California High Court Upholds Marriage Ban

Smallc · June 2, 2009

Homosexuals should receive all the rights and privileges that are afforded to married couples. But of course, there can be no such thing as so-called same-sex marriage.

:huh: :blink: :rolleyes:

BubberMiley · June 2, 2009

...supporters are determined to have homosexual relationships be recognized as important to society as heterosexual ones, which simply isn't the case, because they aren't.

Just so you know, this is where your contempt shines through. Since we're bringing weed into the subject, laws based on nothing more than contempt for others are abuses of power.

sharkman · June 2, 2009

You absolutely refuse to discuss the issue of decriminalization in the decriminalization thread, and then you can't help but bring it up in every other thread I show up in.

You don't seem to follow, I'm simply making a list of issues. Including the decriminalization of pot doesn't constitute a discussion.

Have you got anything else? My listing of rights we don't have seems to have befuddled you, now you're simply nipping around the edges.

BubberMiley · June 2, 2009

My listing of rights we don't have seems to have befuddled you, now you're simply nipping around the edges.

Befuddled? Hardly. You just listed off a list of things that are either (A) bad laws (like drug laws) or ( laws protecting people from other people's (or animals') behaviour. You can't bring your pet into certain places because their peeing everywhere impinges on others' rights to a pee-free existence, etc. etc. A person's right to swing their fist should always stop before someone else's face.

Gay marriage (like pot smoking, again) does nothing to hurt other people. You may say it does---that homosexual marriage devalues heterosexual marriage. But that is only the case if you look down on homosexuality, and if that is the case, I don't blame the homosexuals getting married. I consider that to be more your fault (and problem) than theirs.

Edited June 2, 2009 by BubberMiley

sharkman · June 2, 2009

Then you agree with me completely.

GTL · June 2, 2009

I don't think government should recognize marriage at all.

Drop all 1300 tax benefits, cuts, etc.

At that point marriage and civil union, just become words.

BubberMiley · June 2, 2009

Then you agree with me completely.

If you agree that gay marriage and pot smoking doesn't affect you and so it is therefore none of your business. Yes. I'm glad you're coming around, like a true conservative, to the idea of personal independence and autonomy.

sharkman · June 2, 2009

Look folks, we have laws and regulations that keep people from all kinds of rights and no one says boo about it. You can't legally consume booze until you reach an age set by some old fart. People's rights are being trampled here, and no one is concerned about it. Drugs are illegal. Shouldn't what a person does with their own body be their own business? You can't operate a car until you are 16, yet many are quite capable before then, how is that fair to the capable?
You can't bring a pet into a public place unless it's a seeing eye dog and I know many pet owners feel like criminals when they get asked to leave. You can't marry more than one person at a time, again, what business is it of the government what goes on in a person's home? They've made it illegal to smoke outside in some places let alone indoor smoking, and smokers make up a far larger minority than gays, and people treat them like idiots if they dare light up. They are not criminals, yet they are treated like such and aren't allowed to consume their favorite substance in most places. This is just not fair for them, they are not second class citizens! Even in office buildings, they have to leave the building to smoke, how much would it cost to have a vent separate from the air system installed to suck the smoke out of designated smoke rooms. But no, get thee out of the building!

And how about spanking. People are beating their kids, and the rights of children are being trampled just because of some old fashioned, "We've always done it that way'" mentality, and kids suffer permanent damage because of it. How can this be allowed? Kids are not being properly protected from such abuse, their rights meaning nothing to the courts. And what of speeding? Jurisdictions that simply use tickets as a cash cow when vehicles today are 10 times safer than they ever were but still the same slow 80, 90 or 100km limits. I have a right to select a safe speed for my journey.

I could go on, but the point is easy to see, rights are given and taken in our society like candy. Gays are reacting like the end of the world has come just because they can't have the m word. It's quite ridiculous and a drain on public good will. They need to grow up and realize they are no longer second class citizens.

The point is, everyone has to live within guidelines set out by the government, only we realize we can't get everything we want sometimes and there are considerations of society as a whole that have to be weighed. That's life.

Well, it would be more accurate to describe my thoughts on the matter as above. Gay unions, by definition, are not the same as marriage.

BubberMiley · June 3, 2009

So, without being insulting to homosexuals, can you explain how what their relationships are called is any of your business?

bush_cheney2004 · June 3, 2009

So, without being insulting to homosexuals, can you explain how what their relationships are called is any of your business?

Don't look now, but I think they want to make it our business as a civil rights matter. That is the whole point.

GostHacked · June 3, 2009

Don't look now, but I think they want to make it our business as a civil rights matter. That is the whole point.

Yeah .. screw civil rights. Right in the ass.

bush_cheney2004 · June 3, 2009

Yeah .. screw civil rights. Right in the ass.

Irrelevant....as both heterosexuals and homosexuals engage in such behaviors. :lol:

Oleg Bach · June 3, 2009

Yeah .. screw civil rights. Right in the ass.

Does this mean you like me - I hope not! Benny was boring me to smitherenes.... BC - this Californian thing.........It was actually a ruling that affirms that Sex is between a man and a woman - and that other stuff is not SEX.....odd - up here in Canada some company did a survey on teenagers and their sexual educational needs - 20 said they had anal intercourse - and wondered if it was sex - firstly - back in my day - were were not interested in that opening to the digestive track - just goes to show you that this propogation of gayness - has rubbed off on our youth --------------------------what - you want me to put WHAT in my mouth? - exactly - the youth have to be given the idea - they don't come up with the off the wall stuff on their own - what boy back in 1859 had a fantacy about screwing his girl in the ass - It is suggested behaviour.

bush_cheney2004 · June 3, 2009

Does this mean you like me - I hope not! Benny was boring me to smitherenes.... BC - this Californian thing.........It was actually a ruling that affirms that Sex is between a man and a woman - and that other stuff is not SEX.....

It's not about sex at all, but a lot of people can't get past that. Many people are married, but they haven't had sex for a very long time! :lol:

That's why I prefer to use the term "Same Gender Marriage".

When can I marry my sister!

Oleg Bach · June 3, 2009

It's not about sex at all, but a lot of people can't get past that. Many people are married, but they haven't had sex for a very long time!
That's why I prefer to use the term "Same Gender Marriage".

When can I marry my sister!

Don't want to hear about the sister thing...or the no-sex marriage....speaking of sex - visiting the X-never got married girl who had my kids - gotta go - marriage can destroy a sex life - that's why after 27 years I get lucky - besides - why would I marry her? I can't stand her.......coming dear - have to go now - go play with benny for a while - big daddy is now unavailable - enjoy your day - and make sure Obama - does not suck up to the Saudis to much - they might take you for granted and knock over some more buildings - over and out.

geoffrey · June 3, 2009

I don't think government should recognize marriage at all.
Drop all 1300 tax benefits, cuts, etc.

At that point marriage and civil union, just become words.

This guy has it perfectly. Why should the government support or recognize any arrangement? No point. Let people organize as they wish.

bush_cheney2004 · June 3, 2009

This guy has it perfectly. Why should the government support or recognize any arrangement? No point. Let people organize as they wish.

Because the state has determined it has a public interest in contract law, public and private.

Oleg Bach · June 3, 2009

Because the state has determined it has a public interest in contract law, public and private.

10 guys sitting at a shinny table does not consitute a state - nor does it show any real or worth while determination to accomplish anything for the common good. Contract law is fine if it is NOT an unconscionable arragement - contracts are a two way street called mutual co-operation and benefit - If it is less than that it should be called a con - not a con - tract>

GostHacked · June 3, 2009

Irrelevant....as both heterosexuals and homosexuals engage in such behaviors.

Well the focus was on civil rights. Your view is assenine.

Oleg Bach · June 3, 2009

Well the focus was on civil rights. Your view is assenine.

This is taking civil rights to the extreme - defying reality is not a right - it's a wrong - I believe I will declare myself a chair - and demand rights for all chairs - all people sitting on them from now on will have to always wear a fresh pair of underware. Or - I demand to be a woman...or it is my right to - get a huge handout from the bank because rich people have money and I do not! It is not a right that I declare myself a brain surgeon and demand a job as such...It is not a right for me to demand to be something that I am not - It is not a right after 50 thousand years to suddenly demand that I take the role of a male in marrigage if I am a woman - It is a right to have fair treatment under the law with out undermining reality it self.

bush_cheney2004 · June 4, 2009

Well the focus was on civil rights. Your view is assenine.

You are the one who brought us ass...not I.

New Hampshire has joined the club, giving Canada more of the validation it seeks.

http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2009/06/03/n...iage060309.html

BubberMiley · June 4, 2009

There's no evidence that Canada is "seeking validation." The only ones I see seeking validation are Americans, particularly ones who spend all their time on this board.

Canada, on the contrary, has been a leader on this issue, and one by one each state is falling in line.

bush_cheney2004 · June 4, 2009

There's no evidence that Canada is "seeking validation." The only ones I see seeking validation are Americans, particularly ones who spend all their time on this board.
Canada, on the contrary, has been a leader on this issue, and one by one each state is falling in line.

See, this is exactly what I mean. Gotcha! :lol:

Smallc · June 4, 2009

As was said above, it appears that we are not the ones seeking validation. I would be as sure that what we did was right if no one else was doing it.

GostHacked · June 4, 2009

You are the one who brought us ass...not I.
New Hampshire has joined the club, giving Canada more of the validation it seeks.

http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2009/06/03/n...iage060309.html

And we should just take all the progress in civil rights away from everyone. This is the point you chose to miss.