Posts: 8299 |
Scottish Dubliner Posted Fri 14 Nov, 2008 6:13 PM |
So the californians have voted to dis-allow same sex marriages ??
Is it not their own State and can they not do what they like ??
Or is it only constitutional when your beliefs are out weighed by the beliefs of a minority ??
Now... these are only questions, I don't know enough about it as I am only getting second hand news in Ireland but I find it a bit weird. It reminds me of when the extreme right guy got in in France or Italy or somewhere, All the lefties and Liberals over Europe were in uproar "You can't do that" was the cry, but hang on a minute is that not what a democracy is, The people vote the people have spoken.
Dubz
|
|
|
Posts: 3258 |
mili Posted Fri 14 Nov, 2008 6:17 PM |
| I find this a bit sad. First they allow the same-sex marriages and then they take it away, consistancy would be better, eh? |
|
|
Posts: 8299 |
Scottish Dubliner Posted Fri 14 Nov, 2008 6:23 PM |
As far as I can tell the Right and the Conservatives were never happy that it had been passd in the first place, they then got together and proposed an ammendment to the constitution that would take it away again, which was passed by the voters.
I do agree that to snatch it back out from under the gay community after allowing it to be passed originally is not very fair (or consistant)
Dubz |
|
|
Posts: 1006 |
Aletways Posted Fri 14 Nov, 2008 6:41 PM |
| I don't think that basic rights (equality, in this case) should be submited to vote. They just should be officially recognized and the government should guarantee that people can exercize them. And that's it! |
|
|
Posts: 7519 |
Nikki Posted Fri 14 Nov, 2008 6:51 PM |
This is very sad. Did they ever figure out what they are going to do with the gay people who got married during the time it was allowed in California? Are they going to say "your marriage isn't legit anymore," or are they going to recognize those couples as still married and from now on just not let other gay couples to get married?
The whole thing is ridiculous and I can't believe that that many people voted to take these people's rights away. It's cruel. How is it hurting anybody? |
|
|
Posts: 8299 |
Scottish Dubliner Posted Fri 14 Nov, 2008 7:02 PM |
Nikki wrote: This is very sad. Did they ever figure out what they are going to do with the gay people who got married during the time it was allowed in California? Are they going to say "your marriage isn't legit anymore," or are they going to recognize those couples as still married and from now on just not let other gay couples to get married?
This raises a very good point which could end up running around in circles, The Law is basically based on statutes and precedents...I'm guessing if the people already married get to keep their marriage then the people waiting to marry will go to court, If they annul these marriages they'll go to court and contest the ruleing. Whatever way they run with this it's gonna cause untold problems in the courts.
Whether it hurts anyone or not is immaterial, the people of California have voted,(wrongly in my opinion) ,and as it's a democracy I suppose the State has to abide by the decision.
Dubz
|
|
|
Posts: 8142 |
minnmess Posted Fri 14 Nov, 2008 7:06 PM |
last i heard, they were still deciding whether or not all those people that were previously married were going to be forced into annullment.
Stupid.
and it passed by what...2%?
it's ridiculous.
And i saw last night that you can be fired in 31 states for being gay. WHAT? |
|
|
Posts: 10115 |
ricv64 Posted Fri 14 Nov, 2008 7:13 PM |
| This is the 2nd time that's been up to the voters actually . If you look at maps of where people voted in the state you can see that only a few areas voted a no . Lots of reasons why it passed , from a community that it would benefit dropping the ball to alot of outside money roaring in to influence the voters . Last time it was more of a slam dunk , this time it was close . I give it a few more years and it'll get changed . |
|
|
Posts: 7519 |
Nikki Posted Fri 14 Nov, 2008 7:13 PM |
minnmess wrote:
And i saw last night that you can be fired in 31 states for being gay. WHAT?
NO! I don't think so. Where did you hear this? It's discrimination. If it's true, I had no idea about this and am sickened.
Dubz, yes...the people have voted, but I agree with Ale that when it comes to BASIC rights like equality, that shouldn't be up for a vote. If it says "all men are created equal"...that's it. Period. We are all equal and should have the same rights.
|
|
|
Posts: 8142 |
minnmess Posted Fri 14 Nov, 2008 7:19 PM |
Nikki wrote: minnmess wrote:
And i saw last night that you can be fired in 31 states for being gay. WHAT?
NO! I don't think so. Where did you hear this? It's discrimination. If it's true, I had no idea about this and am sickened.
It was on a video I saw about national protests that are being held...tomorrow I think?
it had facts scrolling across the screen. That was one of them. It was on youtube. Yes, i know, not the greatest source, could be wrong. I assume it is based on something, however. I hope it is wrong.
"There's no place for the state in the bedrooms of the nation" -Pierre Trudeau. |
|
|
Posts: 10115 |
ricv64 Posted Fri 14 Nov, 2008 7:23 PM |
"There's no place for the state in the bedrooms of the nation" -Pierre Trudeau. [/quote]
First I have the church trying to influence my state and now Canadians ? This is too much |
|
|
Posts: 8142 |
minnmess Posted Fri 14 Nov, 2008 7:25 PM |
ricv64 wrote:
"There's no place for the state in the bedrooms of the nation" -Pierre Trudeau.
First I have the church trying to influence my state and now Canadians ? This is too much [/quote]
Oh, ive been trying to influence you since day 1. This isnt new! |
|
|
Posts: 8299 |
Scottish Dubliner Posted Fri 14 Nov, 2008 7:30 PM |
Nikki wrote:
Dubz, yes...the people have voted, but I agree with Ale that when it comes to BASIC rights like equality, that shouldn't be up for a vote. If it says "all men are created equal"...that's it. Period. We are all equal and should have the same rights.
But some people would argue that statement "all men are created equal" isn't true as a gay man is not a proper man. And even though I do agree with you that everyone should have the same basic rights regardless of any colour creed sexuality age or any other criteria. Where do we draw the line? There is already a problem with affirmative action.
for example- kids are extremely impressionable and while I have no problem with telling them that there is nothing wrong with having two Dads or two Moms, should it be encouraged or promoted ?
The problem I have with a certain area of the gay community is that it's got nothing to do with genetics or hormones but it's a lifestyle choice, it's attention seeking, it's being different for the sake of it, this generally happens with men more than women, but I mean seriously can a man not be in love with another man without developing effeminate tendancies, like a squeeky voice or the other thing were Gay men think it's pefectly ok to be extremely crude and disgusting about sex and in particular women's genitalia ?? If a straight man talks like this he's just a dirty , filthy disgusting pervert but because the perpretrator is gay it's ok, why because he's not a threat, If anyone(regardless of sexuality, colour or creed) speaks this way in frnt of Dee they are liable to a quick warning followed by a belt to the mouth if it persists.
Dubz
|
|
|
Posts: 8299 |
Scottish Dubliner Posted Fri 14 Nov, 2008 7:33 PM |
minnmess wrote:
"There's no place for the state in the bedrooms of the nation" -Pierre Trudeau.
What if you are getting up to highly illegal stuff in your bedroom, involving drugs or abuse for example ??
Dubz |
|
|
Posts: 8142 |
minnmess Posted Fri 14 Nov, 2008 7:37 PM |
Scottish Dubliner wrote: minnmess wrote:
"There's no place for the state in the bedrooms of the nation" -Pierre Trudeau.
What if you are getting up to highly illegal stuff in your bedroom, involving drugs or abuse for example ??
Dubz
Not the context in which it was said. |
|
|
