Anyone being affected by Proposition 8? - Page 12

classicman · 03-09-2009, 03:50 PM

Once this passes, and I'm sure it will soon, that will mark the beginning of the "slippery slope." It will begin to pass in more and more states. Whether you agree with it or not isn't the issue. Those who are fighting it in CA are doing so preemptively to their own state.

On the other hand, Lobbyists do the same thing every day. So do groups like ACORN and a whole host of others... whats the difference with this, other than you disagree with them?

sugarpop · 03-09-2009, 04:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by classicman

Once this passes, and I'm sure it will soon, that will mark the beginning of the "slippery slope." It will begin to pass in more and more states. Whether you agree with it or not isn't the issue. Those who are fighting it in CA are doing so preemptively to their own state.

On the other hand, Lobbyists do the same thing every day. So do groups like ACORN and a whole host of others... whats the difference with this, other than you disagree with them?

I believe we should get rid of lobbyists. They have completely polluted the political system.

TheMercenary · 03-09-2009, 05:15 PM

Which is why the electoral college needs to stay in place.

03-09-2009, 05:23 PM

1. Prop 8 was a citizen initiative so it has little to do with lobbyists, but I do like how classic got his ACORN dig in.

2. Only 10-15 states have such an initiative process to amend the state constitution, so I dont see the slippery slope on this one.

3. The Cal Supreme Court has yet to rule on its constitutionality. although evidently the Court is not looking favorably to overturning it, but might very well prohibit it from being retroactive...a small victory for those same sex couples now legally married in Cal.

4. Congress and Obama can and may repeal the federal Defense of Marriage Act, which woulld nullify much of the impact of state constitutional amendments like this in everything but name only (ie gay couples would have equal rights just w/o the formal marriage.)

classicman · 03-09-2009, 06:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Redux

1. Prop 8 was a citizen initiative so it has little to do with lobbyists, but I do like how classic got his ACORN dig in.

Thanks

I learned that from tw.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Redux

2. Only 10-15 states have such an initiative process to amend the state constitution, so I dont see the slippery slope on this one.

Once one state has passed it, it will be much easier for other states as the precedent will have been set.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Redux

3. The Cal Supreme Court has yet to rule on its constitutionality. although evidently the Court is not looking favorably to overturning it, but might very well prohibit it from being retroactive...a small victory for those same sex couples now legally married in Cal.

Agreed

Quote:

Originally Posted by Redux

4. Congress and Obama can and may repeal the federal Defense of Marriage Act, which would nullify much of the impact of state constitutional amendments like this in everything but name only (ie gay couples would have equal rights just w/o the formal marriage.)

That would be a start.
This issue is headed in the right direction. It will happen soon.

Urbane Guerrilla · 03-09-2009, 09:24 PM

What the too-conservative are missing here is that a "union" encourages a lifestyle of commitment to one other, and thus encourages a life that isn't sexually promiscuous. Therefore, it's a social institution that causes gay people to be more like straight people -- and where would straight people complain on that score?

Even Saint Paul would approve.

X-Lydia sez to me rather often that the most determined support for Prop. 8 seems to come from the people who overdo on gender roles within marriage, and are made very itchy at visualizing a marriage that doesn't hew so rigidly to the gender roles they've been taught since babyhood. She regards this as a terrible intellectual failing.

Happy Monkey · 03-09-2009, 09:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Urbane Guerrilla

What the too-conservative are missing here is that a "union" encourages a lifestyle of commitment to one other, and thus encourages a life that isn't sexually promiscuous. Therefore, it's a social institution that causes gay people to be more like straight people -- and where would straight people complain on that score?

They don't want gay people to be more like straight people. They view the evolving attitude towards tolerance as "defining away deviancy".

Sundae · 03-10-2009, 06:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Urbane Guerrilla

Even Saint Paul would approve.

You think?
Women-should-worship-God-by-worshipping-their-man St Paul?
The-reason-the-Catholic-church-can't-countenance-women-priests St Paul?
The-reason-evangelical-Christians-believe-women-should-be-barefoot-and-pregnant St Paul?

Of course I give him leeway for having written what he did a v-e-r-y long time ago. But given that the Church allows no such leeway I think you may have another St Paul in mind.

piercehawkeye45 · 03-10-2009, 11:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Urbane Guerrilla

What the too-conservative are missing here is that a "union" encourages a lifestyle of commitment to one other, and thus encourages a life that isn't sexually promiscuous. Therefore, it's a social institution that causes gay people to be more like straight people -- and where would straight people complain on that score?

So homosexuals are more sexually promiscuous then straight people?

This law will not change the lifestyles of homosexuals, it will just allow them to gain a social status and the benefits from that. The ones that want to be in a relationship are in a relationship. The ones that don't want to be in a relationship aren't.

Aliantha · 03-09-2009, 09:47 PM

The 'too conservatives' are threatened by gay people appearing to be ordinary in any way. It's the differences that make conservatives or anti gays feel superior. If they're the same, how will they then define their own relationships?

DanaC · 03-10-2009, 06:36 AM

Oh yeah...the other St Paul.

Undertoad · 03-10-2009, 11:42 AM

Pre-AIDS, gays were notoriously more promiscuous. There were bathhouses in every city where gays could go get laid anonymously. Bette Midler started her career entertaining in them.

Many of UG's notions of culture are decades old.

Shawnee123 · 03-10-2009, 12:33 PM

Straight people can get laid anonymously in my bathroom.

DanaC · 03-10-2009, 12:36 PM

That's just begging to be a sigline...

Shawnee123 · 03-10-2009, 12:37 PM

True. Too long for a user title, do you think?

03-09-2009, 03:50 PM	#1
classicman barely disguised asshole, keeper of all that is holy. Join Date: Nov 2007 Posts: 23,401	Once this passes, and I'm sure it will soon, that will mark the beginning of the "slippery slope." It will begin to pass in more and more states. Whether you agree with it or not isn't the issue. Those who are fighting it in CA are doing so preemptively to their own state. On the other hand, Lobbyists do the same thing every day. So do groups like ACORN and a whole host of others... whats the difference with this, other than you disagree with them? __________________ "like strapping a pillow on a bull in a china shop" Bullitt Last edited by classicman; 03-09-2009 at 03:55 PM.

03-09-2009, 05:15 PM	#3
TheMercenary “Hypocrisy: prejudice with a halo” Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Savannah, Georgia Posts: 21,393	Which is why the electoral college needs to stay in place. __________________ Anyone but the this most fuked up President in History in 2012!

03-09-2009, 09:24 PM	#6
Urbane Guerrilla Person who doesn't update the user title Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Southern California Posts: 6,674	What the too-conservative are missing here is that a "union" encourages a lifestyle of commitment to one other, and thus encourages a life that isn't sexually promiscuous. Therefore, it's a social institution that causes gay people to be more like straight people -- and where would straight people complain on that score? Even Saint Paul would approve. X-Lydia sez to me rather often that the most determined support for Prop. 8 seems to come from the people who overdo on gender roles within marriage, and are made very itchy at visualizing a marriage that doesn't hew so rigidly to the gender roles they've been taught since babyhood. She regards this as a terrible intellectual failing. __________________ Wanna stop school shootings? End Gun-Free Zones, of course.

03-09-2009, 09:47 PM	#10
Aliantha trying hard to be a better person Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Brisbane, Australia Posts: 16,493	The 'too conservatives' are threatened by gay people appearing to be ordinary in any way. It's the differences that make conservatives or anti gays feel superior. If they're the same, how will they then define their own relationships? __________________ Kind words are the music of the world. F. W. Faber

03-10-2009, 12:33 PM	#13
Shawnee123 Why, you're a regular Alfred E Einstein, ain't ya? Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 21,206	Straight people can get laid anonymously in my bathroom. __________________ A word to the wise ain't necessary - it's the stupid ones who need the advice. --Bill Cosby

03-09-2009, 05:23 PM	#4
Redux Guest Posts: n/a	1. Prop 8 was a citizen initiative so it has little to do with lobbyists, but I do like how classic got his ACORN dig in. 2. Only 10-15 states have such an initiative process to amend the state constitution, so I dont see the slippery slope on this one. 3. The Cal Supreme Court has yet to rule on its constitutionality. although evidently the Court is not looking favorably to overturning it, but might very well prohibit it from being retroactive...a small victory for those same sex couples now legally married in Cal. 4. Congress and Obama can and may repeal the federal Defense of Marriage Act, which woulld nullify much of the impact of state constitutional amendments like this in everything but name only (ie gay couples would have equal rights just w/o the formal marriage.)

03-10-2009, 06:36 AM	#11
DanaC We have to go back, Kate! Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Yorkshire Posts: 25,964	Oh yeah...the other St Paul.

03-10-2009, 11:42 AM	#12
Undertoad Radical Centrist Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Cottage of Prussia Posts: 31,423	Pre-AIDS, gays were notoriously more promiscuous. There were bathhouses in every city where gays could go get laid anonymously. Bette Midler started her career entertaining in them. Many of UG's notions of culture are decades old.

03-10-2009, 12:36 PM	#14
DanaC We have to go back, Kate! Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Yorkshire Posts: 25,964	That's just begging to be a sigline...

03-10-2009, 12:37 PM	#15
Shawnee123 Why, you're a regular Alfred E Einstein, ain't ya? Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 21,206	True. Too long for a user title, do you think? __________________ A word to the wise ain't necessary - it's the stupid ones who need the advice. --Bill Cosby

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)