Home› A Moving Train

CA allows same sex marriage

SilverSeedSilverSeed Posts: 336
edited May 2008 in A Moving Train
http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/05/15/same.sex.marriage/index.html

Go my state! Hopefully this is a sign of things to come nationally. I think this is something most people on here agree on, however is there anyone who believes allowing same sex marriages is a bad thing?
When Jesus said "Love your enemies" he probably didn't mean kill them...

"Sometimes I think I'd be better off dead. No, wait, not me, you." -Deep Toughts, Jack Handy
Post edited by Unknown User on
«1

Comments

  • farfromglorifiedfarfromglorified Posts: 5,696
    I believe allowing the state to regulate marriage is a bad thing. Doesn't look like this ruling addresses that at all, unfortunately.

    But it is nice that same-sex couples can now have state-sanctioned marriages just like their opposite-sex counterparts.
  • ZanneZanne Posts: 899
    Two people who want to be married to each other should be able to regardless of their gender. Good going to the CA lawmakers.
    Just me
  • shamrocknightsshamrocknights Posts: 7
    I certainly believe everyone should be allowed to marry anyone they love no matter what, but unfortunately there is a strong sentiment from a certain segments of the population that marriage is some sort of sanctity that should only be shared by a man and a woman. Most of these people are also responsible for the high divorce rates. Some sanctity.
  • mammasanmammasan Posts: 5,656
    farfromglorified wrote:
    I believe allowing the state to regulate marriage is a bad thing. Doesn't look like this ruling addresses that at all, unfortunately.

    But it is nice that same-sex couples can now have state-sanctioned marriages just like their opposite-sex counterparts.

    I have always said this. States have no business getting involved in the institute of marriage.
    "When one gets in bed with government, one must expect the diseases it spreads." - Ron Paul
  • DerrickDerrick Posts: 475
    Maybe soon they will allow poly-relationships. Spousal benefits for everyone!
  • farfromglorifiedfarfromglorified Posts: 5,696
    On behalf of all heterosexuals, I'd like to welcome California's homosexuals into the world of emotional humiliation, sexual deficiency, financial chaos, and painful divorce!
  • mammasanmammasan Posts: 5,656
    Derrick wrote:
    Maybe soon they will allow poly-relationships. Spousal benefits for everyone!

    That would be great.
    "When one gets in bed with government, one must expect the diseases it spreads." - Ron Paul
  • ZanneZanne Posts: 899
    farfromglorified wrote:
    On behalf of all heterosexuals, I'd like to welcome California's homosexuals into the world of emotional humiliation, sexual deficiency, financial chaos, and painful divorce!


    Fair is Fair, I always say. ;)
    Just me
  • farfromglorifiedfarfromglorified Posts: 5,696
    Zanne wrote:
    Fair is Fair, I always say. ;)

    Absolutely. Misery loves company :)
  • Eliot RosewaterEliot Rosewater Posts: 2,659
    Heathens!!

    :D
  • cropdustercropduster Posts: 52
    SilverSeed wrote:
    http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/05/15/same.sex.marriage/index.html

    Go my state! Hopefully this is a sign of things to come nationally. I think this is something most people on here agree on, however is there anyone who believes allowing same sex marriages is a bad thing?


    This decision should be left to the states. I disagree with gay marriage, but am fully for civil unions in which they can have all of the rights afforded to hetero couples. I just think that religion should not play a part in marrying two men or two women.
  • Pacomc79Pacomc79 Posts: 9,404
    cropduster wrote:
    This decision should be left to the states. I disagree with gay marriage, but am fully for civil unions in which they can have all of the rights afforded to hetero couples. I just think that religion should not play a part in marrying two men or two women.


    I don't think religion in this sense takes part. I'm pretty sure a justice of the peace marries them under the authority of the state.... the same way all other couples are married in the eyes of the state anyway.

    Whether you're jewish or christian or hindu or whatever the presiding person has a licence as do the marrying couples.
    My Girlfriend said to me..."How many guitars do you need?" and I replied...."How many pairs of shoes do you need?" She got really quiet.
  • angelicaangelica Posts: 6,038
    farfromglorified wrote:
    On behalf of all heterosexuals, I'd like to welcome California's homosexuals into the world of emotional humiliation, sexual deficiency, financial chaos, and painful divorce!
    :D



    .."on behalf of all heterosexuals..." lol
    "The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr

    http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta

    Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
  • chromiamchromiam Posts: 4,114
    cropduster wrote:
    This decision should be left to the states. I disagree with gay marriage, but am fully for civil unions in which they can have all of the rights afforded to hetero couples.

    My problem with calling it civil union instead of marriage is that by calling it a union, you are inherently saying that it is not the same as marriage.
    This is your notice that there is a problem with your signature. Please remove it.

    Admin

    Social awareness does not equal political activism!

    5/23/2011- An utter embarrassment... ticketing failures too many to list.
  • whitepantswhitepants Posts: 727
    I'm very happy about this decision. Great job Supreme Court of California! :D
    ~*~Me and Hippiemom dranketh the red wine in Cleveland 2003~*~

    First PJ Show: March 20, 1994 | Ann Arbor | Crisler Arena
  • DixieNDixieN Posts: 351
    Same here! I'm so happy to see the precedent set from a state as influential as California. Not allowing gay marriage is like not allowing interracial marriage. It's just wrong. Some people are *not* more equal than others.
  • Kel VarnsenKel Varnsen Posts: 1,952
    Pacomc79 wrote:
    I don't think religion in this sense takes part. I'm pretty sure a justice of the peace marries them under the authority of the state.... the same way all other couples are married in the eyes of the state anyway.

    Whether you're jewish or christian or hindu or whatever the presiding person has a licence as do the marrying couples.

    That's how we do it here in Canada. If you are gay and your religion accepts gay marriage then your preacher or whatever is allowed to marry you. If you can't find one of those you can get a JP to do it. But it is not like 2 guys can walk into a Catholic Church and tell the priest that he has to marry them.
  • i am a targeti am a target Posts: 808
    i'm all for it. i'd like to read the ruling to see how they went about striking the law down.

    i would also like to insert this:

    a big fuck you to oregon and all your fucking arrogant bullshit posturing. california did it first. california is better then you.

    i miss you california.
  • DixieNDixieN Posts: 351
    cropduster wrote:
    This decision should be left to the states. I disagree with gay marriage, but am fully for civil unions in which they can have all of the rights afforded to hetero couples. I just think that religion should not play a part in marrying two men or two women.

    Except that religion doesn't play any part in some male/female marriages. If you get married by a JP, it's not a religious ceremony...but you have all the rights that gay people can't enjoy in any civil union. Civil unions are not separate, but equal to marriage. If civil unions were like unions by a justice of the peace (still a marriage), then you'd have something. But, until the union confers the same rights and responsibilities on the parties, you can't equate the two.
  • mammasanmammasan Posts: 5,656
    The way I see it if a heterosexual or homosexual couple walks into their town hall/city hall the should be issued a civil union. Federal/state/local governments have no right getting themselves involved in marriages. If a couple wants to get married they should go to their mosque, temple, or church to do so.
    "When one gets in bed with government, one must expect the diseases it spreads." - Ron Paul
  • meisteredermeistereder Posts: 1,577
    mammasan wrote:
    The way I see it if a heterosexual or homosexual couple walks into their town hall/city hall the should be issued a civil union. Federal/state/local governments have no right getting themselves involved in marriages. If a couple wants to get married they should go to their mosque, temple, or church to do so.

    But of course, that would be too logical. Then we couldn't reopen this issue every two years or so and use it as a litmus test for whether we agree with a certain politician.
    San Diego 10/25/00, Mountain View 6/1/03, Santa Barbara 10/28/03, Northwest School 3/18/05, San Diego 7/7/06, Los Angeles 7/9/06, 7/10/06, Honolulu (U2) 12/9/06, Santa Barbara (EV) 4/10/08, Los Angeles (EV) 4/12/08, Hartford 6/27/08, Mansfield 6/28/08, VH1 Rock Honors The Who 7/12/08, Seattle 9/21/09, Universal City 9/30/09, 10/1/09, 10/6/09, 10/7/09, San Diego 10/9/09, Los Angeles (EV) 7/8/11, Santa Barbara (EV) 7/9/11, Chicago 7/19/13, San Diego 11/21/13, Los Angeles 11/23/13, 11/24/13, Oakland 11/26/13, Chicago 8/22/16, Missoula 8/13/18, Boston 9/2/18, Los Angeles 2/25/22 (EV), San Diego 5/3/22, Los Angeles 5/6/22, 5/7/22, Imola 6/25/22, Los Angeles 5/21/24, [London 6/29/24], [Boston 9/15/24]
  • angelicaangelica Posts: 6,038
    meistereder wrote:
    But of course, that would be too logical. Then we couldn't reopen this issue every two years or so and use it as a litmus test for whether we agree with a certain politician.
    :D
    "The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr

    http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta

    Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
  • normnorm Posts: 31,146
    "The California Supreme Court has engaged in the worst kind of judicial activism today, abandoning its role as an objective interpreter of the law and instead legislating from the bench," said Matt Barber, policy director for cultural issues for the group Concerned Women for America, in a written statement.

    "So-called 'same-sex' marriage is counterfeit marriage. Marriage is, and has always been, between a man and a woman. We know that it's in the best interest of children to be raised with a mother and a father. To use children as guinea pigs in radical San Francisco-style social experimentation is deplorable."

    i can't believe this type of ignorant thinking still exists.....two words for you matt - fuck off!! :D
  • VictoryGinVictoryGin Posts: 1,207
    cutback wrote:
    "The California Supreme Court has engaged in the worst kind of judicial activism today, abandoning its role as an objective interpreter of the law and instead legislating from the bench," said Matt Barber, policy director for cultural issues for the group Concerned Women for America, in a written statement.

    "So-called 'same-sex' marriage is counterfeit marriage. Marriage is, and has always been, between a man and a woman. We know that it's in the best interest of children to be raised with a mother and a father. To use children as guinea pigs in radical San Francisco-style social experimentation is deplorable."

    i can't believe this type of ignorant thinking still exists.....two words for you matt - fuck off!! :D

    i'm going to go ahead and assume matt is a man. i find it funny he is a policy director for a group called concerned women for america. or rather find it suspect. if the women are so concerned, why aren't they the policy directors?
    if you wanna be a friend of mine
    cross the river to the eastside
  • CosmoCosmo Posts: 12,225
    farfromglorified wrote:
    On behalf of all heterosexuals, I'd like to welcome California's homosexuals into the world of emotional humiliation, sexual deficiency, financial chaos, and painful divorce!
    ...
    I know... Why shouldn't they be as miserable as the rest of us, right?
    Let's see how long before that 'Gay' moniker gets dropped.
    Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
    Hail, Hail!!!
  • decides2dreamdecides2dream Posts: 14,977
    farfromglorified wrote:
    On behalf of all heterosexuals, I'd like to welcome California's homosexuals into the world of emotional humiliation, sexual deficiency, financial chaos, and painful divorce!

    :D
    nice!


    one can have all that without marriage too - well except the divorce bit, but close enough. ;) i think homosexuals are actually looking for the benefits associated with marriage more than anything though. perhaps a wee bit more 'public validity' to their relationships as well, and rightly so. :)
    Stay with me...
    Let's just breathe...


    I am myself like you somehow


  • NMyTreeNMyTree Posts: 2,374
    Does dis means I'ez can marry my goat and sheep? :D

    Golly! I reckon I'ez gonna' be one happy hillbilly!!:D
  • CommyCommy Posts: 4,984
    NMyTree wrote:
    Does dis means I'ez can marry my goat and sheep? :D

    Golly! I reckon I'ez gonna' be one happy hillbilly!!:D
    its up to the goat really.
  • Heineken HelenHeineken Helen Posts: 18,095
    Commy wrote:
    its up to the goat really.
    does the sheep not get a say? :mad:
    The Astoria??? Orgazmic!
    Verona??? it's all surmountable
    Dublin 23.08.06 "The beauty of Ireland, right there!"
    Wembley? We all believe!
    Copenhagen?? your light made us stars
    Chicago 07? And love
    What a different life
    Had I not found this love with you
  • AbookamongstthemanyAbookamongstthemany Posts: 8,209
    decides2dream wrote:
    :D
    nice!


    one can have all that without marriage too - well except the divorce bit, but close enough. ;) i think homosexuals are actually looking for the benefits associated with marriage more than anything though. perhaps a wee bit more 'public validity' to their relationships as well, and rightly so. :)

    Why does one, whether homo/heterosexual, even need the public to make their relationship 'valid'?
    If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you.

    Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
    -Oscar Wilde
Sign In or Register to comment.