How far will Prop 8 supporters set back gay marriage?

[Guynemer]

I know. I thought they reproduced via asexual meiosis.

[Lefty Scaevola]

It has not worked out so well. Check out Canada's population density (lack thereof). Obviously, they are not doing it right.

[Dinner]

Originally posted by Zkribbler


Finally someone spotted that error.

BTW: The Calif. Supreme Court has set Monday as the deadline for the opposition papers to the suit to overturn Prop. 8. The Court is moving with unusual speed.

If I understand correctly the opponents are claiming that prop 8 amounts to a revision of the constitution (which must be passed through the state legislature) instead of just being an amendment (which can be passed via a proposition). This actually gives me hope that it may be over turned because the ban on gay marriage was previously over turned because it violated the equal protection clause in the state constitution.

[Darius871]

Originally posted by Asher
I've bagged a female and I didn't even want it. That's how easy it is.

How exactly did this transpire?

Also, what's her number?

[Dinner]

Originally posted by Naked Gents Rut
I bet Asher gets a lot more attention from women than you do.

Naw. I've seen his photos. He needs to lose weight.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Darius871


How exactly did this transpire?

Also, what's her number?

I don't know her number. I never knew her number.

Happened at a high school party. Much booze. She was pretty hot for a feeeeemale also.

[Dinner]

Does that mean she was flat chested with a boyish look?

[Asher]

Originally posted by Oerdin
Does that mean she was flat chested with a boyish look?

While I admit you have bigger breasts, I'd guesstimate she was at least a c-cup. They were more than big enough for me...but I'm not a boob man.

[Naked Gents Rut]

Interesting op-ed in the LA Times today...

Most Americans insist that they want the word "marriage" to continue to mean a long-term, opposite-sex union, as it has in the Judeo-Christian world for nearly two millenniums. To put this issue into better perspective, imagine that English were more like German and that the word marriage had a lot more syllables: longtermoppositesexunion. Should same-sex couples wed under that label? I say no -- and that gay activists have been fighting the wrong battle.

The real challenge is to have the state begin to recognize the full range of healthy, non-exploitative, romantic partnerships that actually exist among human beings. Gays are correct in expressing outrage over the fact that official recognition, the power to make health decisions, inheritance rights and tax benefits, have long been granted to only one kind of committed partnership in the United States. But wanting their own committed relationships to be shoe-horned into an old institution makes little sense, especially given the poor, almost pathetic performance of that institution in recent decades. Half of first marriages fail in the U.S., after all, as do nearly two-thirds of second marriages. Is that really a club you want to join?



Even if marriage were redefined to accommodate same-sex couples in California, would any real benefits ensue? The state's current domestic partnership law -- wait, I mean its longtermsamesexunion law -- does everything a state can do for a romantic same-sex couple, creating complete parity between gay and straight couples. Gay "marriage" adds nothing except the label, still leaving those all-important federal rights -- accelerated immigration rights, Social Security and federal tax benefits, veterans benefits and many others -- completely inaccessible.

Let's fight a larger battle, namely to have government catch up to human behavior. That means recognizing the legitimacy of a wide range of consensual, non-exploitative romantic partnerships, each of which should probably have its own distinct label.

http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/opinion/la-oe-epstein4-2008dec04,0,2277867.story?track=rss

Polygamy

[Zkribbler]

That's wrong.

For example, Prop. 13, which became a constitutional provision, permits married couples to transfer property between themselves without it being reassessed. The same is not true for civil unions.

There are literally thousands of legal benefits and privileges which flow to married couples. While blanket legislation has attempted to permit persons in civil unions to have these same benefits and privileges, loopholes still exist.

Next time you're on jury duty, see if you aren't asked about your spouse but not about your civil union partner.

[Naked Gents Rut]

The more important point is that polygamy is a far more common and accepted practice worldwide than gay marriage is. It's bigotry to deny Mormons the right to engage in their version of marriage while allowing their enemies in the gay community the right to engage in their version of marriage.

[MrFun]

In many states in United States, a peson can still legally get fired for being gay or lesbian. This is just one example why it's ridiculous to say that Mormons are still a minority group that suffers from legally-sanctioned discrimination.

Mormons do not suffer from such lack of protection, as they are protected under the freedom of religion found in our Bill of Rights.

[DinoDoc]

Why are gay activists protesting the Mormon church anyway? They weren't even the largest denomination that supported the ban. When will we see protests of black churches and the like pursued with equal vigor.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by MrFun
Mormons do not suffer from such lack of protection, as they are protected under the freedom of religion found in our Bill of Rights.

Actually the responses in this thread should tell you that Mormons still suffer from bigotry from the populace at large. Pro-gay marriage groups are trying to play into that well of hatred with thier campaign against thier church.

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
Why are gay activists protesting the Mormon church anyway? They weren't even the largest denomination that supported the ban. When will we see protests of black churches and the like pursued with equal vigor.

You're very wrong. The overwhelming financial backing for Prop 8 was from the Mormons. Black churches had very little to do with organizing/supporting the proposition efforts.

And black voters were not the deciding factor in the passage of the proposition, either. This is just an attempt to stir up animosity between gays and blacks where none need be.