California Attorney General Asks State Supreme Court to Void Gay Marriage Ban

  • Thread starter Thread starter peregrinus_WA
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
peregrinus_WA said:
You knew this was comingI am calling for a complete boycott of California. They are already morally bankrupt. We need to financially bankrupt them. Only then will they get the hint.
Click to expand...
You will be boycotting many, many, many, many things if you try to do that. Also, I would not want to financially bankrupt that has so many resources that the rest of the country depends on so heavily.

The voters of California have made a plea to the rest of the country- “we MUST have gay marriage!”. By getting scared, and INCREDIBLY naively thinking that all those gay rights activists would just sit quiet and accept defeat (nobody can throw a big, dramatic temper tantrum like a group of angry gay people!), they begged for their vote to be fought in the supreme court- and overturned. They also ensured it will set an example for other states to do the same- or for someone to get it to the US supreme court, and it is overturned there as well.
 
m134e5 said:
(nobody can throw a big, dramatic temper tantrum like a group of angry gay people!),
Click to expand...
How is asserting basic civil rights throwing a “temper tantrum?” Maybe if conservative Catholics and Protestants had supported truly equal civil unions a long time ago, the gay community would not have pushed so hard for “gay marriage.”
 
StAnastasia said:
That’s just silly! You can think whatever you want about the morality of two men or two women loving each other. Just don’t attack their right to equal protection in a secular society.
Click to expand...
StA,

Gays have the same rights to equal protection already, what this group is looking for SPECIAL PRIVELEGE not equal protection.
 
Yerusalyim said:
StA,

Gays have the same rights to equal protection already, what this group is looking for SPECIAL PRIVELEGE not equal protection.
Click to expand...
What is important is that the children of gay and lesbian couples receive protections equal to those given to children of heterosexual couples. And if marriage confers unique protection to married adults – e.g., property, inheritance, hospital visitation, medical powers, etc. – these ought to be accessible to non-heterosexual couples.
 
m134e5 said:
You will be boycotting many, many, many, many things if you try to do that. .
Click to expand...
Yes. You would even have to boycott the Catholic church, since it allows married gays (single sex marriage) to teach theology supporting homosexual marriage in its Catholic colleges.
 
StAnastasia said:
What is important is that the children of gay and lesbian couples receive protections equal to those given to children of heterosexual couples. And if marriage confers unique protection to married adults – e.g., property, inheritance, hospital visitation, medical powers, etc. – these ought to be accessible to non-heterosexual couples.
Click to expand...
As soon as a homosexual couple naturally has a child, I guess we should consider that…

In the meantime, the child has the same rights as any child. In the case where homosexual couples feel compelled to and are allowed to adopt, they can draw up legal contracts that cover things they need covered - inheritance, hospital visitation, medical powers, etc.

There is no reason to change society in order to accommodate people who choose to go outside of societal norms.
 
bobzills said:
Yes. You would even have to boycott the Catholic church, since it allows married gays (single sex marriage) to teach theology supporting homosexual marriage in its Catholic colleges.
Click to expand...
You don’t have to boycott the Catholic Church…just the “Catholic” college. However, it would be nice to see the Church take actions in those cases.
 
RobertLGarrett said:
You don’t have to boycott the Catholic Church…just the “Catholic” college. However, it would be nice to see the Church take actions in those cases.
Click to expand...
The Catholic college operates under permission from the local bishop. So if the Roman Catholic bishop sees nothing wrong with homosexual marriages and teaching that it is in accord with Catholic principles, then why should you boycott California, which is a secular institution?
 
bobzills said:
The Catholic college operates under permission from the local bishop. So if the Roman Catholic bishop sees nothing wrong with homosexual marriages and teaching that it is in accord with Catholic principles, then why should you boycott California, which is a secular institution?
Click to expand...
:confused:

People can boycott anything they want. The fact that a Catholic bishop approves of and/or condones something which goes against Church teaching (taking your word for it), does not make it “in accord with Catholic principles.”

Catholics can boycott something “Catholic” or secular if it’s not in line with Catholic teaching and/or principles.

You are making very strange arguments. :whacky:
 
The majority of discussions on gays here quickly go off on a tangent.
I’m not concerned about the attorney general’s action because gay advocates have already taken proposition 8 to court. They too will appeal it to the state supreme court if the lose in lower courts. So I don’t see that his action has importance.
If though the courts are able to overthrow proposition 8, I would think this a terrible blow against our political institutions. It would become so evident that political elites can overrule democratic decisions that many people would give up and think that our traditional democratic way of life has largely come to an end. People have already lost a lot of faith in government since the days of Nixon (and I have lived long enough to see the difference), and this would create a greater loss of faith in our democratic way of life.
 
RobertLGarrett said:
As soon as a homosexual couple naturally has a child, I guess we should consider that…
Click to expand...
Two infertile couples in our parish adopted girls abandoned in Chinese orphanages. One couple is lesbian, the other heterosexual. The girls deserve equal rights and protections under the law. That’s what I seek to protect, regardless of the interests of the two sets of parents. The girls deserve equal treatment and protection. Incidentally, the daughter of the lesbian couple has a huge crush on my son.

StAnastasia
 
StAnastasia said:
Two infertile couples in our parish adopted girls abandoned in Chinese orphanages. One couple is lesbian, the other heterosexual. The girls deserve equal rights and protections under the law. That’s what I seek to protect, regardless of the interests of the two sets of parents. The girls deserve equal treatment and protection. Incidentally, the daughter of the lesbian couple has a huge crush on my son.

StAnastasia
Click to expand...
Name the difference in protection for the children, other than the ones you listed, which can’t be handled through attorneys without changing marriage.
 
StAnastasia said:
That’s just silly! You can think whatever you want about the morality of two men or two women loving each other. Just don’t attack their right to equal protection in a secular society.
Click to expand...
Equal protection has to do with the rights of individuals. or partners, corporation, etc. In the case of homosexuals who claim the right to be treated as a married couple, they have yet to establish this right. But what I am talking about is the action of the so-called "gay community " which is primarily a political bodt trying to change the existing law which does not (yet) acknowledge such a right. And indeed they would use the law to muzzle everyone who dares publicly to disagree with their claim OR to say that homosexuality is wrong.
 
RobertLGarrett said:
Well then, we have no disagreement. 👍 The “marriage ban” should be upheld.
Click to expand...
What I don;t understand is why the state of California should ban same sex marriages, but it is OK for Catholic colleges to have gay ex-priests teaching that homosexual marriage is in accord with Catholicism and the Bible?
 
I don’t get it.
If California is going bankrupt with USD40 Billion deficit and there would probably be not enough resources to get get by with basic services, why prioritize precious dollars to provide legitimacy to all immoral gay marriage?

I think Maslow does not apply in gay communities such as in California.
 
bobzills said:
What I don;t understand is why the state of California should ban same sex marriages, but it is OK for Catholic colleges to have gay ex-priests teaching that homosexual marriage is in accord with Catholicism and the Bible?
Click to expand...
Let me guess:
Because these gay ex-priests are not the marrying type?😛
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top