Prop 8

[Xavier434]

Originally posted by: MH2007

Originally posted by: DealMonkey
That's a little rich for my blood. I'd go for $5 or maybe $10.

I forgot to mention one other point -- I heard that this proposition was supported financially from out-of-state orgs -- and I strongly believe we should ban this sort of thing in California.

Where do these out-of-state organizations get off putting props on our ballot and then spending huge amounts of cash to affect the outcome of our state election? That's just absurd and I would say so regardless of the specific issue or who was behind it.

Actually, No on 8 spent just as much money (more actually): $37.6M vs. $35.8M

In-state money was almost dead even

http://www.mercurynews.com/new...0889066?nclick_check=1

"Of the $51 million given by California contributors, less than $550,000 separated the totals raised by the two sides in the emotional election."

So unless I'm missing something, No on 8 actually got more money from out-of-state.

Whether or not that is true shouldn't matter though. I agree with DealMonkey. State amendments need to be represented by only those who reside in that state. Otherwise, what's the point of having it at the state level at all? I realize you need to take the good with the bad when one says that but still.

 

[gevorg]

Originally posted by: Xavier434

Originally posted by: gevorg

Originally posted by: Harvey

Originally posted by: gevorg

What I learned from this thread: If you don't like someone's views, call them a bigot so others would chip in and call then a bigot too. The more you say it, the better your stance is. Sandbox name calling helps too.

If you didn't learn that this issue IS about bigotry, and calling it by its ugly name is the only appropriate action, then you didn't learn anything. :thumbsdown: :|

Grow up and watch C-SPAN or something.

You're not discussing/debating you're just bullshiting. Is this your preferred way of communication (name calling)?

Harvey easily has more than 10 times the number of quality posts consisting of discussion and debating than you have total and that is me really selling him short.

If thats how it is, then all props for him, I'm just pointing out a negative trend in this particular thread.

 

[MH2007]

Originally posted by: 0roo0roo

Originally posted by: MH2007
Wow, I voted no and thought this didn't have a chance to pass (based on polls that I had glanced over while doing my research).

Boy was I wrong. I wonder how many of our fellow Obama voters didn't bother voting on this?

theres no squeezing out of this.
9.9 million voted for obama/mccain
9.9 million voted on prop 8
people who voted didn't skip things this time.

Good catch. Actually I looked at the latest numbers here

http://election.cbsnews.com/el...8/state.shtml?state=CA

and it shows 341,971 more votes on Prop 8 than on the Presidential election counted so far.

I looks 628 precints haven't reported Presidential results that did report on Prop 8 results at the time I took down those numbers, but that still looks odd to me. Maybe I just underestimated how much interest the voters had Prop 8.

 

[Suspicious-Teach8788]

Originally posted by: Atomic Rooster

Originally posted by: Jschmuck2

Originally posted by: Atomic Rooster
Same-sex marriage ban wins

(11-05) 10:08 PST SACRAMENTO -- After a heated, divisive campaign, fueled by a record $73 million of spending, California voters backed Proposition 8, which would change the state Constitution to ban same-sex marriage.

With 96 percent of the vote counted, the measure was winning by a decisive 400,000-vote margin, 52.2 percent to 47.8 percent. It had piled up huge margins in the Central Valley, but lost in every Bay Area county but Solano.

That pitch also was a big help for the Democratic presidential ticket. Both Barack Obama and Joe Biden could give 100 percent support to the campaign's efforts to preserve rights, even though neither of them supports same-sex marriage.

Isn't that interesting. Even Nobama and his sidekick Joe the Senator are against same-sex marriage.

Still bitter, huh? That's ok, time will pass.

Any major political candidate in the foreseeable future has to be anti-gay marriage if they want to win anything. This is the sad truth of our country. The best answer he could have given was "let the states decide," and that's essentially what he did.

Not bitter at all. I just find it interesting how everybody spews their hatred and anger towards those that supported prop 8, while these two jokers get a pass. I also find it interesting that you think that they will have to anger a large part of their constituency by saying they are against gay marriage just to get elected. Even saying "let the states" decide is a cop out for a politician instead of standing up for what they feel is correct.

See, that's the thing about Prop 8 though. You can group its supporters in many categories:

1) Anti-Gay/Lesbian bigots. Fine, you have every right to label certain individuals like that

2) Those who are tolerant of gays but choose not to follow that lifestyle themselves, but are iffy about it. It's just like those who don't mind the second amendment but get iffy when people start carrying guns around them.

3) Those who have been misinformed by the campaign.

4) Those who look at it from a constitutionality standpoint. Some people believe that we passed it in 2000, and was wrongfully overturned by activist judges or whatever and now want to restore the old state.

Obama is opposed to Prop 8 on CONSTITUTIONALITY ISSUES. Read his comments. He doesn't say that same sex marriage should be in CA. He says he doesn't believe in it. He's not vehemently against Prop 8 either. It's more like he feels its unnecessary because the constitution should not be used to restrict people but rather expand on liberties. There you go. So he, like many others do not believe in gay marriage. What now? Call him a bigot?

I really hate how this board just trash talks about prop 8 supporters like they're the scum of the earth. I think the truth is MANY people are not for gay marriage in general. They're not gonna come out and say it, but once again the voters have spoken.

 

[Corn]

Originally posted by: gevorg

Originally posted by: Harvey

Originally posted by: gevorg

What I learned from this thread: If you don't like someone's views, call them a bigot so others would chip in and call then a bigot too. The more you say it, the better your stance is. Sandbox name calling helps too.

If you didn't learn that this issue IS about bigotry, and calling it by its ugly name is the only appropriate action, then you didn't learn anything. :thumbsdown: :|

Grow up and watch C-SPAN or something.

You're not discussing/debating you're just bullshiting. Is this your preferred way of communication (name calling)?

This is exactly his preferred way of communication.

 

[Xavier434]

Originally posted by: DLeRium
See, that's the thing about Prop 8 though. You can group its supporters in many categories:

1) Anti-Gay/Lesbian bigots. Fine, you have every right to label certain individuals like that

2) Those who are tolerant of gays but choose not to follow that lifestyle themselves, but are iffy about it. It's just like those who don't mind the second amendment but get iffy when people start carrying guns around them.

3) Those who have been misinformed by the campaign.

4) Those who look at it from a constitutionality standpoint. Some people believe that we passed it in 2000, and was wrongfully overturned by activist judges or whatever and now want to restore the old state.

Obama is opposed to Prop 8 on CONSTITUTIONALITY ISSUES. Read his comments. He doesn't say that same sex marriage should be in CA. He says he doesn't believe in it. He's not vehemently against Prop 8 either. It's more like he feels its unnecessary because the constitution should not be used to restrict people but rather expand on liberties. There you go. So he, like many others do not believe in gay marriage. What now? Call him a bigot?

I really hate how this board just trash talks about prop 8 supporters like they're the scum of the earth. I think the truth is MANY people are not for gay marriage in general. They're not gonna come out and say it, but once again the voters have spoken.

You know, you can use all of those same reasons when describing Americans back in the day where racism flourished both on the streets and in government with exception of your #4. That's the problem. You are right that the voters have spoken, but the fact of the matter is that they spoke in ways where they truly have nothing to lose or gain in their lives. NO ONE who votes Yes on these amendments will see their lives change what so ever. Only those who are gay and possibly even heterosexual domestic partners will see their lives change and that will only be in a negative way.

"Think of children?" Yes, let's think about them. Let's think about how many of them are currently in foster care when there are 5 star homosexual couples out there who want to get married, want to adopt, and who are both personally and fiscally responsible enough to raise them very well. Let's think about all of the current children being raised by heterosexual domestic partners who are now at greater risk of having to endure more financial hardships which leads to things like no insurance or less money to dedicate to their college funds. Let's think about them.

Face it man. The people spoke about something that they know absolutely nothing about, and all it did was act directly against liberty with zero benefits for anyone in the process beyond a false sense of peace of mind. Hopefully there will be a day when enough people realize that and they speak again.

 

[MH2007]

Originally posted by: sactoking

Originally posted by: DealMonkey

Originally posted by: RightIsWrong
That is the basis of my argument. California (I'm assuming) has some equal protection clause/amendment in its constitution that this new passed law is in direct conflict with. It will be heard and any sensible judge would rule against it.

That's exactly what California has, an equal protection clause. It's the same clause that caused the CA Supreme Court to rule against the last proposition that tried to ban gay marriage. Prop 22, I believe.

And for whomever was asking if it's retroactive, I do not believe that it can retroactively affect those who have already been married.

The difference is that Prop 8 is an amendment to the CA Constitution. None of the other measures were amendments, they were laws.

If Prop 8 is in fact passed, the effect will likely be this: The CA Constitution Equal Protection clause will state "Everyone has rights, blah, blah, blah..." Then later on the Constitution will say "This has been Amended to remove the ability for homosexuals to marry from the Equal protection Clause."

Considering that the Prop initially went before the CA Supreme Court and they rejected it as misleading, then it was reworded by the Atty General, then the CASC affirmed the Prop, I don't see them later ruling on it. Again, it is NOT in conflict with the CA Constitution, it CHANGES the CA Constitution.

Also, the wording it has is something to the effect of "only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California", which means that the prior legal marriages would be null and void, as would other unions performed in other states.

I am fairly certain that is not what happened. The petition was certified under the name/wording under which it was signed. There was a suit filed to throw it out. After the suit to throw the Prop out was denied, the CAG chose to change the name/wording of the Prop. There was then a suit to change the name/wording back to how it was when it was certified, but was rejected because the wording that the CAG chose was deemed to be accurate. But as far as I know it was never ruled that the original wording was misleading (or even inferior in any way to what the CAG chose).

I believe the rest of your post is pretty much dead-on, though.

 

[Atomic Rooster]

Pop quiz.

How many states recognize same sex marriage?

How many nations recognize same sex marriage?

 

[Xavier434]

Originally posted by: Atomic Rooster
Pop quiz.

How many states recognize same sex marriage?

How many nations recognize same sex marriage?

Add a third to that one:

How many outright ban it along with any other form of legal union between two people?

 

[Suspicious-Teach8788]

Originally posted by: Xavier434

Originally posted by: DLeRium
See, that's the thing about Prop 8 though. You can group its supporters in many categories:

1) Anti-Gay/Lesbian bigots. Fine, you have every right to label certain individuals like that

2) Those who are tolerant of gays but choose not to follow that lifestyle themselves, but are iffy about it. It's just like those who don't mind the second amendment but get iffy when people start carrying guns around them.

3) Those who have been misinformed by the campaign.

4) Those who look at it from a constitutionality standpoint. Some people believe that we passed it in 2000, and was wrongfully overturned by activist judges or whatever and now want to restore the old state.

Obama is opposed to Prop 8 on CONSTITUTIONALITY ISSUES. Read his comments. He doesn't say that same sex marriage should be in CA. He says he doesn't believe in it. He's not vehemently against Prop 8 either. It's more like he feels its unnecessary because the constitution should not be used to restrict people but rather expand on liberties. There you go. So he, like many others do not believe in gay marriage. What now? Call him a bigot?

I really hate how this board just trash talks about prop 8 supporters like they're the scum of the earth. I think the truth is MANY people are not for gay marriage in general. They're not gonna come out and say it, but once again the voters have spoken.

You know, you can use all of those same reasons when describing Americans back in the day where racism flourished both on the streets and in government with exception of your #4. That's the problem. You are right that the voters have spoken, but the fact of the matter is that they spoke in ways where they truly have nothing to lose or gain in their lives. NO ONE who votes Yes on these amendments will see their lives change what so ever. Only those who are gay and possibly even heterosexual domestic partners will see their lives change and that will only be in a negative way.

"Think of children?" Yes, let's think about them. Let's think about how many of them are currently in foster care when there are 5 star homosexual couples out there who are both personally and fiscally responsible enough to raise them very well. Let's think about all of the current children being raised by heterosexual domestic partners who are now going to have to endure more financial hardships which leads to things like no insurance or less money to dedicate to their college funds. Let's think about them.

Face it man. The people spoke about something that they know absolutely nothing about, and all it did was act directly against liberty with zero benefits for anyone in the process beyond a false sense of peace of mind. Hopefully there will be a day when enough people realize that and they speak again.

Tons of people voted for it and voted against it not knowing much about it, what's the point? Many people in every campaign have been misinformed. This goes for both sides of Prop 8. I voted against it, but I can see why people voted for it.

What I'm saying is not everyone who voted for it was looking at it from a "I don't want gays to be married" standpoint.

Racism is always equivocated to this, but I say it's slightly different. Is it discrimination still? Yeah, but now we're on a fine line, and Obama chose to walk a fine line with Prop 8 when he said No but he's still fundamentally against same-sex marriage. Regardless of what you believe in for marriage or for rights, we're going to have to wait for that day when people can see clearly and make the right choice.

 

[JD50]

A question for the "YOU'RE A BIGOT, BIGOT" crowd. Do you consider Barrack Obama and Joe Biden bigots?

Disclaimer - I have no problem with gay marriage.

 

[sactoking]

Originally posted by: MH2007
I am fairly certain that is not what happened. The petition was certified under the name/wording under which it was signed. There was a suit filed to throw it out. After the suit to throw the Prop out was denied, the CAG chose to change the name/wording of the Prop. There was then a suit to change the name/wording back to how it was when it was certified, but was rejected because the wording that the CAG chose was deemed to be accurate. But as far as I know it was never ruled that the original wording was misleading (or even inferior in any way to what the CAG chose).

I believe the rest of your post is pretty much dead-on, though.

You're right, the AG changed the wording and the SC affirmed it as correct. There was no prior challenge of the wording to the CA SC.

 

[jonks]

Originally posted by: JD50
A question for the "YOU'RE A BIGOT, BIGOT" crowd. Do you consider Barrack Obama and Joe Biden bigots?

Disclaimer - I have no problem with gay marriage.

No, and Obama sponsored a "no on 8" ad.

There's a difference between holding a personal belief that marriage should be between a man and a woman and voting for a constitutional amendment which discriminates against a group of people. Similar to being personally against abortion but not pushing for making it illegal.

 

[Xavier434]

Originally posted by: DLeRium
Tons of people voted for it and voted against it not knowing much about it, what's the point? Many people in every campaign have been misinformed. This goes for both sides of Prop 8. I voted against it, but I can see why people voted for it.

What I'm saying is not everyone who voted for it was looking at it from a "I don't want gays to be married" standpoint.

Racism is always equivocated to this, but I say it's slightly different. Is it discrimination still? Yeah, but now we're on a fine line, and Obama chose to walk a fine line with Prop 8 when he said No but he's still fundamentally against same-sex marriage. Regardless of what you believe in for marriage or for rights, we're going to have to wait for that day when people can see clearly and make the right choice.

Then what did they want? What was their point of view?

Originally posted by: JD50
A question for the "YOU'RE A BIGOT, BIGOT" crowd. Do you consider Barrack Obama and Joe Biden bigots?

Disclaimer - I have no problem with gay marriage.

Depends. Are they actively fighting for and/or support banning gay marriage?

 

[daniel49]

there goes a liberal judges usurption of power as he legislates from the bench. Down in flames baby.
And this in Cal of all places.

 

[Atomic Rooster]

Originally posted by: jonks

Originally posted by: JD50
A question for the "YOU'RE A BIGOT, BIGOT" crowd. Do you consider Barrack Obama and Joe Biden bigots?

Disclaimer - I have no problem with gay marriage.

No, and Obama sponsored a "no on 8" ad.

There's a difference between holding a personal belief that marriage should be between a man and a woman and voting for a constitutional amendment which discriminates against a group of people. Similar to being personally against abortion but not pushing for making it illegal.

Of course Obama sponsored a "No on 8" ad. He was trying to get elected to the office of president. It was good politics. Nothing more.

 

[JD50]

Originally posted by: jonks

Originally posted by: JD50
A question for the "YOU'RE A BIGOT, BIGOT" crowd. Do you consider Barrack Obama and Joe Biden bigots?

Disclaimer - I have no problem with gay marriage.

No, and Obama sponsored a "no on 8" ad.

There's a difference between holding a personal belief that marriage should be between a man and a woman and voting for a constitutional amendment which discriminates against a group of people.

When it comes to things like bigotry and racism, there really isn't a difference. So I guess there really aren't any racists here because no one is voting to re-enact slavery or bring back segregation?

People here that disagree with gay marriage are being called bigots. Since Obama and Biden both hold that view, why wouldn't they be considered bigots as well?

 

[MH2007]

Originally posted by: Xavier434

Originally posted by: MH2007

Originally posted by: DealMonkey
That's a little rich for my blood. I'd go for $5 or maybe $10.

I forgot to mention one other point -- I heard that this proposition was supported financially from out-of-state orgs -- and I strongly believe we should ban this sort of thing in California.

Where do these out-of-state organizations get off putting props on our ballot and then spending huge amounts of cash to affect the outcome of our state election? That's just absurd and I would say so regardless of the specific issue or who was behind it.

Actually, No on 8 spent just as much money (more actually): $37.6M vs. $35.8M

In-state money was almost dead even

http://www.mercurynews.com/new...0889066?nclick_check=1

"Of the $51 million given by California contributors, less than $550,000 separated the totals raised by the two sides in the emotional election."

So unless I'm missing something, No on 8 actually got more money from out-of-state.

Whether or not that is true shouldn't matter though. I agree with DealMonkey. State amendments need to be represented by only those who reside in that state. Otherwise, what's the point of having it at the state level at all? I realize you need to take the good with the bad when one says that but still.

Oh, I definitely agree. I just wanted to clear up what seems to be a fairly common misconception. DealMonkey's post seems to imply that he thinks the out-of-state money was just on the Yes on 8 side. It wasn't explicitly stated here so this may not apply to DealMonkey, but it seems like many just look at the single large contribution from the Mormon church and assume that the out-of-state money was huge just on the Yes on 8 side.

 

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: Ocguy31

I voted "no", sorry. But i'm just a straight white upper-middle class male with no disabilites, so my vote is not important to anyone.

Good enough, and yes, your vote is important.

Originally posted by: Ocguy31

Grow up and watch C-SPAN or something.

You're not discussing/debating you're just bullshiting. Is this your preferred way of communication (name calling)?

NOT calling bigotry for what it is would be denying the truth. You can try to dismiss it all you want, but it doesn't change the fact that, those who voted for Prop 8, are exactly what I called them... BIGOTS! I'll leave it to you to tell us which side you supported.

 

[jonks]

Originally posted by: daniel49
there goes a liberal judges usurption of power as he legislates from the bench. Down in flames baby.
And this in Cal of all places.

Gay marriage was passed by the CA legislature twice and vetoed by the governator. One man thwarted the voice of the elected officials of the people. All the judges did was reassert the voice of the legislature.

Are you a supporter of segregation too? I hear it stuck around until some activist judges decided enough was enough.

 

[abaez]

Originally posted by: jonks

Originally posted by: JD50
A question for the "YOU'RE A BIGOT, BIGOT" crowd. Do you consider Barrack Obama and Joe Biden bigots?

Disclaimer - I have no problem with gay marriage.

No, and Obama sponsored a "no on 8" ad.

There's a difference between holding a personal belief that marriage should be between a man and a woman and voting for a constitutional amendment which discriminates against a group of people. Similar to being personally against abortion but not pushing for making it illegal.

http://prnwire.com/cgi-bin/sto...2008/0004916383&EDATE=

"Senators Obama and Biden have made clear their commitment to fighting
for equal rights for all Americans whether it's by granting LGBT Americans
all the civil rights and benefits available to heterosexual couples, or
repealing 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell,'" said a statement issued by campaign
spokesman Ben LaBolt. "Senator Obama has already announced that the
Obama-Biden ticket opposes Proposition 8 and similar discriminatory
constitutional amendments that could roll back the civil rights he and
Senator Biden strongly believe should be afforded to all Americans."

 

[JD50]

This is reminds me of the liberals that ridicule and make fun of Christians, calling them stupid, deniers of science, etc.. But I don't believe that I've ever seen them say the same things about Obama, who is obviously a practicing Christian.

 

[daniel49]

Originally posted by: jonks

Originally posted by: daniel49
there goes a liberal judges usurption of power as he legislates from the bench. Down in flames baby.
And this in Cal of all places.

Gay marriage was passed by the CA legislature twice and vetoed by the governator. One man thwarted the voice of the elected officials of the people. All the judges did was reassert the voice of the legislature.

Are you a supporter of segregation too? I hear it stuck around until some activist judges decided enough was enough.

people don't want the gay agenda shoved down thier throats. Its really as simple as that.
Gays are allowed thier civil unions and should be content with that.

 

[mugs]

Originally posted by: JD50
A question for the "YOU'RE A BIGOT, BIGOT" crowd. Do you consider Barrack Obama and Joe Biden bigots?

Disclaimer - I have no problem with gay marriage.

Notwithstanding anything they claim publicly, I doubt Barack Obama or Joe Biden have a problem with gay marriage. I think a lot of politicians are in favor of allowing gay marriage, but don't have the courage to do anything about it.

 

[JD50]

Originally posted by: Xavier434

Originally posted by: JD50
A question for the "YOU'RE A BIGOT, BIGOT" crowd. Do you consider Barrack Obama and Joe Biden bigots?

Disclaimer - I have no problem with gay marriage.

Depends. Are they actively fighting for and/or support banning gay marriage?

So it's ok for someone to have a bigoted personal belief as long as they go against their convictions in the political arena?