California Proposition Eight - Ban on Same-Sex Marriage

Status
Not open for further replies.
Becareful folks---remember that religious discussion isn't allowed.
 
Maria said:
Okay, since you posted it to here where I highlighted a bold above - I would like to do the same about gay. " If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable ( abnominable ). They must be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads." Lev. 20:13 NIV. -- " Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion. " Romans 1: 24-27 NIV
Click to expand...

Is the bible verus reason why they obey to sentence the people to death over homosexuality in Islam countries?
 
Byrdie714 said:
Becareful folks---remember that religious discussion isn't allowed.
Click to expand...

Yes, I am aware. I won't do it after my last post since Shel posted hers from the F/B and I would like to show mine as well -- without discussin' any further.
 
Liebling:-))) said:
Is the bible verus reason why they obey to sentence the people to death over homosexuality in Islam countries?
Click to expand...

I am not talkin' about Islam countries. I am talkin' about against the universe. Please, do not bring anymore of this. Ok ? :) I apologized if my recent post have made you brought this issue up, but please, don't start any further due to AD's rules. You can PM me anytime to discuss this issue and I would be more than glad to discuss through PM. ;)
 
Maria said:
Okay, since you posted it to here where I highlighted a bold above - I would like to do the same about gay. " If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable ( abnominable ). They must be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads." Lev. 20:13 NIV. -- " Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion. " Romans 1: 24-27 NIV
Click to expand...

I thought the Christianity don't follow the old testament?
 
I repeat....

Byrdie714 said:
Becareful folks---remember that religious discussion isn't allowed.
Click to expand...

Save your religious discussions for the religious thread.

Oh....that's right--you can't! :lol:

We have a very good discussion going on here--we don't need this to be hi-jacked into a religious/moral discussion.

Thanks!
 
Maria said:
I am not talkin' about Islam countries. I am talkin' about against the universe. Please, do not bring anymore of this. Ok ? :) I apologized if my recent post have made you brought this issue up, but please, don't start any further due to AD's rules. You can PM me anytime to discuss this issue and I would be more than glad to discuss through PM. ;)
Click to expand...

Because the universe is composed of many different cultures and many different religions, you cannot use your own religious beliefs to justify anything going on anywhere other than in your own backyard. Please do not presume to speak for the universe. You are a distinct minority in your beliefs when it comes to the universe.

Nor can you use your religious belief system to decide the right or wrong of a legal issue such as civil rights. Civil rights are a secular matter for the state to decide. The law must be used to make equitable that which judgemental religious beliefs seek to deny to others.
 
Liebling:-))) said:
Is the bible verus reason why they obey to sentence the people to death over homosexuality in Islam countries?
Click to expand...

yes, i heard about that. *puzzle* But, there allow 3 or 4 women with one man. *pfffuuiiiiii*
How sad, that California ban on same sex marriage. In Germany is fine. I still don't understand...
 
Sunshinelady said:
yes, i heard about that. *puzzle* But, there allow 3 or 4 women with one man. *pfffuuiiiiii*
How sad, that California ban on same sex marriage. In Germany is fine. I still don't understand...
Click to expand...

Quite frankly, Sunshine Lady, I don't understand this county's objections either. It would appear that the U.S. is full of judgemental and intolerant people.
 
jillio said:
Quite frankly, Sunshine Lady, I don't understand this county's objections either. It would appear that the U.S. is full of judgemental and intolerant people.
Click to expand...


*umm* your part was right. But, it isn't 100% right. I don't think so the U.S. is full of judgement PPL. Can you imagine, if you live with your husband in small town. many 99 the same sex marriage out of one. How do you feeling? it isn't comfortable, because too many gays or lesbians in small town. that is why, they mean It isn't comfortable about the same sex marriage. that is their decision. to me in germany is fine. they are comfortable.
 
Minorities fear trend from California gay marriage ban

SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) – California's gay marriage ban could open the door to legal discrimination against unpopular groups if the state Supreme Court allows the voter-approved measure to stand, blacks, Latinos, Asians and other minorities said.

The November 4 vote, supporting an end to legal same-sex marriage in the most populous U.S. state, has caused a nationwide furor as opponents of the measure decry what they consider a civil rights violation.

California's highest court agreed on November 19 to hear a challenge, based on whether the state constitution requires support from the legislature -- as well as a majority vote of the people -- to strip rights from any group.

The court had recognized such marriages in May, and about 20,000 same-sex couples wed before the November vote. Those marriages may now hang in the balance. Connecticut and Massachusetts are the only states that allow gay marriage.

Legal scholars say the measure, which defines marriage as between a man and a woman, breaks new ground by limiting the courts' ability to protect minorities.

"They could take away any right from any group," said University of Southern California Law Professor David Cruz, who filed a brief in favor of gay marriage in an earlier case.

EQUAL PROTECTION 'SUBVERSION'

The ban, California Proposition 8, amended the constitution with 52 percent support -- less than is required to approve some state bond measures.

"The entire purpose behind the constitutional principle of equal protection would be subverted if the constitutional protection of unpopular minorities were subject to simple majority rule," read a brief by black, Asian and Hispanic groups challenging the ban. "This case is not simply about gay and lesbian equality."

It is unlikely that relatively liberal California would approve restrictions on racial and religious minorities, especially ones that clash with the protections guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution, Cruz and others say.

"We are past that as a realistic matter. We just elected an African-American president, for Christ's sake," said University of California, Berkeley, law professor Jesse Choper, who also filed on behalf of gay advocates in the original gay marriage case.

Other groups -- from prisoners to undocumented workers -- might not have public opinion on their side.

"The history of California demonstrates with sobering clarity the potential for disfavored minorities to be subjected to oppression by hostile majorities," the minority groups say in their brief, pointing to segregation laws and one excluding Asian-Americans from land ownership as examples.

'TRACK RECORD'

"It is not hypothetical. It's a track record," said Stanford University law professor Jane Schacter, who has not filed briefs in the case.

Indeed, a central argument in support of the gay marriage ban is that majority-vote constitutional amendments can change rights.

"That power is broad and deep and, by nature, populist. It has often been used to be make significant changes in state government and to override judicial interpretations of the Constitution with which the people disagree -- including interpretations involving basic constitutional rights," lawyer Andrew Pugno argued in court papers.

He also argued that defining marriage as between a man and a woman simply re-established the situation before the court recognized gay marriage in May.

The California high court could hear arguments in March. Berkeley's Choper says it will be an uphill battle to persuade the judges that the measure requires legislative action.

Choper said he understands why the groups are fighting the ban and he is sympathetic, "but that's not the way the system works."
Click to expand...

Minorities fear trend from California gay marriage ban - Yahoo! News
 
Too many people are scared of gay and lesbian being too powerful in this country.


That their judgement might be too gay. TOO GAY.
 
Good article, Byrdie. I'm anxious to see how this is all going to turn out.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top