norm, and it hasn't caused the social upevils previously thought or argued.

coiler

Trad climber
The Rock Monkey Ranch
Nov 10, 2008 - 04:42pm PT
Let me clear something up here. I'm NOT allright with cristianity. Yes, I am an athiest, and I used to say that I'm allright with cristianity. The problem is the Cristians just can't stop shoving their beliefs down my throat! A cristian might be against gay marriage, or abortion, or whatever else. I don't care what they believe. But why are they always so intrested in what I am doing? Pay attention to your own lives people. One church who contributed alot of money to the yes on 8 campaign is the very church who went waliking into the Utah desert because everybody told them that it wasn't OK to have multiple wives. Now those very same people are saying that something different then what they believe should be stopped. Have they learned anything out in that desert? NO. Freedom means you have to let people make their own choices, even if it might not be the one you'd make. Tolerance! PROP 8 is not tolerance, and that's UNAMERICAN. So, to all you people who voted yes on prop 8... If you don't like freedom feel FREE to leave AMERICA. Here, we let people live free, free to marry thier gay lovers or whomever they are "in love" with. Don't like it BOO FREAKITY WHO!
setherbugs

Social climber
Leuven, Belgium
Nov 10, 2008 - 04:43pm PT
since we are using animals behavior to lead us in our decisions, how many animals (besides humans) do you see getting married? zero. i guess the next step is to get rid of marriage all together, why do we need it anyway, it just causes gays "happy people" (where did that term come from anyway), to be grumpy. since gays aren't allowed to join the club, we better get rid of the club.

"Chaz, I believe gay marriage will someday be legal because I believe in an inevitably more educated human race. The entire history of progress happens because the old ones with intolerant and uneducated beliefs eventually die off and thus can not vote any more. The proof is seen in young people's attitudes nowadays, they are more educated, more used to seeing races and homosexuals mingle in society, and therefore much more tolerant and understanding that diversity IS NORMAL. It takes generations for gradual social changes to take effect, this is no different."

so what you are saying is that the public education system (no other gov. subsidized alternative exists) will eventually wear down, condition and assimilate everyone so that they will no longer care who does what, in the name of education. so the problem with everyone who voted "yes" is that they are not edumacated. yeah, that's why! and what do you do to the ones who resist "education"? there are some things that should be tolerated but somewhere you have to draw the lines, this debate, is about defining those line, or for "no" voters, trying to redefine the lines.
setherbugs

Social climber
Leuven, Belgium
Nov 10, 2008 - 04:47pm PT
"If you don't like freedom feel FREE to leave AMERICA. Here, we let people live free"

we also live in a democracy where we vote.
Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
Nov 10, 2008 - 05:08pm PT
Setherbugs,
First: You use only public education in your supposition, you may be interested to know that many millions of us are educated through private institutions in addition to home schooling.
Second: I did NOT say, you did, that everyone who voted for Propositon 8 is not "edumacated", not my words, yours.
You can conclude that if YOU wish, but I don't.
Third: You ask what do we do with the ones who resist education?
I assume they can continue to live in poverty, misery, intolerence and ignorance if they wish, I don't really care.
Fourth: Yes, the NO voters have spoken, so what? And yes I do believe that in time, a long time, those people will die and cease to be a dominant voting block, and progress towards recognition of everyone's committment, regardless of sex, will become the law.
dirtbag

climber
Topic Author's Reply - Nov 10, 2008 - 05:10pm PT
"Do you guys get off on making up these bizarre, twisted, illogical arguments? "

It beats owning up to their own bigotry. Everything I've read from those folks is just crap to cover up their own intolerance.
Karl Baba

Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
Nov 10, 2008 - 05:12pm PT
Interracial marriage Illegal until 1948! Wonder who was against it and why?

Anybody want to stand up now and say the earth is flat and white shouldn't marry asians?

Come on!

Wonder if God hates religious intolerance as much as everybody else? I doubt it, because God is full of love and created all this drama.

But still, religions would bring a lot more people to spirit if they'd quit being the opposite of the Great Being they worship.

Peace

karl
mbb

climber
the slick
Nov 10, 2008 - 05:15pm PT
People think marriage between a man and a woman is sacred. Therefore we should not allow gays to marry.
Hindus think the cow is sacred. Therefore we should not eat meat.
Islam thinks the middle east is sacred. Therefore we should not go there.
Using religious arguments to support Prop 8 is beyond ridiculous or logical. The real reason it passed is because most people in California that voted for it, religious or not, think gay marriage is wrong. Voter referendums regarding moral issues show the true colors of democracy, the majority will always stamp on the rights of the minority if it is not something "good" for them.

The problematic thing is that we don't live in a democracy. There is a little thing called the Constitution that supposedly helps protect the rights of those who may not be able to protect themselves in a democracy (check out the equal protection and privileges and immunities clauses of the 14th amendment, they are pretty cool).

Hey, what if homosexuals all started a religion where they had to be married to get into heaven, then would it be ok?

WBraun

climber
Nov 10, 2008 - 05:50pm PT
I haven't yet read one argument for or against this proposition in this thread that remotely makes any sense.
Jingy

Social climber
Flatland, Ca
Nov 10, 2008 - 09:14pm PT
weschrist - Thank you for the clarification on that.

TRUE!

My comment should be taken as a miscommunication on my part, and only reflects my inability to say what I was thinking. At the time I wrote that I had a minute to get to work.

I am not siding WITH proposition 8, I voted against it. Those who voted for it will be the ones labeled discriminators in the coming years.

Thanks again Wes,


Werner Edit: Not even the fact that it used to be illegal for "Whites" to marry "Blacks"? Now this is common-place, and the world has not come to an end? Restricting marriage to only be strictly "Man & Women" is clearly discriminatory, regardless of the rest of our personal religious beliefs.

Is that a good arguement against the proposition?

Oh, yeah, let's not forget the divisive nature of the proposition either! Just look at this board to see how divided this group is.
sirloin of leisure

Gym climber
X
Nov 10, 2008 - 09:35pm PT
to compare the gay thing to the colored thing,is an insult to all colored folk...
Chaz

Trad climber
So. Cal.
Nov 10, 2008 - 09:52pm PT
Thanks, Werner.

That's one reason why I couldn't vote either way.
Jaybro

Social climber
wuz real!
Nov 10, 2008 - 10:11pm PT
Werner, it's baaaad, sheesh, get with it!
HighDesertDJ

Trad climber
Arid-zona
Nov 10, 2008 - 10:30pm PT
I don't see how preventing the legislation of bigotry is that hard a choice.





(Have the gays all been fixed yet? Didn't think so.)
Largo

Sport climber
Venice, Ca
Nov 10, 2008 - 11:08pm PT
"once again...sexual orientation MIGHT be genetically determined, but our sexual behavior is completely our choice...again, as a man, i am genetically predisposed to have sex with, literally, thousands of females during my life...my reproductive system is designed (or has evolved) for it; however, i CHOOSE to be monogamous...that's right, i CHOOSE to ignore sexual drive, desires, instinct, design, evolution, etc. because i believe simply following my apetites (like an animal) would be detrimental not only to me but, more importantly, to society."

The flaw in this reasoning is that you equate exersizing choice in how many women you sleep with (1 at a time, in your case) with WHO (male or female) you are attracted to in the first place. These are not at all the same things, hombre.

JL
WBraun

climber
Nov 10, 2008 - 11:28pm PT
This whole thread is based on bodily consciousness.

Since we are not this material body thus the aim of this discussion to come to a real understanding is incomplete.

You will all just tax your brains over this either way it goes, (Prop 8 for or against), and never come to a satisfactory conclusion.

Just like the driver of a Toyota Camry who falsely identifies with the vehicle due to material attachment says I'm a Toyota.
mbb

climber
the slick
Nov 11, 2008 - 02:13am PT
Religious people, in determining how you would vote on such a proposition, should you follow what you feel or what your minister/priest/spiritual leader says or should you follow the Golden Rule?
Jaybro

Social climber
wuz real!
Nov 11, 2008 - 02:45am PT
I am neither a Saab, nor a Mongoose, not even a Corolla, sometimes. and nothing in between.
coiler

Trad climber
The Rock Monkey Ranch
Nov 11, 2008 - 08:33am PT
Yes, here we vote... But not about peoples freedoms to choose. It was illegal to ask people to vote on what they think about a moral question (freedom of religion). We're all going to answer that question differently, we have a right to choose who or what we want to marry. This is not or shouldn't ever be up for a popular vote! Again, it's only the cristians who give a crap about whomever I or anyone else marries. In the end, it's none of their business. The bigots will fade into obscurity like all the others before them. Cristianity is suppsed to teach tolerance, I guess they all forgot about Jesus' lessons. It's tough to see through hate though, I feel compasion for the cristians' and their tiny little minds. Someday that religion will grow up!
Chaz

Trad climber
So. Cal.
Nov 11, 2008 - 09:34am PT
Coiler writes:

"This is not or shouldn't ever be up for a popular vote!"

Did you vote on Prop 8?

Or did you leave that one blank, like I did?
WBraun

climber
Nov 11, 2008 - 11:48am PT
"The" Coiler says --- "The bigots will fade into obscurity like all the others before them."

That's what happened to you, with all your bigoted bullsh'it about bolts and what not. You're also classic case of an atheist who has no clue what a real Christian is telling them what they should be doing.

You're an idiot of the highest nature.
Josh

Trad climber
Watsonville, CA
Nov 11, 2008 - 12:24pm PT
"It would be helpful .. if in .. all .. democratic discourse we could resist the temptation to impute bad faith to those who disagree with us." Barack Obama
WoodySt

Trad climber
Riverside
Nov 11, 2008 - 12:27pm PT
If the court had stayed out of it, Prop 8 probably would have failed. I know, for a fact, that some voters voted for it because they wanted to send a message to the court that democracy should decide these issues, and they shouldn't be decided by judicial fiat. I didn't vote one way or the other because I never received my ballot. I applied five days before the deadline and waited until the third when I left for RR.

Gay marriage isn't an issue for me one way or the other. It's an issue I don't care about. I would, however, have voted yes for the reason above.

I do believe that it will become acceptable in the future, and that's fine with me; but I'm fed up with the courts forcing social change in areas that need time for the populace to evolve toward acceptance.
Karl Baba

Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
Nov 11, 2008 - 01:23pm PT
Werner wrote

"This whole thread is based on bodily consciousness.

Since we are not this material body thus the aim of this discussion to come to a real understanding is incomplete.

You will all just tax your brains over this either way it goes, (Prop 8 for or against), and never come to a satisfactory conclusion. "

There's a lot of body consciousness involved in our physical lives my friend. You choose what your eat and who you marry.

And Werner, you got married right, and not to have kids either. So...?

Restricting marriage based on body consciousness is a problem. Have you been a male in all your lives?

Peace

karl
Largo

Sport climber
Venice, Ca
Nov 11, 2008 - 01:26pm PT
"Find a battle more worth fighting (other) than denying that queers love one another and are going to live in sin or not, per their own agenda. Their only mistake is to act like the Find a battle more worth fighting than denying that queers love one another and are going to live in sin or not, per their own agenda. Their only mistake is to act like the surrounding culture is got any control over them at all.

Pretty much the whole shooting match right there.

Barring what the Old Testiment said about homosexuality, can anyone name one credible, current day, studied source that says sexual identity is a choice? Who would choose to be gay, with all the guff they take?

JL

dirtbag

climber
Topic Author's Reply - Nov 11, 2008 - 03:35pm PT
""It would be helpful .. if in .. all .. democratic discourse we could resist the temptation to impute bad faith to those who disagree with us." Barack Obama "


Some issues really do have hateful undercurrents. This is one of them. I see nothing wrong with calling bigotry for what it is.
Jingy

Social climber
Flatland, Ca
Nov 11, 2008 - 03:37pm PT
I say that we all have biases toward the group that we associate with most. This, more often than not, leads to group behaviors and personal behaviors that we (read 'you') don't realize that we (read 'you') can do.

In other words, for any one person, there are any number of biases, none of which can be none until put to the test....

For this I have recentlt heard about a text site that gauges these biases for people in the privacy of their own homes. I have been told that to take a test at this site can be disturbing to the test taker.

Beware!

So, I say GO to the Site: https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/demo/selectatest.html

TAKE THE TEST labelled "Sexuality IAT" (https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/Study?tid=-1), take all distractions away, and take the test.

I think that finding out just how biased you are can be a great learning experience. This knowledge can give insight into your own mind and given this info you can see what it is that you may need help with.

I need to take the religion test, but will have to wait until I have the time.
dirtbag

climber
Topic Author's Reply - Nov 11, 2008 - 03:38pm PT
"If the court had stayed out of it, Prop 8 probably would have failed. I know, for a fact, that some voters voted for it because they wanted to send a message to the court that democracy should decide these issues, and they shouldn't be decided by judicial fiat. I didn't vote one way or the other because I never received my ballot. I applied five days before the deadline and waited until the third when I left for RR.

Gay marriage isn't an issue for me one way or the other. It's an issue I don't care about. I would, however, have voted yes for the reason above. "


Bullsh#t.
smyth

climber
Nov 11, 2008 - 04:34pm PT
Prop 8 passed simply because lots of people are tired of being told they must affirm and celebrate homosexuality, and that if they don't then they're bigots, scum or religious whackos. Most supporters are fine with other people living any way they want, they'd even be willing to allow gay marriage, but they're afraid it won't end there. Why? Things like:

 school textbooks with chapters on famous gays but nothing about George Washington
 mandatory "sensitivity training" at work
 church services interrupted by condom-throwing activists
 parades and rallies with lewd behavior designed specifically to shock and repulse, and chants of "we're here, we're queer, we're in your face"
 TV shows and movies with only hip, cool gay characters and lame, repressed straights
 kindergarten teachers getting their 5-year old students to sign cards pledging not to use anti-gay slurs

The list goes on and on, to the point that eventually people get tired of it, and you end up with ballot initiatives passed in 29 states, with more to come. Simple as that.
smyth

climber
Nov 11, 2008 - 04:53pm PT
Maybe partly true in CA, but these initiatives haven't passed in 29 out of 29 states they've been voted on because of "lies, deception and out of state contributions". Gotta be more to it than that.
dirtbag

climber
Topic Author's Reply - Nov 11, 2008 - 04:58pm PT
Yeah, it was because of fear and hatred, that's why.
smyth

climber
Nov 11, 2008 - 05:45pm PT
Thanks for making my point dirt - "If you don't support gay marriage, its only because you're irrationally afraid and a hater". That's exactly what people are tired of.
HighDesertDJ

Trad climber
Arid-zona
Nov 11, 2008 - 05:53pm PT
Judicial fiat Woody? Really? So tell me....if a court's job isn't to interpret laws then what exactly are they for? You're living in a fantasy land.
TradIsGood

Chalkless climber
the Gunks end of the country
Nov 11, 2008 - 06:06pm PT
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/1/7.html

There you have the federal definition of marriage, husband, wife, spouse, etc.

So here is a little quiz:
 Which president signed this into law?
 What was the vote in the Senate?
 What was the vote in the House?


By the way, there was zero pork in this law. It is one of the shorter bills ever passed and signed into law. Only affects two sections of the United States Code.

Then consider what happens when a state decides to make the definition.

You are married until you cross a border then you aren't depending on what state you end up in.

There is a case in which a man changed gender to a woman and married a man who was fully aware of it . After 10 years "she" died. A child of the husband sued to have the marriage "unrecognized" so that he would be entitled to half of a 2.5 million dollar estate. Kansas and Texas law are not consistent, and who knows what it is elsewhere.


Seems like this issue should be decided at the federal level. It could be set there by a majority passage of a law in Congress and signature by the President (or override a veto), or it could go the route of the 13th Amendment and establish a change in marriage as a right.

But for now, for federal purposes, tax purposes, and even enforcement of issues between states, marriage, husband, and wife have a specific meaning in the entire United States.
Jaybro

Social climber
wuz real!
Nov 11, 2008 - 06:06pm PT
"Gotta be more to it than that."
-Later day saint's with strongarm money, preying on the uncomfortable?
-just a thought.
dirtbag

climber
Topic Author's Reply - Nov 11, 2008 - 06:07pm PT
"Thanks for making my point dirt - "If you don't support gay marriage, its only because you're irrationally afraid and a hater". That's exactly what people are tired of. "

Oh cry me a river. Thanks to Prop 8 and similar laws, gay people are treated as second class citizens.

Don't like the "irrationally afraid and a hater" label? Well, you guys earned it.
tamberly

Trad climber
san diego
Nov 11, 2008 - 06:10pm PT
well... as my dad would say... you're entitled to your opinion "just keep it to yourself" (ITS A JOKE) but all jokes aside... how would you feel being restricted as to whom you could marry or not regardless if its a man or woman.... Feelings are feelings, not bad not good not right or wrong.. I ain't got no tolerance...for people with no tolerance!
TradIsGood

Chalkless climber
the Gunks end of the country
Nov 11, 2008 - 06:11pm PT
How would you feel being restricted to how many you could marry at once?

:-)
Josh

Trad climber
Watsonville, CA
Nov 11, 2008 - 06:17pm PT
I hear you. "I'm OK, you're not OK". I hear that a lot, from both sides. It encourages me that I don't hear it from our President-elect.

52% of the state are bigoted hateful as#@&%es? Or is it that they're just stupid? It's more discouraging to hear that rhetoric coming from my side, than to have to accept and respect that other people feel differently than I do.
More Air

Big Wall climber
S.L.C.
Nov 11, 2008 - 06:26pm PT
weschrist:

Your paragraph on Mormons & Blacks is full of misinformation. I'd discuss it with you but your in much to foul of a mood.
TradIsGood

Chalkless climber
the Gunks end of the country
Nov 11, 2008 - 06:27pm PT
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/1/7.html

There you have the federal definition of marriage, husband, wife, spouse, etc.

So here is a little quiz:
 Which president signed this into law?
 What was the vote in the Senate?
 What was the vote in the House?


Reposted just to get it to the top of a page...
TradIsGood

Chalkless climber
the Gunks end of the country
Nov 11, 2008 - 06:33pm PT
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/28/1738C.html

Here is the other part of the law.


"No State, territory, or possession of the United States, or Indian tribe, shall be required to give effect to any public act, record, or judicial proceeding of any other State, territory, possession, or tribe respecting a relationship between persons of the same sex that is treated as a marriage under the laws of such other State, territory, possession, or tribe, or a right or claim arising from such relationship."
Chaz

Trad climber
So. Cal.
Nov 11, 2008 - 06:43pm PT
I'm going to go out on a limb and say we have Bill Clinton to thank for the Federal definition of marriage (one man, one woman).

The vote in Congress was almost 100% in favor.
Jaybro

Social climber
wuz real!
Nov 11, 2008 - 06:47pm PT
Sounds like TIG's typical, hall monitor shtick. I bet he's so proud...
TradIsGood

Chalkless climber
the Gunks end of the country
Nov 11, 2008 - 07:48pm PT
OK. Chaz has one answer correct.
President Clinton signed the bill into law.

Freekin' neocon Democrat! Yikes! chuckle.. Nice guess Chaz.




Now, did we have a "super-majority"...?

Count in the house...
Senate...

I actually posted enough that you can find the answer with out any more searches... (Hint).
HighDesertDJ

Trad climber
Arid-zona
Nov 11, 2008 - 07:50pm PT
Thomas Jefferson owned slaves. Does that mean all his writings about freedom and democracy are now null and void? Just checking. Elections over guys. Stop playing the "but dems did xxxx" whine shtick.
dirtbag

climber
Topic Author's Reply - Nov 11, 2008 - 07:53pm PT
TIG just likes playing "Do you know what I know?" games to show how smart he thinks he is.
TradIsGood

Chalkless climber
the Gunks end of the country
Nov 11, 2008 - 08:29pm PT
Nah, man.

Just think if your for it, you should do it right.

Being gay married in Cally only is silly.

And I did not know the answers to these questions until this morning.

(I did know that the US Code defined marriage, husband, etc. some time ago.)

So dirtbag, stop deflecting.

You will especially like the name of the act of Congress...

:-)
TradIsGood

Chalkless climber
the Gunks end of the country
Nov 11, 2008 - 09:15pm PT
wc - IANAL, but...

Correct as I see it from a federal standpoint. No same sex filing Federal tax return as married.

Depends on the state whether you could file a state tax return as married. Most states pretty much mirror federal tax returns, so most you would still file separate single returns.

If you are gay married in state A and move to state B, state B either follows federal law, or in some cases (?) its own, but does not recognize state A law, unless state B recognizes married for some particular purpose from any state...

So if you die in state B, then your state A spouse's rights are most likely not the rights he had in state A when he/she married.

Remember that the US Constitution grants certain rights to the federal government. All other rights are states. So, for the most part, family law is a state matter.

Yeah, not very freakin' clear, correct. So even if CA had a supermajority, blah, blah, allowing same sex marriage, no other state would have to recognize it, and most would not!

Social security ... no same sex survivor rights.

und so weiter...


EDIT...
Before 1996, there were virtually no same sex rights anyway!

See the name of the act for a hint.... :-)
del cross

climber
Nov 11, 2008 - 09:49pm PT
True TIG, but you have to start somewhere. Back in 1948(?) the CA Supreme Court tossed out the state law banning mixed-race marriages. First state in the country to do that. Plenty of other states where it was still very illegal, even if you'd been married in CA.

Could there have been a proposition back then to amend the state constitution to reinstitute the ban? Probably not since the court ruled the law unconstitutional because it violated the 14th amemendent of the federal constitution. In the more recent case with same-sex marriage the CA Supreme Court ruled that ban unconstitutional with respect to the California constitution. Different deal. Is same-sex marriage covered by the 14th amendment? I'll bet there are plenty of opinions and I'd also bet the US Supreme Court would say "no".

It will take time.


I remember the Defense of Marriage act. Along with "don't ask don't tell" it was one of many disappointments I had with Clinton. Perhaps political necessity for him.
TradIsGood

Chalkless climber
the Gunks end of the country
Nov 11, 2008 - 10:47pm PT
True, maybe "political necessity",

especially since the initial vote was easily sufficient to override the veto.

Still, I think an objective analysis, is that the status in CA would have been weak even if the ban failed. Now it is part of the CA Constitution. Can Congress pass a law overriding a State Constitution on this issue?

At this point, it looks like the CA court ruling was an excellent example of the unintended consequences principle. What they sealed was the exact opposite of what was intended.

Wyoming was first to pass women's suffrage, but it was only a states' right issue. Others could do as they saw fit, and eventually followed.

The purpose of tossing out the US Code section was to get this thread off its silly "religious" argument, which was headed nowhere and to stimulate some pragmatic thought processes. Hopefully that worked.
HighDesertDJ

Trad climber
Arid-zona
Nov 11, 2008 - 11:01pm PT
This whole issue is so simple its ridiculous. I've posted it before and I'll keep posting it. The issue is simply the WORD "MARRIAGE." That's the ENTIRE issue. A huge majority of Americans support legalized couplehood for homos of equal stature to that of heteros. Everyone just gets all tripped up with the religious connotation of the word marriage. Tell people that marriage of any kind should be left to churches and not governments and simply call all forms of legalized couplehood "civil unions" or "legal couple" or WHATEVER WHO FRIGGIN CARES?!

Problem solved. Everyone is happy and the politicians have an easy out. Why this has to descend into all kinds of craziness is beyond me. It's probably the simplest "hot button" issue on the table.
sirloin of leisure

Gym climber
X
Nov 11, 2008 - 11:07pm PT
wescrist,you poor angry...homo
setherbugs

Social climber
Leuven, Belgium
Nov 14, 2008 - 04:20am PT
"Cristianity is suppsed to teach tolerance, I guess they all forgot about Jesus' lessons. It's tough to see through hate though, I feel compasion for the cristians' and their tiny little minds. Someday that religion will grow up!"

I'm curious to know where you found these lessons about tolerance? Maybe you can look it up for me? Do Christians hate gays, no certainly not, but do they tolerate gay marriage, definitely not, hence their strong opposition.
dirtbag

climber
Topic Author's Reply - Nov 14, 2008 - 11:33am PT
"sex she would tell me stories about young, hot blonds, with big boobs that she had de-virginized."



Please continue... :-)
dirtbag

climber
Topic Author's Reply - Nov 14, 2008 - 12:55pm PT
setherbugs I've seen and heard about many Christians who do not like gays. In my neighborhood there many who hold this view. This goes beyond the punish the "sin" not the "sinner" stuff: they just don't like gays and don't believe they are equal. Some are quite vocal, others less so.

Christians can be just as hateful as anyone else.
WoodySt

Trad climber
Riverside
Nov 14, 2008 - 01:00pm PT
It will be interesting to see if the court gets back into this. Some of you, I'm sure, remember Rose Bird et al.

As I stated previously, the court jumping the gun is, in my opinion, one of the reasons 8 passed. 8 passed by only four percentage points. It would be interesting to have a poll attempting to determine how many voted for 8 to give the court a bloody nose.
dirtbag

climber
Topic Author's Reply - Nov 14, 2008 - 01:11pm PT
Yeah Woody, judicial oversight, checks and balances, what a horrible thing.



HighDesertDJ

Trad climber
Arid-zona
Nov 14, 2008 - 01:13pm PT
Woody-

Did the Supreme Court jump the gun when it integrated schools back in the 60's? Progress is always too fast for some, not fast enough for other. It will always go in fits and starts. If it had been the Alabama or Mississippi courts that integrated schools you would be damn sure that a segregationist ballot measure would have passed overturning it.

This IS democracy. It's always a back and forth struggle between the different powers of the different branches.
nita

climber
chica from chico, I don't claim to be a daisy
Dec 4, 2008 - 02:01am PT
Prop 8, The musical.. funny or die.
http://www.funnyordie.com/videos/c0cf508ff8/prop-8-the-musical-starring-jack-black-john-c-reilly-and-many-more-from-fod-team-jack-black-craig-robinson-john-c-reilly-and-rashida-jones
S.Powers

Social climber
Jtree, now in Alaska
Dec 4, 2008 - 05:53am PT
this is the thread that goes on and on my friends...
dirtbag

climber
Topic Author's Reply - May 27, 2009 - 04:26pm PT
You still suck.

And the answer is no RJ, they get to keep their presents.
bookworm

Social climber
Falls Church, VA
May 27, 2009 - 04:28pm PT
you know, if a repub said that black people "suck", they'd be pilloried as bigots and hate-mongers...why is it ok for libs to make such racist remarks?
dirtbag

climber
Topic Author's Reply - May 27, 2009 - 04:30pm PT
Boo-hoo-hoo...
dirtbag

climber
Topic Author's Reply - May 27, 2009 - 04:33pm PT
A lot of people are angry at the Court about yesterday's decision. I'm not. This is the same court that originally recognized gays' right to marraige a year ago. Given a chance, they would probably uphold it. But by choosing to make this a Constitutional Amendment instead of a statute, the Prop supporters didn't give them much wiggle room.

No, the blame still lies with the 52% who voted for this travesty.
apogee

climber
May 27, 2009 - 04:37pm PT
"you know, if a repub said that black people "suck", they'd be pilloried as bigots and hate-mongers...why is it ok for libs to make such racist remarks?"

bookworm, 'libs' didn't say Prop 8 supporters 'suck', dirtbag did. Let's not descend into a listing of the terms that each political side uses to describe their opponents- the list will be long, and both sides will look like idjuts.
UncleDoug

climber
No. Lake Tahoe, CA
May 27, 2009 - 04:39pm PT
bookworm,

You can't change the color of your skin.
You can change how you look at / think about a given concept.
dirtbag

climber
Topic Author's Reply - May 27, 2009 - 04:40pm PT
Well, they do suck.

And it's preposterous that he would compare that to a racist slur. If his feelings are hurt, it's nothing compared to the hurt experienced by those who the bookworms of the state inflicted on other people who just want a chance to live and love and not be hated.

So cry me a river, bookworm. Hatred won out yesterday. You should be jumping for joy.
GDavis

Trad climber
May 27, 2009 - 04:46pm PT
Really? Its a 'travesty'?

Its amazing that this is being painted as some huge social and civil tragedy. Its amazing, but not surprising. By and large its a reason for bleeding-hearts to stand on pedestals and make grand speeches and cry out for the poor, helpless gay community, and somehow you, the non-victim, can share in the victim mentality.


Therein lies the rub, you see. Its a race to be a victim. Go ahead, honestly, and have the parades and the emotional oscars acceptance speeches and the whole hooplah. Its childish and its attention mongering.

I honestly, HONESTLY, deep down to the center of my being, could care less about the issue. I choose not to vote or to defend one ISSUE (not those defending/supporting, but the ISSUE - an argumentative fact most people are unable to seperate) on it because its being so blown out of proportion by everyone else little needs be said. Why are there not crying hippies in the streets of how many other DOZENS of states that do not legalize gay marriage? Because its not about gay marriage, its about being the victim, and being the victim feels good.

I can see prop 8 being overturned and gay marriage being legalized here soon, sure, why not? And with it, by the way, a precedent for the courts not to uphold and enforce the laws but rather to create them in opposition to the majority public.

More than anything I just want this whole retarded (yes, PC mongers, I said RETARDED) issue to GO AWAY. Maybe the same crazed bearded liberals could use this same fire and intensity to something useful, like a steady job or fixing our TERRIBLE school system in california, but no, not likely to happen. Not until they can be a victim and paint someone a homophobe/racist/sexist will they get behind ANY issue.

And THAT, my friends, is the REST of the story.
GDavis

Trad climber
May 27, 2009 - 04:47pm PT
"bookworm, 'libs' didn't say Prop 8 supporters 'suck', dirtbag did. Let's not descend into a listing of the terms that each political side uses to describe their opponents- the list will be long, and both sides will look like idjuts. "


No, they say much worse than that. Supporters of prop 8 have been some of the most hated people in California by the far left and the media. Don't believe me? Ask a girl I went to high school with. A bunch of retards tried to take her crown away for expressing her opinion.

apogee

climber
May 27, 2009 - 04:54pm PT
GD, it is easy to argue thatboth sides of the Prop 8 argument are guilty of using negativity in the very nature of their positions, &/or in their tactics to persuade their point. And the result: negativity, divisiveness, and hatred. Point made.
dirtbag

climber
Topic Author's Reply - May 27, 2009 - 04:57pm PT
Nice rant Gd.

I just got an e-mail from a friend. He wants to leave, CA, feels like people like you, like his family, like most of his old friends hate him, will never accept him, would never want to see him happy if that means marrying the person he loves.

You'll never understand that GDavis.

So go ahead and rant your little heart our about all the little PC hippies if it makes you feel like your hatred, your God, your twisted reasoning is somehow justified.

You know what though? Your side is going to lose eventually.

Edit: it IS a travesty.

WBraun

climber
May 27, 2009 - 05:01pm PT
"whoever voted yes on prop 8 is a nosy busybody who is probably insecure about their own sexuality."

Then why is everyone in this thread so nosy?
Binks

Social climber
May 27, 2009 - 05:03pm PT
This kind of creeps me out in an Orwellian sort of way:

http://www.eightmaps.com/

GDavis

Trad climber
May 27, 2009 - 05:04pm PT
What 'side'?

I don't have one on this issue. I am just calling shots like I see 'em. Again, I DID NOT VOTE for this issue, and I will not. I honestly could care less where the vote swings. What I do see is a ton of bullsh!t from one side making it about victims and hate. PUH-LEEZ!!!

By the way

"He wants to leave, CA, feels like people like you, like his family, like most of his old friends hate him, will never accept him, would never want to see him happy if that means marrying the person he loves........
...if it makes you feel like your hatred, your God, your twisted reasoning is somehow justified. "


Great job there. Label me a homophobe. Diabolical. This is EXACTLY what I was talking about. You won't focus on issues, you name-call and focus on words like hate and rights and happiness.... your gay friend can get married today, buddy. lol. He can drive to another state and get married there, nothing is stopping him. OR, he can wait a few months and get married here. You act like the supporters of prop 8 want to keep him locked in a tower until prince valiant (which you think is YOU) comes to save him.


I hope he does get married and has a good life. Why not? But he doesn't need you and your ilk to soak up all the attention of standing in front of him and taking imaginary bullets. Stop making it about you buddy.
GDavis

Trad climber
May 27, 2009 - 05:07pm PT
"Me, a neocon Republican, am in favor of gay people having exactly the same rights as heterosexual married couples. Child support, alimony, health decisions, tax rates, etc, but why not invent a word that doesn't insult millions of others."

I don't think the word INSULTS people. Makes them feel uncomfortable, sure. How they interpret things is beyond our governments control though.

GDavis

Trad climber
May 27, 2009 - 05:08pm PT
"whoever voted yes on prop 8 is a nosy busybody who is probably insecure about their own sexuality"

So what, are they gay or homophobes??? make up your mind people!!! Liberals need to focus on ONE label they can put people on, this will just confuse everyone.