Rock the Vote - Prop 8, YES/NO?(Threads merged)

Help keep the court ruling in place. Why the hell shouldn't everyone be allowed to get married? I really don't get it! :?:

Gay Marriages to be Decided at November Election


Today, California Secretary of State Debra Bowen announced (pdf) that the initiative to ban gay marriage through a state amendment change qualifies for the November 4th ballot. 1,120,801 signatures were submitted and enough signatures qualified through a random sample signature check. If passed, the amendment would change California's consitutution to define marriage as a union “between a man and a woman.” One poll said that Californians "narrowly" reject gay marriage.

LIMIT ON MARRIAGE. CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT. Amends the California Constitution to provide that only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California. Summary of estimate by Legislative Analyst and Director of Finance of fiscal impact on state and local government: The measure would have no fiscal effect on state or local governments. This is because there would be no change to the manner in which marriages are currently recognized by the state. (Initiative 07-0068.)​

Opponents of same-sex marriages have asked the California Supreme Court to stay the ban on the marriages until voters decide, but no decision has been made yet. For now, county clerks offices around California are preparing for a June 17 start date for an influx of marriages to perform.

This morning, the LA Times reported the positive impacts of allowing gay marriages -- a $370 million boost to the state's economy. However, the amendment change's use of "fiscal effect" only refers to budget used to implement the bill, not increases money spent within the California economy.
Other propositions Californians will be voting on in November include a "high-speed rail bond, a measure relating to the treatment of farm animals, a children’s hospital bond, a parental notification for abortion measure, a measure involving the sentencing of nonviolent offenders, a measure regarding increased criminal penalties and public safety funding, and a renewable energy measure," says the Secretary of State's website.

 

What about "the will of the people"? Unless i've missed something, don't we still have a democracy in this country?

 

Exactly. While I couldn't care less about who wants to marry who, I'm a HUGE proponent of our democracy and circumventing it because you don't like something sets a bad precedent.

 

That's the whole point of encouraging people to get out and rock the vote. To exercise our democratic right to vote. Regardless how you feel on the issue get out and vote. Obviously I would like you to vote against a constitutional amendment to define a marriage as a union between a man and a women. That's just how I roll.

 

I respectfully disagree with your opinion. However, I am glad that it is going to a vote, let the people be heard and the decsison be final. NO MATTER THE OUT COME.

Also, I really look forward to hearing all of the wacked out commercials from both camps! Should be interesting if not ugly...

 

No, we don't have a democracy, and we never did.

"...and to the REPUBLIC, for which it stands..." #-o

Furthermore, the basis for attempting to restrict homosexuals from marriage is religious in nature. Whatever happened to separation of church and state?

The union of two people is (or rather, should be) purely economical in the eyes of the state. So what basis, economically speaking, could there possibly be for not allowing such unions? None, what-so-ever.

I can't stand it when antiquated religious doctrine influences affairs of state and personal rights.

 

Maven, that is exactly what I got from the post. Nothing more nothing less. Thanks for expressing your opinion politly and also for trying to get people to the polls.

Now how do I get you to change your vote??:lol:

Get used to it. This country was founded and shaped by religious influences.

 

will of the people? most people used to think that slavery was okay and that women shouldn't vote. the constitution-and common decency-supercedes what the average person thinks is right or wrong.

 

I think we will just have to agree to disagree. :wave:

(See folks, this is the beauty of this community we have here on STR. Even when we disagree on things like religion and politics we can still agree to disagree and get along. Don't shit on that and ruin this little slice of heaven on the interwebs by getting into stupid arguments about how you dislike this or that community of biker.)

 

I fixed it for you. Now you are right.

So if the State Constitution is changed you will be ok with it, because that is what is being proposed.

Oh, all right!!

 

Partly true. This country was founded and shaped by deeply religious people who fled religious persecution to form a more perfect union where people are (or should be) free to practice whatever religion (or lack of religion) they wanted without the interference of the State.

 

this is going to happen eventually, like it has in most enlightened countries, so get used to it...

it baffles me what people are scared of and why they can't show a little compassion toward people who are different than them.

 

I'm all for gay marriage as long as the 2 chicks are HOT...:lol::lol: <--joke

I actually don't care if they want to marry or not it doesn't affect me...if they want to get married and be miserable like the rest so be it...and I prolly won't vote on this issue...

 

Just curious...why not vote on it? Will you vote at all?

 

I will vote but I have a tendency to not vote on issues like this b/c it's not my place to decide wether a gay couple should be able to get married or not...I know you'll prolly say then that is a vote for gay marriage but I was also raised that it's wrong...so I prefer to skip voting on this issue...only chiming in now b/c I'm bored..

 

That is a very respectable response. :clap: Thanks for sharing.

 

The enlightened countries are in decline. Muslim influence will spread and gay marriages will be seen as an insult to their religion.

PARIS, June 3 - A Paris court convicted French actress Brigitte Bardot of "inciting racial hatred" and fined her 15,000 euros ($23,325) on Tuesday, French media reported.

In a letter to then interior minister Nicolas Sarkozy in December 2006, the former actress, 73, and a vocal animal rights campaigner complained about the Aid el-Kebir Muslim feast, which involves the slaughter of a sheep.

Bardot said she was "fed up with the population leading us by the nose and destroying our society and country by imposing its acts."

The remarks, also published by Bardot's foundation, triggered criticism from various rights groups.

The prosecutor had also demanded a two-month suspended sentence for Bardot, who had been convicted on similar charges on four previous occasions.

 

I guess there's still the influence of old closed minded people still in power and running some countries.

 

The Constitution...

... "life liberty and the pursuit of happiness ..."

...'nuff said, Sez I!

 

You mean like the democracy they had in Nazi Germany?

We are supposedly a constitutional republic.... focused on the protection of individual liberties (remember... life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness)

I'm not sure I got the drift of your post, so...let it suffice to say that even if everyone voted to disallow "gay marriage", the dis-allowance would still be wrong. We don't have the right to tell others what they can or can't do with their personal property, regardless of the outcome of democracy (i.e. organized mob rule)