Prop 8 in California overturned.,..gay marriage is now legal

Postby zanev » Wed Aug 04, 2010 3:18 pm

http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2010/08/0 ... riage.html

California judge rejects same-sex marriage ban


A U.S. Federal Court judge has overturned Proposition 8, California's same-sex marriage ban.

Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker ruled Wednesday that the voter-approved ban was unconstitutional.

Passed by the state legislature in November 2008, Proposition 8 was a referendum passed by 52 per cent of California voters that outlawed gay marriages, five months after they were legalized by the state's Supreme Court.

The case came about after two gay couples claimed the ban violated their civil rights.

Proposition 8 "fails to advance any rational basis for singling out gay men and women," the judge wrote in his ruling. "[This law] does nothing more than enshrine ... that opposite-sex couples are superior," he wrote to justify his decision to rule it unconstitutional.

The ruling is significant in that it's the first such ruling in a federal court. Numerous states have supported and challenged the legality of same-sex marriages on a state level, but Walker's ruling in a federal court opens the door to the issue eventually being appealed all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court.

"This ruling upholds that a government of the people, by the people and for the people cannot discriminate against the people," said Chad Griffin, one of the plaintiffs in the case.

'Government … cannot discriminate against the people.'—Plaintiff Chad Griffin

The ruling will almost certainly be appealed, as supporters on both sides of the issue had pledged to do so if the court ruled against them on Wednesday.

Despite the favourable ruling for same-sex couples, gay marriage will not immediately resume in Califronia while the case winds its way through the appeals process.

Proponents of the ban had hoped the judge would issue a stay order until all appeals had been exhausted — effectively maintaining the status quo. CNN reported Wednesday that the judge did exactly that, issuing a temporary stay that stops his ruling from being implemented until the appeals process is finished.

The case would go first to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, then the Supreme Court if the high court justices agree to hear it. Massachusetts, Iowa, Connecticut, Vermont, New Hampshire and Washington, D.C., all currently grant same-sex couples the right to wed.


I close my eyes, Inis Mona
And reminisce of those palmy days
I moon o'er you, Inis Mona
As long as I breathe
I'll call you my home

Re: Prop 8 in California overturned.,..gay marriage is now l

Postby Chris12 » Thu Aug 05, 2010 4:11 am

Why would people try to bann it anyway? you don't have to be a huge supporter of same sex marriege but forbidding it just seems pointless and a waste of everyone's time.

Re: Prop 8 in California overturned.,..gay marriage is now l

Postby Fesselfan » Thu Aug 05, 2010 5:32 am

Chris12 wrote:Why would people try to bann it anyway? you don't have to be a huge supporter of same sex marriege but forbidding it just seems pointless and a waste of everyone's time.

Agreed...on the other hand, a lot of what happens in politics these days qualifies very well as "pointless and a waste of everyone's time" :big:

Cheers

FF
There are 10 kind of people in the world.
Those who understand binary numeral system, and those who don't.

Re: Prop 8 in California overturned.,..gay marriage is now l

Postby Boundgal08 » Thu Aug 05, 2010 5:39 am

About time I say, its been legal in the UK for sometime now, its about time the American's followed suit, I cant see why the government should be so judgemental on who can get married and who cant.
At the end of the day, if both parties love each other, that should be the only thing that matters really. :big:

BG
BOUNDGIRL!
Probably the kinkiest woman you will ever meet!
I am a switch, I like to put a man in ropes and also have a man put me in ropes!
I am the 'Queen of bondage'

Re: Prop 8 in California overturned.,..gay marriage is now l

Postby Kyle » Thu Aug 05, 2010 2:20 pm

Actually, it was initially banned, then the movement was to make it legal, then to ensure it remains illegal, now it's back to making it legal again.

I personally have mixed feelings on all of this. I'm not a supporter of gay marriage but don't really see why people spend so much time fighting it when we have so many other issues to worry about and at the end of the day don't think it's going to mean the end of the world because 2 men and/or 2 women can get together and say they're married. But I also don't really see why the courts feel the need to overturn something the people of a state have voted in--TWICE. The United States isn't a democracy despite what the general belief is but I'm not sure this is a great precedent to set. Why do we even vote on things if the courts will just come in and overturn them?

Re: Prop 8 in California overturned.,..gay marriage is now l

Postby Chris12 » Thu Aug 05, 2010 4:11 pm

In some casses demcracy does not work. I don't understand why EVERYTHING needs to be democratic these days. I don't believe marriage should depends on votes from people who have nothing to do with your love.

Re: Prop 8 in California overturned.,..gay marriage is now l

Postby Jason Toddman » Fri Aug 06, 2010 7:23 pm

Chris12 wrote:In some casses demcracy does not work. I don't understand why EVERYTHING needs to be democratic these days. I don't believe marriage should depends on votes from people who have nothing to do with your love.


I am afraid you are much wiser than most of the adults who run the government in my country, Chris. But maybe in another generation, the sensible young people growing up now will overturn such idiotic bans like this once and for all and let people love whom they choose.
In the state where I live, sad to say, the opposite happened. The governor made a law allowing same sex marraige but was overturned by popular vote. Maybe the courts will step in here too now that this has happened in California. Though I agree with Kyle too in one regard: why vote in this at all if the courts are going to overrule the winning side? Still, in this one thing at least, I hope the courts do just that. I have no personal stake in the matter; I just hate discrimination of *all* kinds.
Of course, the Catholic Church and the other narrow minded religionists of the world are sure to weigh in on the matter too. IMHO that is one major reason why change is so slow in coming. If they'd had their way all along, we'd *still* be living in the good old days of feudalism and the burning of heretics.
Dare to be different... and make a difference.
To boldly go where no one in their right mind has gone before...

Re: Prop 8 in California overturned.,..gay marriage is now l

Postby Kyle » Fri Aug 06, 2010 9:14 pm

"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote."- Benjamin Franklin

I've seen slightly different wordings before but that's generally how the quote goes. We don't actually live in a democracy, it's a democratic-republic. However, some contentious issues like this one do go to the people to be voted on. This one has gone to the people of California TWICE now and been voted by the people both times.

I really do think we have better things to worry about than gay marriage (from either side of the debate) and I don't see why we're re-evaluating the definition of marriage that's been more or less the same throughout all of mankind for thousands of years, excluding whether or not polygamy was allowed. But I also don't think this is the end of the world like many opponents feel.

I guess I just don't see the furor from either side of things. I don't really think the government should be getting involved in marriage, period. It's always been a religious institution from the dawn of time.

Re: Prop 8 in California overturned.,..gay marriage is now l

Postby Jason Toddman » Fri Aug 06, 2010 9:21 pm

Kyle wrote:"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote."- Benjamin Franklin

I've seen slightly different wordings before but that's generally how the quote goes. We don't actually live in a democracy, it's a democratic-republic. However, some contentious issues like this one do go to the people to be voted on. This one has gone to the people of California TWICE now and been voted by the people both times.

I really do think we have better things to worry about than gay marriage (from either side of the debate) and I don't see why we're re-evaluating the definition of marriage that's been more or less the same throughout all of mankind for thousands of years, excluding whether or not polygamy was allowed. But I also don't think this is the end of the world like many opponents feel.

I guess I just don't see the furor from either side of things.


Maybe you would if you or someone you really cared about had a lover of the same gender and they were told they couldn't have the same civic rights that YOU have.
Freedoms should never be taken for granted; they might someday be taken away!
The more you care about other peoples' freedom, the more free people there will be to care about your own.
I shoulda been a philosopher. :mrgreen:
Dare to be different... and make a difference.
To boldly go where no one in their right mind has gone before...

Re: Prop 8 in California overturned.,..gay marriage is now l

Postby staythirstymyfriends » Sat Aug 07, 2010 11:43 pm

Some societies have tolerated homosexuality over the millennia; some have found it desirable; some have condemned it and instituted punishment for engaging in such acts. However, no society has ever conferred an equal status before the law to homosexuals, and none ever should.

Anyone can love anyone. That's not the issue. Anyone (adults, i.e.) can engage in the purest, sweetest, most romantic, or most disgusting behavior another can imagine, with another person, provided it is consensual. No issue. Anyone of age may shack up with anyone else of age. No issue.

The issue is that 10,000 years of human existence and accumulated knowledge of that which is natural is being thrown away. Everyone (including homosexuals, let's not kid ourselves) knows that the heterosexual paradigm is the normal ordo rerum, something that also plays out within nature. That which is homosexual, be it activity by humans, animals, or "same sex" plants, is not normal. It's outside normal bounds, extranatural.

Deviation from an accepted, proven norm to one of obviously lower status and tacit disapproval (anyone here really want to hear their child tell them they like someone of the same sex enough to want a lifelong thing with them?), to one that accepts 2% of the population doing something imitative of coitus in a rather obsessive, campy way as something on par with the rest of humanity, is the slippery slope defined. Why did Rome fall? Decadence and debauchery, to include homosexuality being accepted. People indulged every whim, not caring about any consequences. Rome thus fell on 4 September AD 476. Interestingly, 500 years earlier when Augustus was emperor, adultery (hetero) was punished by exile. People actually kept their trysts on the DL. Things were better.

This is not about votes or decisions or whatever. We have had homosexuality forever, and as mentioned, we've dealt with it in different ways. We've gotten along in spite of it, not because of it. Look at your world now. It's become a dangerous, unloving, uncaring, me me me gimme gimme gimme society. Gimme the right to imitate, to mock, natural activity with toys and my body. Gimme things I want, screw everyone else; I want hedonistic pleasure with real risks of infection (esp with males); gimme that. Oh, I just gave him HIV? Rats. He's a bi and took it home to his wife? Bugger all (in the British sense), what a shame.

Heritage, precedent, intrinsic knowledge of what is right and wrong- that must guide us, and when you get 10 millennia of humanity's actions to look back on, you don't dump it all, or any part of it, in 5 years. It's going to be bad news; it always is. Why? Because you're taking something(s) accepted on face as correct or desirable for ages, and then one day saying all of man has been wrong forever. Garnered wisdom, seen and applied the world over, does not go wrong.

You have to have a bedrock of permissible behavior and a code of things acceptable and unacceptable, as well as things meeting or not meeting with approval. Some states in life are better than others... you just can't do everything. Logic and wisdom that's 10,000+ years old is a great way to build your house on granite rather than sand...
Is it any different to be tied up vs being tied down? One of the great things about English, its flexibility :p

Re: Prop 8 in California overturned.,..gay marriage is now l

Postby Jason Toddman » Sun Aug 08, 2010 7:12 am

Slavery was a time honored institution too for many many centuries. So was child marraige, polygamy and human sacrifice, Do you advocate those too, Stay?
Dare to be different... and make a difference.
To boldly go where no one in their right mind has gone before...

Re: Prop 8 in California overturned.,..gay marriage is now l

Postby Kyle » Sun Aug 08, 2010 9:22 am

I wouldn't go so far as to say homosexuals shouldn't have equal rights under the law. That's a dangerous thing to say. But I do draw the line at homosexual marriage. Marriage is between a man and a woman. If two people of the same sex want to get together and say they're married, that's their option, but I'm not crazy with the idea of it being legally recognized.

That being said, what I said earlier about not getting worked up over it is true. I think there are bigger issues to worry about. I think we'd be doing better to save the institution of marriage if we focused on how many senseless divorces happen for no reason. I'm not going to protest against gay marriage, and while I don't agree with it I don't think it's nearly the end of the world if it becomes legal (and personally, I think it will be before too much longer has passed). My own state outlawed it with an amendment to the state constitution a few years ago and I did vote against it and would vote against it if it came up again. I voted for it mostly because it was on the same ballot as another election I was voting for.

I know enough about how things work to know there are already same-sex couples who claim they're married on tax returns and who already get the tax benefits from it, so it does happen.

But, I said it before and I'll say it again, ultimately I would be happy if the government's role in marriage was limited. Marriage has virtually always been tied in with religion and I will always see it as a religious ceremony. Though this isn't the real reason why I feel that way, if that happened it would effectively eliminate the gay marriage debate as well.

In some ways I agree with Staythirstymyfriends, though not nearly to the extent he did. Saying the Roman Empire fell because they accepted homosexuality is a fairly strange way to put it. The Roman Empire fell apart for a number of reasons, and getting complacent and too comfortable with themselves definitely contributed, but to just lay that at the feet of homosexuality is a bizarre way to put it.

Re: Prop 8 in California overturned.,..gay marriage is now l

Postby Jason Toddman » Sun Aug 08, 2010 10:38 am

And for those who say marraige is only for procreation, I say: Aren't there enough people in the world (6.2 billion and counting) already? We don't need more!
Let gay people marry. If they want children they can adopt all those unwanted kids the straight couples produce and won't take care of. Solves two problems at once. Reduces population expansion and fulfills the needs of the unloved kids already here.
Besides, how's it any skin off anyone else's nose who marries who? Divorces do far more to harm marraiges than a loving gay marriage ever could!
Dare to be different... and make a difference.
To boldly go where no one in their right mind has gone before...

Re: Prop 8 in California overturned.,..gay marriage is now l

Postby staythirstymyfriends » Sun Aug 08, 2010 11:38 am

Just as the issue is not about polygamy (which still exists, along with polyandry), slavery, incest (though a bro/sis couple in Germany wants that law tossed out, also), or child marriage (anybody see any homosexual children being forced into marriage by the Warren Jeff's of the world?), it is about drawing a moral line that we will not cross for the sake of ourselves. It is about establishing a point beyond which acts that contribute to disease, the thwarting of nature, and general depravity as shown through time back to the Egyptians will not be condoned. No analogy is being drawn here. This is its own thing.

To allow the adoption of children by homosexual couples is next to a mortal sin. Is anyone going to stand there and with a straight face say that a young child will in no way be affected by nurture (not nature) in seeing their parents kissing? God forbid that child walk into the master bedroom during one of their sick interludes. Their parents are "mama" and "mom", or "daddy" and "papa"; they'll be cast into school and at a very young age have to ask, "Why do most people have a mommy and a daddy? I have two (whichever)." Is someone going to say that child will never have to ask why they're hetero when their shack-up-buddy guardians (the birth mother is a mother. The other is a permanent babysitter with portfolio). Oops, never mind, that child actually just did ask about their sexuality. Let that situation continue into middle school, where other kids can really make life rough for you...

"Hey, it's the kid with the queer daddies!"
"Hey, kid, if your homo mamas cheat on each other, do they get a man or a woman?"
"Don't bend over in front of him, he's probably caught the homo bug, too!"

Very improper of a child to say to another, but face it: it will happen. You can try to teach kids all you want about why being homosexual is okay, but those kids will leave that class unchanged, and probably laughing. This is something ingrained in our minds, and by nature. And those who wish to say that you're born homosexual (you're not born to act on that impulse, though, lest one forget) must concede that 98% of the population is born hetero, with a natural aversion to that which is abnormal and foreign in the greatest degree to human existence.

To suggest homosexuality is a viable or even a properly incidental way to effect population control is to say we should deny our essence as human beings, to forsake the acts and circumstances that have created us for a million years. No way; that's insanity, and shall be dismissed out of hand. Population control is served best by natural selection; the strong and those possessed with the necessities of life live and strengthen the species. That means stop sending rice and flour to Somalia and Sudan, or anywhere else in Africa- they have the highest birthrate per woman of any continent. Start sending billions of rubbers and pills. You will achieve a quick and certain, if sad to watch, decrease in the population.

How about we get together and combat this moral laziness we see on this Earth? Homosexuality will not end civilization by itself, just as elective abortion, rampant drug abuse, abuse of welfare and handouts, and dependence on oil/coal will not... by themselves. Put them together, though, add a couple other negatives, and you have the recipe for disaster. Just because one sickness won't do the trick doesn't mean we allow it. We keep good morality amongst nations, and good things will follow. Nobody has yet suggested rebuilding Sodom for the good of mankind, now, have they?
Is it any different to be tied up vs being tied down? One of the great things about English, its flexibility :p

Re: Prop 8 in California overturned.,..gay marriage is now l

Postby Jason Toddman » Sun Aug 08, 2010 12:13 pm

The unpleasant scenarios you posit happen only because bigots, closed-minded, and the self-righteous cause them to happen; not because they are inevitable.
As for homosexuality being 'unnatural', you must not know your biology very well. Homosexuality is VERY common among mammals in general.
And please don't start on about acting like animals, as 'normal' sex is just as animalistic. YOU were the one talking about natural after all.
If you are such a moral person who is so against against 'unnatural' things, why the hell are you even HERE? TuGs are more 'unnatural' than homosexuality is, strictly speaking.
Are you merely a hippocrite, or are you some kind of troublemaking troll?
Dare to be different... and make a difference.
To boldly go where no one in their right mind has gone before...

Re: Prop 8 in California overturned.,..gay marriage is now l

Postby KittyReaper » Tue Aug 10, 2010 11:04 pm

well said jason that was exactly my thoughts, we are all drawn here by our unnatural wants and here you are preaching to us about how homosexuality is wrong and disgusting. I find it sickening that a man and a woman who hate each other have more right to get married then 2 males or 2 females who don't. This world is corrupted with backwards thinking brought on by people who can't let go of their precious religion. Living your lives based on books written 2000 years ago. well times have changed and people need to change with the times otherwise we have problems like this.

Re: Prop 8 in California overturned.,..gay marriage is now l

Postby dreadnaught3200 » Tue Aug 10, 2010 11:33 pm

Interesting this issue should come up, being a Christian (As Jason well knows lol) I've spent a fair amount of time thinking about it. And frankly, I think that in the end, denying gay people their right to marriage is unconstitutional. There are certain rights spelled out in the laws of our countries (The US and Canada, my home and native land eh!) that guarantee individual freedoms, freedom of speech, freedom of religion (Which I enjoy on a daily basis), freedom of movement... The right to marriage is just one of those. Everyone should have completely equal rights under the law, no matter their race, creed, religion or sexual orientation.

And I want to point out that a lot of Christians agree with me on this one. We as a people group are called to love everyone as Christ did. And for some reason many in the church have singled out the gay community to persecute. It isn't right. It's unbiblical.
There's a permanent tension in music isn't there? On one hand you have three chords, you know, four four and three chords. Then there's the people like me, who say "Well, why don't we add a fourth chord and put it in five four?" - Bill Bruford

Re: Prop 8 in California overturned.,..gay marriage is now l

Postby Jason Toddman » Wed Aug 11, 2010 5:52 am

cricks5 wrote:Been reading this since the very beginning and am now ready to give my piece and see if I shall be crucified or fed to the literal lions of this site!

We are taught: "Love one another as I have loved you, for of such is the kingdom of heaven.
"If any man lack wisdom, let him ask of God who giveth to all men liberally and upbraideth not and it shall be given unto him."


I do wish more people would remember that is written in the Bible!
People seem to forget that the only people Christ condemned in the Gospels were the religious zealots and bigots! Never the 'gays'.
Fundamentalists are the modern day Pharisees, and remember what Jesus said about them!
Dare to be different... and make a difference.
To boldly go where no one in their right mind has gone before...

Re: Prop 8 in California overturned.,..gay marriage is now l

Postby Jason Toddman » Wed Aug 11, 2010 7:13 am

cricks5 wrote:Glad to see my memory pays off again Jason.


You already had your brag before breakfast today, Cricks. :big: Or are you making up for being gone all day yesterday? :P
Dare to be different... and make a difference.
To boldly go where no one in their right mind has gone before...

Re: Prop 8 in California overturned.,..gay marriage is now l

Postby Jason Toddman » Wed Aug 11, 2010 3:21 pm

Remember that the Bible also says "Pride goeth before a fall". :twisted:
Dare to be different... and make a difference.
To boldly go where no one in their right mind has gone before...

Re: Prop 8 in California overturned.,..gay marriage is now l

Postby dreadnaught3200 » Wed Aug 11, 2010 11:22 pm

People seem to forget that the only people Christ condemned in the Gospels were the religious zealots and bigots! Never the 'gays'.
Fundamentalists are the modern day Pharisees, and remember what Jesus said about them!


Amen!
There's a permanent tension in music isn't there? On one hand you have three chords, you know, four four and three chords. Then there's the people like me, who say "Well, why don't we add a fourth chord and put it in five four?" - Bill Bruford

Re: Prop 8 in California overturned.,..gay marriage is now l

Postby staythirstymyfriends » Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:35 am

The unpleasant scenarios you posit happen only because bigots, closed-minded, and the self-righteous cause them to happen; not because they are inevitable.


Ah, the call of the liberal: the ad hominem attack. If you can't assail the thesis, assail the messenger with inflammatory names and references. Dismissed as venting and irrelevant.

As for homosexuality being 'unnatural', you must not know your biology very well. Homosexuality is VERY common among mammals in general.


You mean queer fish, queer bears, queer squirrels, something like that? No gay bars exist for any of them to seek anonymous encounters. Incidentally, who cares about how the baser animals conduct themselves? That many engage in homosexual acts sounds suspiciously made up, especially if it's espoused as natural or normal. Common animals mate for procreation, have coitus for that purpose only. Only dolphins (before they're fertile) seem to fool around like humans. Parthenogenesis doesn't count as homosexual, either.

And please don't start on about acting like animals, as 'normal' sex is just as animalistic. YOU were the one talking about natural after all.


Actually, that's a good point to talk about. If you would like to compare your most intimate of behaviors to the unreasoned, purely instinctual, id-based, superego-absent acts of common animals, go right ahead. It's sad you would debase yourself that way. No person need feel that they're imitating animals by engaging in coitus; it's better said that the animals imitate us. While humans far too often abuse the sexual gift, it is often engaged in as the truest act of (heterosexual) love toward one's partner, whether intended as procreatory in that encounter or not. Humans are animals, incidentally, because we deign through taxonomy to refer to ourselves as such. We're also homo sapiens, wise man, and above the mob of other creatures.

If you are such a moral person who is so against 'unnatural' things, why the hell are you even HERE?


(answer) This is an interesting place to visit, with a stimulating topic and concept. If one wishes to equate an enjoyable diversion such as bondage with sexual feeling or activity across the board, then said person would be flat wrong. Youngsters who tie someone for fun do so for that reason. They're not looking for "pleasure". As for those who do like bondage in a more mature way, so? It's an enjoyable, safe, consensual experience with no chance of transmission of STD's or disease (the biggest problems with homosexuality, esp among males). It's what they enjoy as a hobby, just as some like coin collecting. Is it unnatural to feel a twinge of excitement when you find a 3-legged buffalo nickel?

TuGs are more 'unnatural' than homosexuality is, strictly speaking.


A values argument, an assertion, one not backed up with any visible evidence. Reply: it's not unnatural. Evidence: bondage and such are paraphilias. People get turned on by different things. Divers and sundry heterosexuals get off on bondage, smell, the voice, virtually every part of the body, porn flicks, porn stories, topless bars, menages-a-trois, menages-a-quatre, cinque, whatever; food, spanking, and 100,000 other things. Any of those interests, or their absence, is particular to each human as part of his personhood, and are found universally. You can't look at them in a vacuum and say, "Oh, that's perverse." That's not how people engage in these things. However, it -is- possible to observe what the active homosexual does for real "fun". Those acts, the bedrock of the argument against homosexuality, speak for themselves. No, you say, heteros engage in anal also. Count that under disgusting and perverse as well.

Are you merely a hypocrite, or are you some kind of troublemaking troll?


The call of the lib-... oh, we went over that at the start. Names over substance. Let's see, I am straight and against homosexuals marrying or adopting children. That makes me Satan, right? I will stand up and speak my mind as forcefully against this proposition of homosexuals having rights based on their salacious acts and nature as they will speak for it. That makes me a bigot, a hateful misanthrope, small-minded, possessed of 3000-year-old morals, and the shooter on the grassy knoll, right? For I say things outside the realms of PC and the enlightened left. That makes me guilty of abusing free speech because the left doesn't like what it hears. Too bad, it's gonna be said anyway. As for the rhetorical question, no, there's no hypocrisy in liking TUGs, being straight, and not going for the homosexual agenda, and all at the same time. Straight bondage and homosexual cavorting are apples and (rotten) oranges. And I assert my right to free speech at all times. That's neither being a troll (whatever you mean by that; trolls lurk, and I'm right here) nor a troublemaker (other than to the left).

Love whom you want. Care for whom you wish. And be responsible with your body and theirs, for your actions can end up having farther-reaching effects than you know.
Is it any different to be tied up vs being tied down? One of the great things about English, its flexibility :p

Re: Prop 8 in California overturned.,..gay marriage is now l

Postby Jason Toddman » Sun Sep 12, 2010 7:09 am

Ah, Staythirsty is back... finally... but as ignorant as ever.
I'll return your own response at you: your whole thesis is dismissed as venting and irrevelent.
You're so full of it that a detailed response to your long-delayed rebuttal is pointless. I could easily pick apart everything you say here, but why bother? It won't change *your* mind, you're the only negative responder who had venturd an opinion here, and I have more amusing ways to waste my time.
So keep your ignorant opinions if you want; it's a free country and you're entitled to believe whatever ignorant things you want to believe.
Just don't make anyone else's life miserable because of them, because you aren't entitled to that!
Dare to be different... and make a difference.
To boldly go where no one in their right mind has gone before...

Re: Prop 8 in California overturned.,..gay marriage is now l

Postby staythirstymyfriends » Sun Sep 12, 2010 11:57 pm

Ah, Staythirsty is back... finally... but as ignorant as ever.


ad hominem attack #1.

I'll return your own response at you: your whole thesis is dismissed as venting and irrelevant.


ad hominem attack #2.

You're so full of it that a detailed response to your long-delayed rebuttal is pointless.


When one walks away from a contested debate by refusing to speak further, they have nothing more to say. The assertion here is that whatever Jason doesn't like is garbage. Well, if one side can call something garbage without properly stating why, then the other side certainly can maintain its own opinion with supporting evidence. Oh, 'you're so full of it," is ad hominem attack #3.

I could easily pick apart everything you say here, but why bother?


If you value your opinion, you will do more for it and yourself than giving an f-u to your opponent. Losing an argument sucks, and walking away in a huff doesn't prove a thing. As to picking apart everything lickety-split, do it. Oh, you don't wish to? Huh? Makes your assertion very hard to believe.

It won't change *your* mind, you're the only negative responder who had ventured an opinion here, and I have more amusing ways to waste my time.


What your opponent thinks shouldn't matter. You're not out to change his mind. Your job in a debate is to put forth a more cogent, logical, and sound argument, without the use of personal attacks. The former has yet to be seen, regrettably, and the later has been seen too much. Oh, and since those who oppose you are so much vermin for being "negative responders", I guess an opposing view, be it majority or minority in nature, is anathema and a waste of time and effort. ad hominem attack #4.

So keep your ignorant opinions if you want; it's a free country and you're entitled to believe whatever ignorant things you want to believe.


Yes, thank the good Lord and His Son Jesus Christ, by the power of the Holy Spirit, for making this a free country. Is that another atrocity, invoking the name of God in his triune form? He's very real, you know. As to this side's ignorant opinions and belief in those opinions, without any evidence showing why they're ignorant, we'll chalk it up as ad hominem attack #5.

Just don't make anyone else's life miserable because of them, because you aren't entitled to that!


How does one make another's life miserable by having a different opinion? We all have the right to protest, march, counter-protest, and counter-march. No basis there. Assaults on homosexuals are properly punishable, and nobody is allowed to do that. However, letting those folks know they're not liked in a neighborhood, not welcome there, that they're going to be constantly watched, is free speech provided no threats are made or offensive acts perpetrated. Speaking out against the homosexual paradigm, no matter if it upsets every one of them, is protected- just as their calls for non-existent "marriages" are.

Their acts remain vile and abnormal; tribadism, anilingus, and anal copulation are reprehensible, res ipsa loquitur. Even more so is the ongoing attempt to teach young children that this perversion of theirs is morally equivalent to hetero activity. What it amounts to is a recruiting campaign... "If you wish to be gay later, it's ok, come on over. Nobody has a right to tell you that it's disgusting." Well, it's disgusting. What is it, get 'em by 8 or it's too late? That's some group's motto.

If they'd just keep it behind closed doors, keep it amongst their kind, it can be abided. Not good enough for them. If they want to pack the descending colon every night and risk balanitis, fecal coliform infection, urinary tract and bladder infections, anal fissures, ripping of the intestinal lining and subsequent peritonitis and subsequent likely death, AIDS, syphilis, gonorrhea, lymphogranuloma venereum, etc., let them at it. But don't ask those of use who are normal to condone it.

And TUGs are a way of enjoying time between two consenting people, of whatever age. N/C is wrong. If everyone's happy and it's just ropes and scarves, well, the transfer of power is something many people like to experience. No problem with that...
Is it any different to be tied up vs being tied down? One of the great things about English, its flexibility :p

Re: Prop 8 in California overturned.,..gay marriage is now l

Postby Jason Toddman » Mon Sep 13, 2010 6:08 am

Whatever floats your boat, Bozo.
Even Cricks makes more sense than you do.
If you want to believe I walk away from the 'debate' because I have nothing further to say, feel free. I simply don't have anything further to say to *you*.
There's a difference between discussing something with an intelligent person and talking to a brick wall; right now I may as well be doing the latter.
You simpy aren't worth the time and effort to 'debate' with. If it makes your day to feel otherwise, well good for you.
Dare to be different... and make a difference.
To boldly go where no one in their right mind has gone before...

Re: Prop 8 in California overturned.,..gay marriage is now l

Postby staythirstymyfriends » Sat Sep 18, 2010 12:53 am

Jason Toddman wrote:Whatever floats your boat, Bozo.


Ad hominem attack #1 in his post. Here we go again. We're getting nowhere, which tends to indicate the end of a rational debate.

If you want to believe I walk away from the 'debate' because I have nothing further to say, feel free.


Thank you, done. There has been not one piece of argument even attempting to refute any position from this side. No good debater or advocate for a position they believe in would ever pick up their marbles, huff and puff, and go home. You don't tap out with a flurry of Bozos, brick walls, etc, and win an argument. This side has put out many paragraphs of assertions against Prop 8... and has received little more than "You're a jerk, not wanting them to get married." "You're a bigot, and the only reasons homosexuals can't marry is bigoted people like you." "You're a hater." "Go somewhere else, for you're the only opponent of our position." Those are such time-tested liberal tactics that it almost makes me laugh, how inane they are. Once again: if liberal, argue as long as you can, and then get personal. Great for steering an argument away from its point.

This one won't get so steered: homosexuals, whom one might designate an inter-racial ethnicity (as "Hispanic"), commit disgusting acts. In disgusting ways. In ways that mock nature. In ways that are almost obsessive, especially among males. In their desire to be catered to sexually whenever they feel the need.

Why was Sen. Larry Craig (R-Id) busted in the men's room at the airport in Minneapolis? He was "cruising", and the guy he was tapping his rhythm to happened to be a UC. Why, then, was the cop there in the first place? He wasn't going to encounter any women in there. No, he was going to find homosexual men looking for fun in a public airport restroom! His superiors knew it, too, and put him there to sting these deviants. Now, do straight men, straight women, or lesbians do this? Not in an airport bathroom, nor in an open park, a library, a bar. Those are get-to-know you places for these classes. For the Untermenschen that are homosexual men, they're places to line up often anonymous sex encounters (your place or mine? Or do you just want to wait 'til the bathroom's free?) Especially if it's just fellatio, they see little need to introduce themselves. One guy gets his tank filled by the other guy. Is that conduct what America wants to put a stamp of legitimacy on? Oh, just as with heteros, homos cheat, too... so it becomes a circular bit of conduct: boy meets boy, they get something going, and the first one then finds a man and gets with him, etc, etc, etc, love triangle. Only difference here is you're spreading more disease; our homosexual neighbors tend to enter the candy store through the out door, often without protection.

I simply don't have anything further to say to *you*.


As before, your job is to talk to others through this medium. You're not going to convince your opponent of anything, regardless of the side he's on. If you're trying to do that, try climbing Everest without oxygen and crampon boots. You'll have about the same chance of success. Two debaters do just that so the masses can hear them. It's the height of futility (and latent arrogance) even to try to convince everyone within the sound of your voice of your side, let alone your debating nemesis. You should never have been speaking to your opponent in the first place. Your opponent has been speaking to the other readers.

There's a difference between discussing something with an intelligent person and talking to a brick wall; right now I may as well be doing the latter.


Ad hominem attacks 2 and 3. He wishes to win on merit by referring to his opponent as unintelligent (by juxtaposition of intelligent and brick wall), and that his opponent is worthy of being and similar to a brick wall. No counter-argument put forth. Why can't we get a response that deals with the issue at hand?

You simply aren't worth the time and effort to 'debate' with. If it makes your day to feel otherwise, well good for you.


Ad hom. #4 Not worth the time and effort. And this is a debate... was it supposed to be some kind of yes-man convention? This category, with all its threads, is so one can jump into the fire of controversial topics and be in a proper venue for taking either side. If one's opponent is not worth the trouble, then gathering yourself to present your side of things must be just as much meaningless trouble. The anti-homosexual side showed up. Where's the other team?

Homosexual conduct, not feelings, is contemnible. What is done in the open by those folks, who care little about what their fellow countrymen think regarding their activities, is selfish and dangerous to all involved, and not just because of the inclusion of filth in the matter. That can be cured with antibiotics, usually. Some STD's can't, like HIV and genital herpes. Consider that the next time you wish to offer carte blanche to any homosexual to feel strong in his/her activities.
Is it any different to be tied up vs being tied down? One of the great things about English, its flexibility :p

Re: Prop 8 in California overturned.,..gay marriage is now l

Postby Jason Toddman » Sat Sep 18, 2010 5:16 am

It's not a debte for the pure and simple reason is that all you do is rant on about the Bible and other irrelevancies about Congressmen. What he did was wrong not because he was gay but because he used his power and position to hit on someone. The same reason why a female teacher hitting on a male student would be wrong.
It's not a debate when you casually dismiss what *I* say without using any meaningful logic if your own, so why shouldn't I do the same?
It's not a debate because this is not my post and no one else is dumb enough like I am to keep talking to you.
If you couldn't use the Bible to argue with, you wuldn't have anything to say. As is, who am I to debate with someone who speaks for God Himself? :roll: Not me!
It's not worth my time because you're the only one here expressing such opinions as yours. No one else probably cares, so why should I bother?
So go ahead and say whatever hateful things here you like. After all, you have a perfect right to be a bigot.
Dare to be different... and make a difference.
To boldly go where no one in their right mind has gone before...

Re: Prop 8 in California overturned.,..gay marriage is now l

Postby Chase Ricks » Sat Sep 18, 2010 11:48 am

Jason if you do not mind, I would like a chance to demonstrate to this "thirsty" member just what kind of response he has smote upon his own head by mentioning the infamous retired former Senator Larry Craig of Idaho. I am one of only a few Republican Idahoans on this site at all so I feel I can calmly ask for this right.
From whence I came and whence I went heaven said I was too evil and sent me to hell. Demons and devils succeeded in breaking my soul.

Image

Re: Prop 8 in California overturned.,..gay marriage is now l

Postby Jason Toddman » Sat Sep 18, 2010 11:51 am

Shane Bikman wrote:Jason if you do not mind, I would like a chance to demonstrate to this "thirsty" member just what kind of response he has smote upon his own head by mentioning the infamous retired former Senator Larry Craig of Idaho. I am one of only a few Republican Idahoans on this site at all so I feel I can calmly ask for this right.

Feel free to say whatever you like, Shane. For better or worse, this is the land of free speech.
Yes I know why you asked first. It's fine. It's my OWN posts/threads I was referring to before, not ones started by others that I happen to respond to myself.
Dare to be different... and make a difference.
To boldly go where no one in their right mind has gone before...

Re: Prop 8 in California overturned.,..gay marriage is now l

Postby Chase Ricks » Sat Sep 18, 2010 12:03 pm

Jason Toddman wrote:
Shane Bikman wrote:Jason if you do not mind, I would like a chance to demonstrate to this "thirsty" member just what kind of response he has smote upon his own head by mentioning the infamous retired former Senator Larry Craig of Idaho. I am one of only a few Republican Idahoans on this site at all so I feel I can calmly ask for this right.

Feel free to say whatever you like, Shane. For better or worse, this is the land of free speech.
Yes I know why you asked first. It's fine. It's my OWN posts/threads I was referring to before, not ones started by others that I happen to respond to myself.


Thanks Jason. I promise that after I am finished you can have the use of this thread again if staythirstymyfriends can survive debating against me.

Staythirstymyfriends what do you know honestly about how the voters in Idaho felt about Larry Craig other then what the news reported? I can tell you but then you might want to rebut my comments so I'll keep this short and to the point. After the news hit Idaho, lots of us were really caught offguard. He had been a state favorite for many years and all this time he was also a closet gay too. Some things just are not allowed via majority of the law. So those in my state speedily had him removed from office but the shame remains. He was the Idaho version of the Watergate scandal that took down Richard Nixon. You can go claim he was the victim of a sting operation, but where is your proof of that at?
From whence I came and whence I went heaven said I was too evil and sent me to hell. Demons and devils succeeded in breaking my soul.

Image