Gov Schawarzenegger to veto Gay Marriage Bill

[Kelzie]

I have to admit, this is an interesting thread.

On one hand, folks are saying that gay marriage is an individual choice and govt should not be involved. Period. Regardless of the envelope that could be opened, the subject is very direct - 2 humans.

On the other, folks are saying the people's vote a short time ago (5 years) should set the precedent.

The double talk among the folks for gay marriage is wonderfully ironic.
It is ironic because if the shoe was on the other foot - it would indeed matter what the masses have voted on. Every vote counts was slammed through my neurons for months.

The exception of course is something that core belief persuades instead of logic and consistency. Which we are all painfully guilty of.

I do not find it ironic at all. If I remember my history correctly, they wouldn't let voting rights for women go to a public vote because they thought it wouldn't pass. So Congress passed it instead.

Now bear with me here. The women, who were fighting to get the vote obviously felt that every vote counts. But they were still okay with bypassing the vote in this situation. Just because the majority wants to take someone's rights away doesn't make it okay. Like I've said before, what if 51% of the population wants to exterminate the other 49%? Should we let that happen, just cause the majority voted on it?

 

[Navy Pride]

The bottom line is in a democratic process the people have spoken by a huge majority to vote down gay marriage as they have done in every state of the union with the exception of Mass. where activist judges took awat that right and made law instead of interpreting it.............

You liberals and militant gays have to get it through your heads that the American people are against changing the definition of marriage...........

 

[YamiB.]

The bottom line is in a democratic process the people have spoken by a huge majority to vote down gay marriage as they have done in every state of the union with the exception of Mass. where activist judges took awat that right and made law instead of interpreting it.............

You liberals and militant gays have to get it through your heads that the American people are against changing the definition of marriage...........

You have to get it through your head that being the majority does not give them the right to make the minority be treated unequally for no reason. The majority often ignores the rights of the minority and it often comes up to the legislature and judiciary to protect those peoples rights. We saw this in the fight against segregation, the fight for women's suffarage, and the fight for interracial marriages.

 

[Schweddy]

Is still do not see this as an "equality issue". Every male has the ability to marry any female of any race in the US. Same with females marrying males. How is that unequal? Marriage is by no means a "right" - it is a privedge. By that fact alone, it proves that there are boundaries. If one has to ask for permission, one only gets what is granted. In this case, it is from the state.
Since the state has to grant permission, they can define the rules.

If I remember my history correctly, they wouldn't let voting rights for women go to a public vote because they thought it wouldn't pass. So Congress passed it instead.

Excellent response and hard to refute.

 

[ShamMol]

Is still do not see this as an "equality issue". Every male has the ability to marry any female of any race in the US. Same with females marrying males. How is that unequal? Marriage is by no means a "right" - it is a privedge. By that fact alone, it proves that there are boundaries. If one has to ask for permission, one only gets what is granted. In this case, it is from the state.
Since the state has to grant permission, they can define the rules.

However, marriage then grants you about 100 rights if I heard a Fox news consultant right. So, even if marriage itself is not a right or priveldge, is it not logical that they should be entitled to those same 100 things (rights, priveledges, whatever).

 

[Navy Pride]

You have to get it through your head that being the majority does not give them the right to make the minority be treated unequally for no reason. The majority often ignores the rights of the minority and it often comes up to the legislature and judiciary to protect those peoples rights. We saw this in the fight against segregation, the fight for women's suffarage, and the fight for interracial marriages.

Are you even from this country? Do you know how a democracy operates? We vote on issues and majority rules..........

Gays are not a minority.....African American and Hispanics are minorities.Gays are a class defined by their sexual preference...........

To compare the plight of African Americans to Gay marriage is laughable and a insult to all African Americans who have fought so valiantly for equal rights.......

Finally gays have the same rights I have.......They can marry someone of the opposite sex..........They want to change the definition of marriage and get a special right............

 

[YamiB.]

Is still do not see this as an "equality issue". Every male has the ability to marry any female of any race in the US. Same with females marrying males. How is that unequal? Marriage is by no means a "right" - it is a privedge. By that fact alone, it proves that there are boundaries. If one has to ask for permission, one only gets what is granted. In this case, it is from the state.
Since the state has to grant permission, they can define the rules.


Excellent response and hard to refute.

The Supreme Court said marriage is a right when it legalized interracial marriage. By your argument interracial marriage should not have been made legal because everybody had the same right to marry somebody of the same race.

Are you even from this country? Do you know how a democracy operates? We vote on issues and majority rules..........

Yes, I am and I do believe in the ideals of freedom and equality that this country is based on.

Gays are not a minority.....African American and Hispanics are minorities.Gays are a class defined by their sexual preference...........

If you're trying to say you can only be a minority by not having a choice in the matter I would like to know how you obtained a higher qualification than the APA.

To compare the plight of African Americans to Gay marriage is laughable and a insult to all African Americans who have fought so valiantly for equal rights.......

I'm not trying to say that the entire struggle black people went through in America is equvalient to that of the ones homosexuals are currently going through. The struggle though is very similar to that of interracial marriage and many of the arguments used by those against homosexual marriage could have been used against interracial marriage.

Finally gays have the same rights I have.......They can marry someone of the opposite sex..........They want to change the definition of marriage and get a special right............

Homosexual couples do not have the same right to marry their partner that you have. According to your logic interracial marriage should not have been made legal because they had the same right to marry people of their race.

The defenition of marriage has been changed various times throughout history, at times in world history it has included same sex unions. In America the definition has changed as recently as the sixties, if you're only talking about this country you must think that interracial marriage should not have been made legal.

 

[ElGringo17]

Re: Gov Schawarzenegger to veto Homo Marriage Bill

Leave it to homosexual extremists to try to equate their rampant, rampaging rectal behavior with "interracial marriage", "free speach" and "women being able to vote".

I have news for you : society will never accept your behavior as legitimate and accept your perverse sexual behaviors as morally equivalent to heterosexual couple, nor matter how many lies you tell, no matter how much you adhere to The Homosexual Agenda, and now matter how many times you lobby forums owners like here to shut up political opposition, and no matter how many times you sue to silence all dissent.