Prop 8 found to be unconstitutional...struck down!

  • Thread starter Thread starter irishpatrick
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
bingbang said:
LOL…I’m sorry but gay marriage will be legalized across america in the next 10-20 years. You definitely didn’t “win the war.”
Click to expand...
Well, since gay “marriage” isn’t yet legalized across America, the war isn’t over yet.
 
j1akey said:
It just occured to me that I can’t believe that this…allowing gay people to marry…is THE big issue that other people it doesn’t affect are getting worked up about.

Let’s see, the country is in massive debt, the economy sucks, we’ve allowed multinational corporations to basically run the government, we’ve been fighting two wars for the better part of a decade, our infrastructure is collapsing right out from under us and jobs keep getting shipped over seas and that’s just the tip of the iceberg. Not may people get all up in arms over ALL this yet now that gays can get married in California, this, THIS is where you need to make a stand… /facepalm
Click to expand...
Uh huh. Children are still starving in India.

People who aren’t affected? Do you know what’s happening in Massachusetts? Kids are forced by the State to read gay storybooks. The moment “gay marriage” is legalized, it’s spread to every part of the community. Young people are told how to perform gay sex acts.

Now, if an Irish couple moves into an otherwise all Mexican neighborhood, should they be forced to march in the Mexican parade? In San Diego, some firemen were told to put on their gear, get on the fire truck and join the gay parade.

The people will not be forced to jump on the gay bandwagon.

God bless,
Ed
 
Exalt said:
But if you’re a house of worship – which has special protections under the First Amendment – that’s a whole different ballpark. You’re already allowed to discriminate for all sorts of reasons that wouldn’t be allowed if you were leasing space to tenants, taking in students as a university, or providing adoption services. Churches are special and different, and they are *already *allowed to discriminate on the basis of religion, race, and a number of different factors, and are free to do so under the constitution.
Click to expand...
There it is again.

Freedom of worship, but not freedom of religion.
 
richard_wang said:
As expected.

The judge, Vaughn Walker is gay and was outed by the San Francisco Chronicle.

sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2010/02/07/BACF1BT7ON.DTL

And turned the whole affair into some “gay marriage” show trial.

The decision only hold precedence over Federal District of Norther California and no where else.

The next step is appeal to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals before a panel of judges and maybe en banc, ie. the entire court.

After that the United States Supreme Court.

This isn’t something the Democrats wanted for the November mid-term elections because it will bring gay marriage and the Democrats support for gay marriage front and center.

What I do fear is that will embolden militant homosexuals and we will see increased attacks on the Catholic Church and the Mormons.
Click to expand...
 
crazzeto said:
In what way was that obvious?
Click to expand...
One political party is for gay marriages and one side is against gay marriage. They said that if Catholics voted like Catholics, we wouldn’t be in this mess. “This mess” refers to prop 8 being overturned. So, if Catholics voted like Catholics, then prop 8 wouldn’t be overturned. So, which political party would prevent prop 8 from being overturned???

REPUBLICANS. Come on, you know as well as everyone else that read that post that it meant that Catholics should vote red.
 
After 39 pages, I think for now I have said my peace.

This ruling will one day lead to a near total loss of relgious freedoms. That will happen slowly and one piece at a time, and many people will not care because a great many Americans are now raised to be anti-religion and anti-God. Yet, make no mistake, one day the churches will be forced to marry same sex couples and the constitutional provisions will be ignored as they have been for the last ten years or more. When that happens some churches will simply cave-in to the laws and marry same sex couples, other churches (and especially the Catholic Church) will refuse to comply and will be forced underground to a very large degree.

That is only one result of this ruling, only one consequence of many. The real attacks will be on the family (which has been ongoing for years) and upon all houses of worship.

Wait and see.

Have a good day! 🙂
 
scipio337 said:
In it, Bob Jones University lost its tax exempt status, and rightly so, for its interracial dating ban.

My question is, and no supporter of gay marriage has addressed:

Given these legal precedents, what is to prevent the Federal government from stripping the Catholic Church of its 503(c) status for not performing gay marriages??
Click to expand...
Because Bob Jones University is not a religion. The Catholic Church is. Because the Catholic Church is a religion it is protected by the First Amendment in ways that a university is not.

Which is not to say that religious organizations won’t be stripped of their tax-exempt status. Certainly some secularists wish to remove that privilege. However, the First Amendment (as interpreted by the courts during the past 200 years) forbids government interference in religious practice. For example, the use of hallucinogenic peyote in Native American rituals.
 
exoflare said:
While it’s not “moronic” for the reasons the koolaid gang believes, it is totally redundant to say “marry somebody of the opposite sex”. The fact that even the people on the side of good are starting to acquiesce this false distinction just shows how successful all the efforts of cultural brainwashing have been. It didn’t even take that long either.
Click to expand...
Cultural brainwashing has been going on for the last 40 years, right after Pope Paul VI issued Humanae Vitae. It was a slow poison that dripped into the veins of normal people and is currently portraying dysfunctional living as somehow normal.

Pray.

god bless,
Ed
 
Exalt said:
If you’re going to engage in adoption services – where you take defenseless, vulnerable kids and whom the state has a legitimate interest in ensuring that they are protected – you’re going to have a greater level of scrutiny.
Click to expand...
Scrutiny, sure. Run out of business? No.

The point is that the Catholic agency wasn’t the sole agency. There might be an argument if the Catholic agency was the only one available. But since there were alternatives, why force the Church to violate its own teachings?
Exalt said:
If you’re an adoption agency and you won’t let gays adopt, even though all the evidence points to gay parents being just as effective as straight parents, there’s an issue there.
Click to expand...
I haven’t heard this stated yet, but gay parents are a self-selecting group. Gay couples who want to be parents must make an extra special effort to do so. And people who want to be parents make far better parents than people who don’t want to be parents. Yet heterosexual couples, by their very nature, can produce children and it doesn’t take any extraordinary effort to do so. In fact, it often takes extraordinary effort to avoid having children.

Thus when you have a small, self-selected group that wants children, of course they will be better parents. The more apt comparison should be whether gay couples with children are as effective as straight couples that planned and desired children.
 
edwest2 said:
Uh huh. Children are still starving in India.

People who aren’t affected? Do you know what’s happening in Massachusetts? Kids are forced by the State to read gay storybooks. The moment “gay marriage” is legalized, it’s spread to every part of the community. Young people are told how to perform gay sex acts.

Now, if an Irish couple moves into an otherwise all Mexican neighborhood, should they be forced to march in the Mexican parade? In San Diego, some firemen were told to put on their gear, get on the fire truck and join the gay parade.

The people will not be forced to jump on the gay bandwagon.

God bless,
Ed
Click to expand...
Can you post some proof that young people are told how to perform gay sex acts?
 
Usbek_de_Perse said:
In due deference to the position of the Catholic Church, I would like to make the following observations:
  1. The Catholic Church, as well as other churches, do not make the rules. Ours is a secular republic, founded upon belief in God, but largely established on enlightenment principles by secular Protestants and Anglicans.
  2. Defenders of the Catholic position with regard to homosexual marriage, including “experts” on Catholic Answers Live, often decry arguments based on “rights”. Yet it was these very “rights” that afforded the Catholic Church a foothold in an otherwise hostile Protestant nation. Protected by the right of freedom of religion, the Roman Catholic Church has flourished in the United States. If rights are good for the Church, they should be good for the people, all people.
  3. Despite the comments made on Catholic Answers Live from time to time, our government is designed with checks and balances. Interpretation of our constitution is not made in a plebiscite, just as Catholic doctrine and principles are not decided by the believers. Catholic commentators should be well aware of that. This is not to put our government and constitution on the same level as religious belief, of course.
  4. Has anyone really read the decision? I haven’t yet, but I will read it tomorrow. Does it make sense, and is it in tune with the spirit of our constitution?
  5. My comments here do not, in any way, change my originally stated belief that approval of homosexuality is not in line with the strict morality that Christ preached, especially with regard to marriage.
  6. Can we all cool down a bit? This is not the end of the world.
Click to expand...
‘enlightenment principles’ From where?

No one is entitled to rights for doing wrong. We The People get to decide.

Please show me a government document that refers to the United States as a “secular republic.” Is that why In God We Trust appears on our currency?

God bless,
Ed
 
scipio337 said:
Next up: claiming homosexual acts as immoral will be considered “hate speech”.
Click to expand...
I am sure you are aware that “hate speech” is not recognized in the US. The very notion is a contradiction of the First Amendment, as interpreted by the courts during the past 200 years. For example, the right of neo-Nazis to march in the predominately suburb of Skokie, Illinois.
 
What I do fear is that will embolden militant homosexuals and we will see increased attacks on the Catholic Church and the Mormons.

Yes, but not on Islam, despite the fact that it prescribes the harshest treatment of all for homosexuals. They’ll only attack those who won’t strike back.

Let’s see the militants try to come out of the closet in Riyadh and see what happens.
 
Brooklyn said:
You are showing your total ignorance of what Catholic charities are all about. The reason for any Catholic service - be it hospital, schools, charities, adoption services, etc. - is to fulfill the mission given to us by Jesus Christ. The Catholic Church’s intention has never been to make money out of it, but to win souls and take care of the widows and orphans. The Catholic Church is a non-profit organziation, always has been and always will be…
Click to expand...
Which doesn’t say anything. All “non-profit” means is that you have to spend all of the money left over after deducting operating costs before tax time. It doesn’t mean that you’re actually breaking even or operating at a loss. In fact, there was an interesting expose about the CEO of Catholic Charities San Francisco who raked in a salary of $172,000 and billed Catholic Charities for lavish meals, vacations, hair removal, even botox injections, and other personal expenditures totaling $51,770. All this while Catholic Charities was closing homeless shelters and counciling facilities citing a lack of funding. Catholic Charities operates as a business because it is a business.
 
Elizabeth502 said:
Ah yes, the favorite misunderstood and deliberately misapplied ruling. Loving affirmed heterosexual marriage as a civil right.
Click to expand...
Eh… no. Loving v Virginia established marriage as a right, not heterosexual marriage as a right. You are reading something into the decision which is not there. If you think otherwise, please provide the citation that refers to the principle that marriage is restricted to a couple involving a man and a woman.
 
bingbang said:
Can you post some proof that young people are told how to perform gay sex acts?
Click to expand...
We had to read “A Separate Piece” in highschool. While it wasn’t explicitly homosexual, there were certainly enough references to their special bond that one was led to wonder…:rolleyes:

…on another note, anyone want both a good laugh at an appalling video?
youtube.com/watch?v=dENPuTR2xaY
 
Pamm said:
I suspect I will be attacked from all sides for saying this but I am relieved that the judge in California had the bravery to stand up for the civil rights of our gay population. I personally do not believe that two people of the same gender can be “married” in the way God intends – but I do believe that the “state” should recognize same sex commitment in the same legal way as it does a legal commitment between males and females. Marriage is a “faith-based” term and it should be left to the “faith-based” organizations to recognize them.

I have gay friends, who I know to be faithful, committed individuals. They work hard, pay their taxes and do all things that society asks – except they do not practice in their own privacy what others deem as acceptable sexuality. I can’t say that I necessarily understand it – but I do believe they do not have the ability to chose not to be gay. It is inborn in them. I love them, accept them and pray for them.
Click to expand...
The Catholic Medical Association has issued a statement saying that gay people are not born that way. And even if they believe they were born that way, do you think the State has any business turning gay sex into an Institution? They have stated that they do not want Civil Unions. They compare it to the separate but equal status of blacks during segregation. In Massachusetts, the moment gay marriage became legal, teachers brought their husbands or wives into the classroom, the State forced children to read a gay storybook, against the wishes of some parents. It never stayed private. It never stayed personal. Kids are being given information about how to perform gay sex acts.

Marriage is not a faith based term. The term marriage refers to a man and woman who commit to having kids and raising them together. It is based on the natural complementary of the sexes.

The biggest lie currently in circulation that is aimed at heterosexuals is that you cannot control your sexuality. Older people are bombarded with viagra and other enhancement product commercials. Comedians have turned into spewers of graphic sex stories.

And you mention commitment. I suggest you read the following:

nytimes.com/2010/01/29/us/29sfmetro.html

God bless,
Ed
 
edwest2 said:
Young people are told how to perform gay sex acts.
Click to expand...
Gay sex acts?? There are sex acts that only married couples may take part in, but those aren’t uniquely “gay” or even “fornicator” sex acts. :confused:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top