User Tag List

First 3456715 Last

Results 41 to 50 of 368

Thread: Prop 8

  1. #41
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    681

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Modern Nomad View Post
    The same people who voted for it, would not support the teaching of the bible in schools.
    Um, yes they would lol, you haven't seen my neighbors. If they tried it might get 40%. Remember, some states supported teaching creationism in school along side of evolution

    Quote Originally Posted by Modern Nomad View Post
    It DID happen in Massachussets though. It DID. It was taught to schoolchildren in Massachussets. California gays should have come out and said "We just want to marry, not teach it to kids like Massachussets did". That would have swayed people.
    It isn't an issue of Gays wanting it to be taught in schools, its a matter of the schools deciding if it is going to be taught. The california superintentent of schools said, right there, that it wasn't being taught. The prop failing to pass wouldn't have changed anything, it still wouldn't have been taught.

    And explain why it matters if it is taught in the first place?

  2. #42
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Enneagram
    9w8
    Posts
    3,187

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Didums View Post

    It isn't an issue of Gays wanting it to be taught in schools, its a matter of the schools deciding if it is going to be taught. The california superintentent of schools said, right there, that it wasn't being taught. The prop failing to pass wouldn't have changed anything, it still wouldn't have been taught.

    And explain why it matters if it is taught in the first place?
    Then why did the CA teacher's association pore millions of dollars in to fight the proposition? What were they after with the passing prop 8?

  3. #43
    Once Was Synarch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    8,470

    Default

    Sticky issue. Committed gays want recognition and same legal standing as committed straights. Straights want to preserve something they see as particular to male / female union. Result: clashing of world views.

    Personally, I think the only true social reason for marriage is to create the pair bond beneficial to breeding new offspring. Everything else is so much sugary icing on the cake of biology. This includes attendant legal issues involving property, rights, etc.

    Solution: disentangle world views. The only solution is to create something called "gayrriage", which is identical to legal marriage but only happens between gays. Homophobes keep their cherished social institutions and gays get to experience divorce like the rest of us.
    "Create like a god, command like a king, work like a slave."

  4. #44
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    681

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Risen View Post
    Then why did the CA teacher's association pore millions of dollars in to support the proposition? What were they after with the passing prop 8?
    No_on_Prop_8 | CTA

  5. #45
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2008
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    1w9
    Posts
    479

    Default

    Why should marriage be taught in schools if it is claimed as religious based here??? Just a question I randomly thought of while reading this forum...


    I voted Yes on 8. But I wouldn't really care if it had not passed.

    Got this from an email:
    Argument #2:
    The introduction of legalized gay marriages will lead inexorably to polygamy and other alternatives to one-man, one-woman unions.

    In Utah, polygamist Tom Green, who claims five wives, is citing Lawrence v. Texas as the legal authority for his appeal. This past January, a Salt Lake City civil rights attorney filed a federal lawsuit on behalf of another couple wanting to engage in legal polygamy. Their justification? Lawrence v. Texas.

    The ACLU of Utah has actually suggested that the state will "have to step up to prove that a polygamous relationship is detrimental to society"-as opposed to the polygamists having to prove that plural marriage is not harmful to the culture. Do you see how the game is played? Despite 5,000 years of history, the burden now rests on you and me to prove that polygamy is unhealthy. The ACLU went on to say that the nuclear family "may not be necessarily the best model." Indeed, Justice Antonin Scalia warned of this likelihood in his statement for the minority in the Lawrence case.10 It took less than six months for his prediction to become reality.

    Why will gay marriage set the table for polygamy? Because there is no place to stop once that Rubicon has been crossed. Historically, the definition of marriage has rested on a bedrock of tradition, legal precedent, theology and the overwhelming support of the people.

    After the introduction of marriage between homosexuals, however, it will be supported by nothing more substantial than the opinion of a single judge or by a black-robed panel of justices. After they have done their wretched work, the family will consist of little more than someone's interpretation of "rights."

    Given that unstable legal climate, it is certain that some self-possessed judge, somewhere, will soon rule that three men and one woman can marry. Or five and two, or four and four. Who will be able to deny them that right? The guarantee is implied, we will be told, by the Constitution. Those who disagree will continue to be seen as hate-mongers and bigots. (Indeed, those charges are already being leveled against those of us who espouse biblical values!) How about group marriage, or marriage between relatives, or marriage between adults and children? How about marriage between a man and his donkey? Anything allegedly linked to "civil rights" will be doable. The legal underpinnings for marriage will have been destroyed.


    Argument #3
    An even greater objective of the homosexual movement is to end the state's compelling interest in marital relationships altogether. After marriages have been redefined, divorces will be obtained instantly, will not involve a court, and will take on the status of a driver's license or a hunting permit. With the family out of the way, all rights and privileges of marriage will accrue to gay and lesbian partners without the legal entanglements and commitments heretofore associated with it.


    Argument #5
    From that point forward, courts will not be able to favor a traditional family involving one man and one woman over a homosexual couple in matters of adoption. Children will be placed in homes with parents representing only one sex on an equal basis with those having a mom and a dad. The prospect of fatherless and motherless children will not be considered in the evaluation of eligibility. It will be the law.

  6. #46
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Enneagram
    9w8
    Posts
    3,187

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Didums View Post
    Sorry, tangled my words. I meant they pored millions of dollars in to FIGHT prop 8.

  7. #47
    mountain surfing nomadic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    MBTI
    enfp
    Posts
    1,709

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Didums View Post
    It isn't an issue of Gays wanting it to be taught in schools, its a matter of the schools deciding if it is going to be taught. The california superintentent of schools said, right there, that it wasn't being taught. The prop failing to pass wouldn't have changed anything, it still wouldn't have been taught.
    Well local communities and schools should be in charge, but it seems like in Massachussets, the leading gay minds thought they should take it to court. And they won.

    Yet a review of public records filed with the First District Court of Appeal in Boston shows these same organizations who claim our statement is a lie fought to make it true in Massachusetts. Specifically, they fought to ensure that gay marriage be taught in Massachusetts public schools, even over the objection of parents who sought an "opt out" for their children. Gay marriage was legalized by Massachusetts courts in 2003.
    Proposition 8: Who's Really Lying? - MarketWatch


    And explain why it matters if it is taught in the first place?
    It becomes a cultural issue then that is beyond the teaching of math, science, etc... Much like the teaching of bibles in schools. Like I said, the gay leaders of Massachussets made a fatal mistake in doing this.

  8. #48
    Senior Member prplchknz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    MBTI
    yupp
    Posts
    29,782

    Default

    what's wrong about teaching kids about same sex marriage and what's wrong with liking some one of the same sex? I think anyone of any sexual preference is capable of raising a child granted they're comptent enough and plenty of straight people aren't just like many gays are. Ok so this is about marriage, and yes I know some people get married and never have kids, but people also marry and want kids.
    In no likes experiment.

    that is all

    i dunno what else to say so

  9. #49
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    681

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Risen View Post
    Sorry, tangled my words. I meant they pored millions of dollars in to FIGHT prop 8.
    Because the Yes on Prop 8 people were lying about education, so the education people supported the opposing side?

  10. #50
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Enneagram
    9w8
    Posts
    3,187

    Default

    Prop. 8 debate veers from same-sex marriage to public schools - Sacramento Politics - California Politics | Sacramento Bee

    The California Teachers Association has donated $1.25 million to defeat Proposition 8. Gluckmann also opposes the measure, but she said she keeps political opinions to herself when she is teaching.

    Such issues, she said, are better discussed between students and their parents.

    "What a child does at home, or what parents do at home, it's not my business unless they're in an abusive relationship," she said, noting that state law requires teachers to report allegations of abuse to authorities.

    John Montgomery, assistant superintendent of curriculum for the Roseville Joint High School District, said teachers in the district also use discretion when discussing gay marriage.

    "They're probably more inclined to talk of the responsibilities of legal adults," he said. "Now, whether they go into greater detail in terms of same-sex marriage or traditional marriage, I doubt that."

    Schubert said gay marriage is already taught in some schools, citing a case in which first-graders in San Francisco attended the wedding of their lesbian teacher that was officiated by Mayor Gavin Newsom,

    While school officials noted the outing was arranged by a parent, Schubert said, "In the final two weeks, we are going to have this debate about whether or not you can opt your children out."
    And that is all I'll say on the issue because I know it's an emotional one for many.

Similar Threads

  1. Why you should vote YES on PROP 19
    By Edgar in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 48
    Last Post: 11-14-2010, 09:12 AM
  2. Media Spin (Prop 8 example)
    By Totenkindly in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 08-12-2010, 03:53 PM
  3. Props to whomever solves my puzzles first
    By ygolo in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 05-09-2009, 07:29 PM
  4. Protest Prop 8 - This Weekend
    By anii in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 45
    Last Post: 11-15-2008, 09:01 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO