Cali voting on same sex marriage(again)

[Tobra]

This should be interesting

http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/07/16/same.sex.marriages/index.html

[mikester]

I am not sure how I will vote on this.

On the one hand - I don't think I could care less if homosexuals want to be 'married.'

On the other hand I do not think any marriage - not even my own - should be recognized as anything more than a contract between my wife and I as a 'domestic partnership.'

The idea of a 'Marriage' should be governed by whatever religion you are a member of. Of course this brings to bear the question of polygamy and other generally unacceptable forms of Marriage...

I won't vote 'No' but it is possible that I will abstain from voting on it at all.

Also - generally speaking I don't think its interesting at all.

[kstar]

I guess the question is: will the results of the vote have meaning and carry weight?

[DARISC]

I've got a name for a guy that marries a guy; well, actually a number of them - minister, priest, rabbi. JP....

[island911]

Originally Posted by kstarnes

I guess the question is: will the results of the vote have meaning and carry weight?

For a while, I suspect.

[sammyg2]

California voted against gay marriage before and we will do it again. There are allot of Californians who don't live in Hollyweird or san francisco.

This isn't about equal rights. Everyone already has the same right, to marry a person of the opposite sex.
Gays want more rights and the rights they are demanding come with a price tag $$$$$$.
They want money. Pure and simple, this is about them trying to get more money from the government and business in the way of additional benefits and tax credits.

I don't like the idea of my tax money being used to reward someone because they have a psychological disorder.

[kstar]

Originally Posted by sammyg2

. . . snip . . .

I don't like the idea of my tax money being used to reward someone because they have a psychological disorder.

Now there's a powerful thread catalyst!

[vash]

let them get married. why should they be able to stay single and happy?

[gassy]

It's about equal rights. Simple as that.

[widebody911]

Originally Posted by sammyg2

They want money. Pure and simple, this is about them trying to get more money from the government and business in the way of additional benefits and tax credits.

Not being married - or gay - could someone explain what the benefits would be? Apart from better food/wardrobe/grooming/interior decorating, that is...

[Shaun @ Tru6]

Originally Posted by sammyg2

California voted against gay marriage before and we will do it again. There are allot of Californians who don't live in Hollyweird or san francisco.

This isn't about equal rights. Everyone already has the same right, to marry a person of the opposite sex.
Gays want more rights and the rights they are demanding come with a price tag $$$$$$.
They want money. Pure and simple, this is about them trying to get more money from the government and business in the way of additional benefits and tax credits.

I don't like the idea of my tax money being used to reward someone because they have a psychological disorder.

We reward churches with tax-free status and belief in organized religion is a psychological disorder.

[cairns]

"We reward churches with tax-free status and belief in organized religion is a psychological disorder."


I don't consider either a psychological disorder but also don't think either should get a tax break.

[TheMentat]

Originally Posted by Shaun 84 Targa

We reward churches with tax-free status and belief in organized religion is a psychological disorder.

yeah! what a hypocrite!

[kang]

Originally Posted by sammyg2

California voted against gay marriage before and we will do it again. There are allot of Californians who don't live in Hollyweird or san francisco.

This isn't about equal rights. Everyone already has the same right, to marry a person of the opposite sex.
Gays want more rights and the rights they are demanding come with a price tag $$$$$$.
They want money. Pure and simple, this is about them trying to get more money from the government and business in the way of additional benefits and tax credits.

I don't like the idea of my tax money being used to reward someone because they have a psychological disorder.

Actually, it is about equal rights. You can marry the person you choose to, but they cannot.

The law basically states “heterosexuals can marry the person of their choice, but homosexuals cannot.” That’s really no different than saying “blacks can marry the person of their choice, but whites cannot” or “Mexicans can marry the person of their choice, but Americans cannot.” Of these three examples, one is discrimination based on sexual orientation, one is discrimination based on race and one is discrimination based on nationality. They are all wrong.

Also, since when is being gay a psychological disorder? It’s been around for eons, and is also present in the animal kingdom. Perhaps it’s your opinion that it is a disorder, but tell the truth. You are against gay marriage because the old testament says it’s wrong and/or it just seems too gross for you to handle. Now answer this: how is someone else’s choice for a spouse your (or the governments) business?

[sjf911]

Originally Posted by vash

let them get married. why should they be able to stay single and happy?

1+

Unfortunately, homosexuality does not appear to be a "choice" for most.

http://www.newscientist.com/channel/sex/dn14146-gays-brains-structured-like-those-of-the-opposite-sex.html

[Shaun @ Tru6]

Originally Posted by sjf911

1+

Unfortunately, homosexuality does not appear to be a "choice" for most.

Going to Church is a choice. Why do I have to subsidize Sammy's personal beliefs?

[Moses]

Gay "marriage" is about estate planning, establishing credit, family rights in medical affairs, etc. It's the right thing to do. Period.

[RPKESQ]

Oh no!
You’re not trying to present the truth as science has evidence for it again?
Don't you know the same groups of people who accept every other scientific increase in knowledge that provides these same people with technology are too hypocritical to accept any knowledge that will contradicts their deep seated religious/cultural bigotry.

Just like the Taliban.

My favorite bit is that California marriage laws allow for the ceremony to be conducted by anyone. All you have to do is say you are a: holy man, shaman, witchdoctor, witch, druid, etc. and you are allowed to perform a legal binding marriage. Look it up.
Yes, keeping gays out clearly shows the law in CA is ALL about the sanctity of marriage.

[island911]

Originally Posted by kang

Actually, it is about equal rights. You can marry the person you choose to, but they cannot.

The law basically states “heterosexuals can marry the person of their choice, but homosexuals cannot.” That’s really no different than saying “blacks can marry the person of their choice, but whites cannot”...

So what about Bisexuals? Why can't they marry one of each?!? That’s really no different than saying “blacks can marry the person of their choice, but whites cannot”.

And then... What if one of those Bisexuals within the trio wants multiple partners? of course they should be allowed to marry outside of the first marriage.


wait. wait, wait... what IF, marriage is not just about who you want to fuch?

[Moses]

Originally Posted by island911

So what about Bisexuals? Why can't they marry one of each?!?

Because polygamy is not legal...yet.