Judge rules California's ban on same-sex marriage is unconstitutional

Dixie said:
Aw-fucking-some!!! SQUEEEEE!!! I would love for this to go to the U.S. Supreme Court and ruled that any ban on same-sex marriage is unconstitutional. This is this generation's 'civil right's movement'.

1st- Women's Suffrage
2nd - Racial equality
NOW - Equality for the GLBT community.

Surely we are making progress!
Click to expand...

I wouldn't go counting my Supreme Court Chickens........
 
Dixie said:
Aw-fucking-some!!! SQUEEEEE!!! I would love for this to go to the U.S. Supreme Court and ruled that any ban on same-sex marriage is unconstitutional. This is this generation's 'civil right's movement'.

1st- Women's Suffrage
2nd - Racial equality
NOW - Equality for the GLBT community.

Surely we are making progress!
Click to expand...

Yup!!! :D
 
Like I said...
Women born women....there is plenty of logical proof
Blacks born black.....there is plenty of logical proof
Gays born gay.....there is no logical proof
Anyone who thinks otherwise can post there proof here...remember it has to be logical and acceptable
 
Dixie said:
Aw-fucking-some!!! SQUEEEEE!!! I would love for this to go to the U.S. Supreme Court and ruled that any ban on same-sex marriage is unconstitutional. This is this generation's 'civil right's movement'.

1st- Women's Suffrage
2nd - Racial equality
NOW - Equality for the GLBT community.

Surely we are making progress!
Click to expand...

Yay!!!!!
 
Wirelessly posted

There's no logical proof we are meant to be heterosexual either, other than the need to reproduce. I means... Look at warrior cultures, many of the individuals are homosexuals. Look at the Animal Kingdom, many creatures display homosexual behaviours.

So, other than being driven to reproduce, who is to say heterosexuality is logical when presented with examples of homosexuality?
 
rolling7 said:
Like I said...
Women born women....there is plenty of logical proof
Blacks born black.....there is plenty of logical proof
Gays born gay.....there is no logical proof
Anyone who thinks otherwise can post there proof here...remember it has to be logical and acceptable
Click to expand...

There is not only logical proof, there is empirical evidence for it, as well. However, one is not born with the degree of intolerance that you seem to have...that is a learned behavior. You need to un-learn it.
 
souggy said:
Wirelessly posted

There's no logical proof we are meant to be heterosexual either, other than the need to reproduce. I means... Look at warrior cultures, many of the individuals are homosexuals. Look at the Animal Kingdom, many creatures display homosexual behaviours.

So, other than being driven to reproduce, who is to say heterosexuality is logical when presented with examples of homosexuality?
Click to expand...

Homosexuality is known in all cultures and societies, and accepted in many. In fact, many cultures celebrate the homosexual as being more spiritually enlightened and closer to God than the heterosexual based on the fact that they have equal amounts of both feminine and masculine qualities and traits. Judging from some of the comments made by those seemingly so proud of their heterosexuality, I'm beginning to believe those cultures have made a very accurate observation.
 
rolling7 said:
Like I said...
Women born women....there is plenty of logical proof
Blacks born black.....there is plenty of logical proof
Gays born gay.....there is no logical proof
Anyone who thinks otherwise can post there proof here...remember it has to be logical and acceptable
Click to expand...

Logical, according to who?
 
*rolls eyes at that particular idiot*

Anyway, yup. The state of Cali's gay marriages will go into effect on August 18th.

Great news. :)
 
rolling7 said:
Like I said...
Women born women....there is plenty of logical proof
Blacks born black.....there is plenty of logical proof
Gays born gay.....there is no logical proof
Anyone who thinks otherwise can post there proof here...remember it has to be logical and acceptable
Click to expand...

Here are two "logical and acceptable" questions I have for you...

1) Is being born with a particular trait equivalent to being moral & ethical? In other words, if someone is born a cleptomaniac (that is, with an innate urge and desire to steal), does that make it right?

&

2) There is no proof that you are "born gay", but then again, there is no proof you are born straight either...unless you could tell me which chromosome and gene such an orientation lies on.
 
Don't you read? I have already stated there is no proof that people are born straight/heterosexual and any one who says so I will debate. Same with those who say they were born gay/homosexual. That is the whole and only issue here. For some one to ask "what about being born cleptomaniac" is out-of-space because that can not be proven. logical and acceptable proof, as ask by shel90, is a worldwide issue. Remember those that proclaim the world is flat they had no proof just looking out their window and making it "true". Later there was logical (the sun is round, the moon is round, etc) and acceptable proof that the earth is flat. Yes this is a stupid and belittleing thing but it goes to show that just because people say or think something does not make it a fact. Until there is proof, it is not a fact.
I have also stated that there is no moral/immoral. That is because both are a state on the mind and the mind can change like the wind. Once it was moral to own slaves, now it is not. Once it was illegal for women to vote, now it is not. Once it was ok to drive 70mph on the freeway, now it is not. See the way mankind changes like the wind does?
 
rolling7 said:
Don't you read? I have already stated there is no proof that people are born straight/heterosexual and any one who says so I will debate. Same with those who say they were born gay/homosexual. That is the whole and only issue here.
Click to expand...

Well, no, that isn't the "issue" here...my point was whether someone is born gay, straight, or bisexual is irrelevant and shouldn't be used as a means to prove something moral or immoral.

Remember those that proclaim the world is flat they had no proof just looking out their window and making it "true". Later there was logical (the sun is round, the moon is round, etc) and acceptable proof that the earth is flat. Yes this is a stupid and belittleing thing but it goes to show that just because people say or think something does not make it a fact. Until there is proof, it is not a fact.
Click to expand...

I'm glad you brought that up, considering it was the Roman Catholic church that belittled Galileo for no valid reason whatsoever (sound familiar?)

I have also stated that there is no moral/immoral. That is because both are a state on the mind and the mind can change like the wind. Once it was moral to own slaves, now it is not. Once it was illegal for women to vote, now it is not. Once it was ok to drive 70mph on the freeway, now it is not. See the way mankind changes like the wind does?
Click to expand...

Just because something once was, doesn't mean it was moral.

Learn the difference between 'what was once moral' and 'what was once acceptable' ... contrary to what you believe those are not interchangeable.
 
Now go back and read the post from TheWriteAlex, he ask me the question and I answered it. My total point is there is no moral/immoral....legal/illegal..because as I explain above..these change with the wind. It was once not only immoral but totally unacceptable for a unweded woman to have a child out-of-wedlock...today it is no big deal. I too am glad you mention the roman catholic church and Galileo because you prove my point.. History reports fully on the action of the r.c.c. and what happen to Galileo but not a peep about the rest of the world population. Do you feel, one way or the other, if the whole world was ask: "Is the world flat or not" that would be a fair question and the results could be reported as worldwide opinion, not just the position of the r.c.c.? Sound Familiar???? Well what is see today is the so-called media not, not, not reporting the news but slanting it!
 
Last edited:
rolling7 said:
Now go back and read the post from TheWriteAlex, he ask me the question and I answered it. My total point is there is no moral/immoral....legal/illegal..because as I explain above..these change with the wind. It was once not only immoral but totally unacceptable for a unweded woman to have a child out-of-wedlock...today it is no big deal. I too am glad you mention the roman catholic church and Galileo because you prove my point.. History reports fully on the action of the r.c.c. and what happen to Galileo but not a peep about the rest of the world population. Do you feel, one way or the other, if the whole world was ask: "Is the world flat or not" that would be a fair question and the results could be reported as worldwide opinion, not just the position of the r.c.c.? Sound Familiar???? Well what is see today is the so-called media not, not, not reporting the news but slanting it!
Click to expand...

Are you high?
 
Back
Top