@sadskippy By your reasoning, society should never have allowed any minority rights. The slippery slope is such a terrible criterion in part because it can begin anywhere; heck, you could say it started back when anti-miscegenation laws were struck down. (And people did, and by your reasoning they were correct.)
There are qualitative differences between adults and minors. If you are very worried that these will be forgotten, then you should be campaigning to reinforce these in people's minds.
Don't any of you ***EVER*** put my loving relationship with my partner Tony in the same category as bestiality and paedophilia it is not the same AT ALL. As other people have mentioned you only have to use your common sense here. Rights are given when something is logical and harmless. It is harmless for gay consenting adults to marry just as it was for inter-racial marriages and abolishing the slave trade removed harm, again logical. Paedophilia, bestiality, rape etc HARMFUL, WRONG! The End
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
I thought the video did more to support the straight position on Gay marriage. These guys (actors) fucked up trying to make a point. The Christian, Muslim, and Jewish money (millions) is going to flow into the anti-gay agenda now. Nice work guys.
And your a polygaphobe incestaphobe bestialaphobe pedaphobe polyandryaphobe. And a jerk to boot... But the best,,, your also a hypocrite, you think your including all rights,,, your not. I'm sure polygamists respect that your a heterosexual monogamous. You apparenttly can't do the same. Hypocrite. PS,,, pedophilia is only a crime now because a judge has not YET changed the age of consent. When 10 is an adult what will you do?
Sadskippy, the debate is not whether one's sexual orientation is a choice. Homosexuality may very well be a choice, but if those involved are able to consent (ie: live human adults), then the law has no place rolling back any personal rights, including civil marriage. Yes, that includes polygamy, polyandry and even incestuous marriages between adults. We might have an aversion to this sort of thing, but we have no right to prevent consenting adults from doing that which makes them happy.
I'll go with that. And the fact that gays should support these other rights too,,, correct?
NEXT, Pedophilia. Considering the age of consent is changeable (like marriage was for gays). Why can't we also include them in this rights business? If a judge changes age of consent or adult to 10 then are they now included too?
When judges decide the rights and not society, there is no end to where this is going.
The age of consent is changeable (it has been raised by most states in our county), but a supreme court would never rule to let children have sex with adults. Your slippery slope argument is totally absurd and fallacious. I can use to it argue the opposite side as well...e.g. "if we start taking away rights of minorities, what is next--not letting women vote, making blacks slaves?
Judges can and do determine rights by interpreting our laws. The court system is vital in protecting minorities.
Don't be ridiculous. The age of consent is not changeable the same way "marriage for gays" is, because it is socially and legally understood that a child is not sufficiently developed psychologically and emotionally to give legal consent to marriage(or any binding contract, for that matter). Furthermore, judges make decisions based on constitutionality, which is decided by society. Even if a slight majority vote against gay marriage in one state, society as a whole thinks otherwise.
Gay rights 40 years ago are where pedophile rights are today. What you think can't happen today had the same chance as happening 40 years ago for gay rights.
Homosexuality USED to be a mental disease. Pedophilia today is considered such. But in 40 years the skys the limit.
Judges make constitutional decisions. There is nothing in the constitution (or any other laws) on sexual orientation.
Gay rights is a judges personal opinion, nothing more nothing less.
It may be true that gays 40 years ago were THOUGHT of the way pedophiles are thought of today(same for socialists and athiests), but there is one crucial difference: Gays (40 years ago AND today) are pursuing relationships and/or sex with consenting adults, whereas pedophiles (40 years ago and today) pursue sex with children, who cannot consent and are recognized by society as being unready physically and emotionally for sex. You cannot compare the two.
You keep assuming that age of consent cannot be changed,,, it can. Do you really think that societies laws on the age of consent are any more difficult to change than they are on marriage?
An adult is whatever a JUDGE tells you it is. Nothing you can do about it. Get ready for 10 year old adults. In another 40 years that is.....
Well done on supporting this process of judges making law and not society. Whatever it takes to get your special group thru.
I don't assume the age of consent cannot be changed; it obviously has been changed in the past. I do, however, assume(because I know) that there are physiological and psychological differences between adults and children. You do, too, or you wouldn't care if the age of consent existed at all. Prepubescent children will never be considered adults, and, again, this has absolutely nothing to with homosexuality or gay marriage. Judges uphold the Constitution, which is a social document.
The only consent i care about is that approved by society not a judge.
You know as much about the differences in children/adult as they did 40 years ago on hetero/homo.
Your statement can (and was) used by society 40 years ago to distinguish the difference on hetero and homo. Physiological and psychological differences were the exact words to degrade gay rights.
Your only assuming what they did 40 years ago. That your current values will be the law forever (not with judges laws).
On one hand, you're arguing that society as a whole must, on its own, approve or disapprove the actions of its members. On the other hand, you claim that my personal values(and yours and the rest of society's) will shift over time(or maybe that the next generation will have different values). Today's values(which are the only ones we can discuss) include that homosexuality is acceptable and pedophilia is not. I have no reason to think that this will change in my lifetime(thank goodness!)...
I am speaking of society as a whole, not its religious fringe. Showing that the attitude toward homosexuality has shifted in the past 40 years does NOT suggest that our attitude toward the victimization of children will shift(as well it shouldn't). Furthermore, even if you could show that society would deem pedophilia acceptable in the future(which you can't), it would be entirely unrelated to homosexuality. Your slippery slope doesn't connect, sadskippy.
Puberty occurs in all children at different ages,,, if the difference is that then why not adults after they go thru puberty?
As to psychology, remember gays were considered mentally deficient. But thanks to a wonderful lobby and lots of $ they are now considered never sick. This will be the same with others.
The constitution does not refer to pedophilia or homosexuality,,, thus you can see the bright prospects for both under judges.
you aren't saying anything. all you're doing is throwing around the word "liberal" at anyone who disagrees with you and defining a whole bunch of arbitrary terms. fact: prop 8 is both morally hypocritical and rationally inconsistent. how do you disprove this?
And you are saying something when you blabber on about gay marriage?
All you're doing is throwing around the word "gay marriage" at anyone who disagrees with you. And defining a ARBITRARY judges decision as good. FACT: prop 8 is both moral and rationally consistent with how we pass laws.
Sexual orientation is not a right, how do you disprove this?
In America the term "marriage" applies to both the legal ceremony where the legal documents are signed and the religious ceremony. In other countries there is marriage and civil unions.
I think a lot of people against gay marriage don't focus about the civil union part (same legal rights as hetrosexual couples), but the religious ceremony that is conducted since most religions are against it.
Answer? Allow civil unions for gay couples and let the churches decide if they will do the religious.
The problem is that civil unions do not grant the same rights and benefits as a State Marriage License does, remember churches are not required in any state.
Portability, Federal taxes, probate rights, there are a few things that Civil Unions don't grant.
BETTER idea, let everybody get a "Civil Union" via the State, and "Marriage Certificates" can be ceremonial only, not giving the bearers any State or Federally mandated rights or priviledges. Churches then won't fear losing their tithes...
I ran out of room to continue my comment. But I agree. I was thinking along the ways of changing the definition of civil union to be just a state marriage that grants the same rights and privileges as the traditional marriage. I just didn't get a chance to state all of that. Damn character limits.
No matter what people still have to fill out two different sets of documents anyway so it's not a huge change.
There is no such thing as a "State Marriage" and a "Traditional Marriage", a Marriage License is, effectively, a business contract signed by the Sec'y of State and handed out to any two legal ( Or Imancipated) adults who choose to fill out the form. No ceremony is required at all, they just go down to the County Recorders Office and sign up. The only difference is between a marriage license and a "Civil Union", both are granted by the State ONLY, they grant different rights to the citizen...
The state of California has voted, not once but twice now and the majority of the state does not want homosexual marriage. In this country we go by a democracy which means we go by what the majority of the people want, not what the minority wants. Get over it already. I don't hate Gay people, but I do believe that marriage should be kept between a man and a woman, if not then next people will want to marry their pets. Don't like it move to an Island and start your own colony...faggotville!
Ummm....? See, the problem there is that gays are people, not pets. People can not have a love relationship and raise children with a pet. You can do that with gays. If any such colony gets started, I'm first to move. and I'm straight.
A democratic vote does not allow the majority to vote in laws that violate State or the Federal Constitution. What if Virgians voted 59:41 to re-instate slavery? Would you say "thats democracy in action!!" It doesn't work that way.
The majority of Californians allowed themselves to be lied to. The issue isn't who should or shouldn't get married, the issue is that they want "Marriage" to be a governmentally protected RELIGIOUS RUN ceremony...
Slavery was ended, in Congress, by Ammending the Federal Constitution, making it illegal in all states. The Marriage rights of gay citizens were ended, in California, by attempting to amend the State Constitution to make it illegal.
The issue has nothing at all do do with Sexual Orientation.
Its about denying certain citizens the rights others enjoy based on the dictates of religion. Meaning, the State enforcing a particular religious belief, which violates the Establishment clause.
The supreme court has been extremely important in granting minority rights. For instance, the supreme court ruled that laws against interracial marriage were unconstitutional in 1967. At the time, the vast majority of Americans disagreed with the ruling. Had the issue been decided by congress or popular vote, interracial marriage laws could still be on the books today. The "elititst" judges enforced the constitution, protecting minority rights against the whims of the ruling majority.
This ruling in 67 was interacial marriage. It referred to the civil rights act of 65 in the law it clarified. The 65 act protected RACE, SEX (gender), AGE, RELIGION.
What did the 65 act not include? Sexual orientation.
This is a great example of judges clarifying laws of congress.
Gay rights laws from judges are not.
As for the vast majority disagreeing,,,, the peoples REPS passed RACE laws in 65. The people recognized race as a right, NOT SEXUAL ORIENTATION.
I competetly agree w/jmet03!!! I loved the prop 8 musical!!! I can't believe it's compared 2 incest pedophilia bestiality etc to homosexuality. Those acts would hurt the other the other person or animal involved. Homosexuals know what they are doing consent to what they are doing and doesn't even compare 2 others!!! Incest 4 example between a father and a daughter would hurt not only the daughter, but if she gets pregnant the kids would be damaged physically and emotionally because of genetics.
Its not "Gay extremists" it is alot of different people, I am certainly not gay or extreme and I see plainly how a religious led political movement lied to the electorate and got away with it.
Marriage is a business agreement, granted by the Sec'y of State, that allows you rights and priviledges. Rights and priviledges that you want to deny to the gay community because of some 4000 year old comments in a book that as the video says, you pick and choose from.
Polygamy pretty much always leads to child molestation, evidenced by the fact that the original Mormon leaders all had 4th or 5th wives who were 14 or 12.
Nobody, nobody sane that is, argues that the age of consent should be lowered to 12. Whereas everyone submitting a request for a marriage License to the Sec'y of State has to be a consenting Adult....
Convince yourself of the ridiculous if it helps you. Your argument was used about inter-racial marriage and it hasn't destroyed Christiandom.
And your comments about hiv/aids are ridiculous.
The things you list are illegal, and for very good reasons, gay marriage was never illegal, it simply wasn't allowed. Two consenting adults denied the rights freely given to others because a small section of the populace are afraid of them.
What's up with the OBAMANATION comment the "gay" director paid the black lady to scream out and why was their extra blacks playing christians??
What's up with Jack black playing Jesus in a comical way(which is very disrespectful) and then make comments which portrayed Jesus as a bigot and sinner.
Jack black and everyone in this play are anti black and anti religion. I will not watch any of their movies or attend anything they do or at. I will boycott anything with you people for disrespecting my black people and christians. If money is the only thing you believe in then thats were I will get you.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
The intolerance and hate from the homo's is now a 2 way street for me I will show all homo's the same respect they are showing the Christians..This is america and last I checked MAJORITY rules not the losing mob...respect our laws or move your hate filled intolerant immoral shit smelling breath to Canada
I am confident that the Majority wanting continue slavery in the south back in the day.
People can not vote away otheres rights.
Strange you thought your interpreted lack of respect for Christians in this video deserved to be told to move to Canada.
People who can not respect the foundations of this country being the separation of church and state should move to where they don't separate church and state, like Afghanistan.
Kill kids who don't honor ma&pa. Its in the bible! Follow it all.
They are not denying you anything, your demands to impose your version of the world on them is objectionable at the very least. You call them sinners and say they lifestyle is "against god" yet you expect them to respect your views, that is ridiculous. All you religious supporters of the ban claim they are taking something away from you, it is the same argument that the bigots used who fought against interracial marriage. It was wrong then and is still dead wrong now.
You are very adroable! Howdy from Maryland! Great vid! I just finished watching Prop 8: The Musical! It was hilarious and it proved a great point! My husband and I got married in September and were protesting here in MD against prop 8.
Ectoplasmicentity: One of the wonderful things that liberal leaning people gave this nation is a public school system. Go back! Learn to read! Our founding fathers were deists. Our founding fathers were criminals, indentured servants, and slaves. The old puritan faith really didn't last for so very long. Christianity CREATED the dark ages. Liberal thinkers created the Renaissances. I love Christians. They've done wonderful things! It's people like you, exclusionary, dogmatic, morons who ruin it.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
It saddens me to see these celebrities bashing Christianity such as they did in the musical. Yes it had a catchy tune but it made my stomach turn. Christianity has changed this world for the better. America was founded with Judeo-Christian values and not this secular nation like the liberal revisionist historians want to portray. The more lefist liberalism expands in the US, the more darker this world will become. Christian America is all thats left to prevent another Dark Ages.
Yea seriously, get your facts straight. They were making fun of christianity because the bible was used for a sleuth of horrible things, for instance the justification of slavery in the south, and now they're picking and choosing verses out of the bible to single out gays. Not to mention how accurate the video was in regards to christians picking and choosing and being ok with things that make a profit- regardless of how immoral it is.
They did'nt "BASH" anybody. They just pointed out a little of the hypocracy behind prop 8. The separation of church and state is in the constitution for reason. Though not strictly applying to the issue of gay marriage. Religious convictions do not give one group the right to determine the rights of any other group. Prop 8 goes directly against, at the very least, the RIGHT of LIFE, LIBERTY and THE PERSUIT OF HAPPINESS>
OMG that is so true. I in fact do know about mr harris too. i corrected my self in the video right after i said his name but like i mentioned.. quality sucks on my phone's video camera! lol.
There's plenty of room for true Christians to agree with everything said there. But radical right-wing Christians interpret the bible to fit their political views and ignore the true message of Christianity, which is basically to love thy neighbor, love Jesus, and do unto others as you would have them do unto you.
There's nothing about hate or trying to control the actions of others there. That's the Christianity I was raised under. How about you?
If Jesus had a grave He'd be turning over in it watching the way "Christians" have become SO unChristlike in this matter. As a former missionary and a straight Christian woman I implore my brother's and sisters to remember who He is not who the religion of today has made Christ to be.
Yay keep spreading the word. You rock! I'm a sucker for people supporting the cause so... you just earned yourself a subscriber! I don't know how much you actually care lol.. Anyway, see ya :-D
@sadskippy By your reasoning, society should never have allowed any minority rights. The slippery slope is such a terrible criterion in part because it can begin anywhere; heck, you could say it started back when anti-miscegenation laws were struck down. (And people did, and by your reasoning they were correct.)
There are qualitative differences between adults and minors. If you are very worried that these will be forgotten, then you should be campaigning to reinforce these in people's minds.
jordanai 1 year ago
yay
acpfilms 1 year ago
These comments against gay marriage are so crappy. Nice work! Keep thumping your bible!
XXDangerZone180XX 2 years ago
Don't any of you ***EVER*** put my loving relationship with my partner Tony in the same category as bestiality and paedophilia it is not the same AT ALL. As other people have mentioned you only have to use your common sense here. Rights are given when something is logical and harmless. It is harmless for gay consenting adults to marry just as it was for inter-racial marriages and abolishing the slave trade removed harm, again logical. Paedophilia, bestiality, rape etc HARMFUL, WRONG! The End
Daveyboi1981 2 years ago 8
This comment has received too many negative votes show
I thought the video did more to support the straight position on Gay marriage. These guys (actors) fucked up trying to make a point. The Christian, Muslim, and Jewish money (millions) is going to flow into the anti-gay agenda now. Nice work guys.
nododon 3 years ago
sadskippy 3 years ago
Sadskippy, the debate is not whether one's sexual orientation is a choice. Homosexuality may very well be a choice, but if those involved are able to consent (ie: live human adults), then the law has no place rolling back any personal rights, including civil marriage. Yes, that includes polygamy, polyandry and even incestuous marriages between adults. We might have an aversion to this sort of thing, but we have no right to prevent consenting adults from doing that which makes them happy.
PutTheBookDown1 3 years ago
I'll go with that. And the fact that gays should support these other rights too,,, correct?
NEXT, Pedophilia. Considering the age of consent is changeable (like marriage was for gays). Why can't we also include them in this rights business? If a judge changes age of consent or adult to 10 then are they now included too?
When judges decide the rights and not society, there is no end to where this is going.
sadskippy 3 years ago
The age of consent is changeable (it has been raised by most states in our county), but a supreme court would never rule to let children have sex with adults. Your slippery slope argument is totally absurd and fallacious. I can use to it argue the opposite side as well...e.g. "if we start taking away rights of minorities, what is next--not letting women vote, making blacks slaves?
Judges can and do determine rights by interpreting our laws. The court system is vital in protecting minorities.
calibloggerl 3 years ago
Age of consent is no more sacred than marriage laws of 1 man 1 woman are. The age of adult is open to a judges interpretation.
As to race and sex (women) rights...
How were these rights gained?
Thru congress. Not a judge.
Womens suffrage, slavery, civil rights act of 65 were all congressional acts of the peoples representatives. NOT A JUDGE.
Judges determine rights from our laws, but there is no law for sexual oreintation. Nothing but a judges opinion, not law.
sadskippy 3 years ago
The past 50 years is the perfect example of slippery slope.
Sodomy changed in the 70's,,, gay sex is legal.
Adoption, benefits, civil unions, 90's,,, gay rights try for mainstream.
Marriage 2008.
I believe that is the definition of Slippery Slope in the dictionary.
sadskippy 3 years ago
Don't be ridiculous. The age of consent is not changeable the same way "marriage for gays" is, because it is socially and legally understood that a child is not sufficiently developed psychologically and emotionally to give legal consent to marriage(or any binding contract, for that matter). Furthermore, judges make decisions based on constitutionality, which is decided by society. Even if a slight majority vote against gay marriage in one state, society as a whole thinks otherwise.
PutTheBookDown1 3 years ago
Gay rights 40 years ago are where pedophile rights are today. What you think can't happen today had the same chance as happening 40 years ago for gay rights.
Homosexuality USED to be a mental disease. Pedophilia today is considered such. But in 40 years the skys the limit.
Judges make constitutional decisions. There is nothing in the constitution (or any other laws) on sexual orientation.
Gay rights is a judges personal opinion, nothing more nothing less.
sadskippy 3 years ago
It may be true that gays 40 years ago were THOUGHT of the way pedophiles are thought of today(same for socialists and athiests), but there is one crucial difference: Gays (40 years ago AND today) are pursuing relationships and/or sex with consenting adults, whereas pedophiles (40 years ago and today) pursue sex with children, who cannot consent and are recognized by society as being unready physically and emotionally for sex. You cannot compare the two.
PutTheBookDown1 3 years ago
You keep assuming that age of consent cannot be changed,,, it can. Do you really think that societies laws on the age of consent are any more difficult to change than they are on marriage?
An adult is whatever a JUDGE tells you it is. Nothing you can do about it. Get ready for 10 year old adults. In another 40 years that is.....
Well done on supporting this process of judges making law and not society. Whatever it takes to get your special group thru.
The ends justify the means.
sadskippy 3 years ago
I don't assume the age of consent cannot be changed; it obviously has been changed in the past. I do, however, assume(because I know) that there are physiological and psychological differences between adults and children. You do, too, or you wouldn't care if the age of consent existed at all. Prepubescent children will never be considered adults, and, again, this has absolutely nothing to with homosexuality or gay marriage. Judges uphold the Constitution, which is a social document.
PutTheBookDown1 3 years ago
The only consent i care about is that approved by society not a judge.
You know as much about the differences in children/adult as they did 40 years ago on hetero/homo.
Your statement can (and was) used by society 40 years ago to distinguish the difference on hetero and homo. Physiological and psychological differences were the exact words to degrade gay rights.
Your only assuming what they did 40 years ago. That your current values will be the law forever (not with judges laws).
sadskippy 3 years ago
On one hand, you're arguing that society as a whole must, on its own, approve or disapprove the actions of its members. On the other hand, you claim that my personal values(and yours and the rest of society's) will shift over time(or maybe that the next generation will have different values). Today's values(which are the only ones we can discuss) include that homosexuality is acceptable and pedophilia is not. I have no reason to think that this will change in my lifetime(thank goodness!)...
PutTheBookDown1 3 years ago
Good,,,
Society or CONGRESS (answerable to society) must make these decisions not in the constitution.
If society votes in gay rights,, so be it.
If socity votes in polygamy rights,, ditto.
ETC... incest, bestiality,,,,
They could no more discuss gay rights 40 years ago than you think we can other rights today.
Will i agree with the rights society accepts?
NO.
Will I recognize societies right to make that call? YES.
A society is only as good as the majority of it's citizens.
sadskippy 3 years ago
I am speaking of society as a whole, not its religious fringe. Showing that the attitude toward homosexuality has shifted in the past 40 years does NOT suggest that our attitude toward the victimization of children will shift(as well it shouldn't). Furthermore, even if you could show that society would deem pedophilia acceptable in the future(which you can't), it would be entirely unrelated to homosexuality. Your slippery slope doesn't connect, sadskippy.
PutTheBookDown1 3 years ago
Society does not have to accept a sexual orientation for it to become law. Or do you think gay rights is accepted by the country as a whole?
You know no more than those before you on what rights society will shift it's attitude.
To assume it will not turn towards other rights not of your liking is the same as the homophobic crowd towards gay rights.
Your mistake is leaving this decision to a judge and not society. Thus it will not matter what YOU THINK.
sadskippy 3 years ago
Puberty occurs in all children at different ages,,, if the difference is that then why not adults after they go thru puberty?
As to psychology, remember gays were considered mentally deficient. But thanks to a wonderful lobby and lots of $ they are now considered never sick. This will be the same with others.
The constitution does not refer to pedophilia or homosexuality,,, thus you can see the bright prospects for both under judges.
sadskippy 3 years ago
Easy LIBTARD,,, calm down. You may think being gay is not a choice but being rational is.
So mister rational why the sexual orientation of homo's is not a choice and
incest
polygamy
pedophiles
bestials
necro's
IS?
It's just sexual orientation. Why the hate?
They are born that way just like gays. Why do you hate them so?
sadskippy 3 years ago
LIBTARD,,,, please apply your illogic unto the following.
Incest is a marriage right
polygamy is a marriage right
pedophilia is a marriage right
bestiality is a marriage right
necrophilia ia a marriage right.
"marriage is a protected right" IDIOT.
You are judgeing these other rights just like others are doing to homo rights.
This makes you a BIGOT and a hypocrite. Wow a double wammy for another libtard. Typical.
sadskippy 3 years ago
what the hell are you talking about...
you aren't saying anything. all you're doing is throwing around the word "liberal" at anyone who disagrees with you and defining a whole bunch of arbitrary terms. fact: prop 8 is both morally hypocritical and rationally inconsistent. how do you disprove this?
arknihil 3 years ago
And you are saying something when you blabber on about gay marriage?
All you're doing is throwing around the word "gay marriage" at anyone who disagrees with you. And defining a ARBITRARY judges decision as good. FACT: prop 8 is both moral and rationally consistent with how we pass laws.
Sexual orientation is not a right, how do you disprove this?
sadskippy 3 years ago
In America the term "marriage" applies to both the legal ceremony where the legal documents are signed and the religious ceremony. In other countries there is marriage and civil unions.
I think a lot of people against gay marriage don't focus about the civil union part (same legal rights as hetrosexual couples), but the religious ceremony that is conducted since most religions are against it.
Answer? Allow civil unions for gay couples and let the churches decide if they will do the religious.
jerseystrife 3 years ago
The problem is that civil unions do not grant the same rights and benefits as a State Marriage License does, remember churches are not required in any state.
Portability, Federal taxes, probate rights, there are a few things that Civil Unions don't grant.
BETTER idea, let everybody get a "Civil Union" via the State, and "Marriage Certificates" can be ceremonial only, not giving the bearers any State or Federally mandated rights or priviledges. Churches then won't fear losing their tithes...
OPE08 3 years ago
I ran out of room to continue my comment. But I agree. I was thinking along the ways of changing the definition of civil union to be just a state marriage that grants the same rights and privileges as the traditional marriage. I just didn't get a chance to state all of that. Damn character limits.
No matter what people still have to fill out two different sets of documents anyway so it's not a huge change.
jerseystrife 3 years ago
There is no such thing as a "State Marriage" and a "Traditional Marriage", a Marriage License is, effectively, a business contract signed by the Sec'y of State and handed out to any two legal ( Or Imancipated) adults who choose to fill out the form. No ceremony is required at all, they just go down to the County Recorders Office and sign up. The only difference is between a marriage license and a "Civil Union", both are granted by the State ONLY, they grant different rights to the citizen...
OPE08 3 years ago
The state of California has voted, not once but twice now and the majority of the state does not want homosexual marriage. In this country we go by a democracy which means we go by what the majority of the people want, not what the minority wants. Get over it already. I don't hate Gay people, but I do believe that marriage should be kept between a man and a woman, if not then next people will want to marry their pets. Don't like it move to an Island and start your own colony...faggotville!
kevzilla33 3 years ago
Ummm....? See, the problem there is that gays are people, not pets. People can not have a love relationship and raise children with a pet. You can do that with gays. If any such colony gets started, I'm first to move. and I'm straight.
TheCelticNinja 3 years ago 2
Your reasoning is flawed.
A democratic vote does not allow the majority to vote in laws that violate State or the Federal Constitution. What if Virgians voted 59:41 to re-instate slavery? Would you say "thats democracy in action!!" It doesn't work that way.
The majority of Californians allowed themselves to be lied to. The issue isn't who should or shouldn't get married, the issue is that they want "Marriage" to be a governmentally protected RELIGIOUS RUN ceremony...
OPE08 3 years ago
Slavery was ended by congress during the civil war. NOT A JUDGE.
Democracy in action IS the congress or people voting,,, However we all know how you libs feel about every vote being counted.
Sexual orientation is not in congress or the constitution. It is a made up right.
judges made gay rights. nothing more nothing less.
sadskippy 3 years ago
Slavery was ended, in Congress, by Ammending the Federal Constitution, making it illegal in all states. The Marriage rights of gay citizens were ended, in California, by attempting to amend the State Constitution to make it illegal.
The issue has nothing at all do do with Sexual Orientation.
Its about denying certain citizens the rights others enjoy based on the dictates of religion. Meaning, the State enforcing a particular religious belief, which violates the Establishment clause.
OPE08 3 years ago
So the issue is not sexual orientation huh?
Well then why not have a judge ok
incest marriage
polygamy marriage
pedophile marriage
bestial marriage
polyandry marriage
Remember "its about denying certain citizens the rights others enjoy based on the dictates of religion".
All these now qualify. Just get a judge to make them a right FIRST and were all good.
sadskippy 3 years ago
The supreme court has been extremely important in granting minority rights. For instance, the supreme court ruled that laws against interracial marriage were unconstitutional in 1967. At the time, the vast majority of Americans disagreed with the ruling. Had the issue been decided by congress or popular vote, interracial marriage laws could still be on the books today. The "elititst" judges enforced the constitution, protecting minority rights against the whims of the ruling majority.
calibloggerl 3 years ago
This ruling in 67 was interacial marriage. It referred to the civil rights act of 65 in the law it clarified. The 65 act protected RACE, SEX (gender), AGE, RELIGION.
What did the 65 act not include? Sexual orientation.
This is a great example of judges clarifying laws of congress.
Gay rights laws from judges are not.
As for the vast majority disagreeing,,,, the peoples REPS passed RACE laws in 65. The people recognized race as a right, NOT SEXUAL ORIENTATION.
Great example.
sadskippy 3 years ago
WHAT???
shapeshifter2007 3 years ago
I am straight by the way!!! I just believe everyone should have equal rights freedoms and b treated equally!!! =D
SingingBeauty 3 years ago
I competetly agree w/jmet03!!! I loved the prop 8 musical!!! I can't believe it's compared 2 incest pedophilia bestiality etc to homosexuality. Those acts would hurt the other the other person or animal involved. Homosexuals know what they are doing consent to what they are doing and doesn't even compare 2 others!!! Incest 4 example between a father and a daughter would hurt not only the daughter, but if she gets pregnant the kids would be damaged physically and emotionally because of genetics.
SingingBeauty 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
This is a war against heterosexuality and religions.
We muslims and christians and every religion and heterosexual most unite to win this battle.
They want to force us to accept their inhumane and unnatural sexuality.
We will not let you destroy our religions by using the law.
Praise be ALLAH!!The one and only God, creator and sustainer of the universe.
blacknproud4ever 3 years ago
Its not "Gay extremists" it is alot of different people, I am certainly not gay or extreme and I see plainly how a religious led political movement lied to the electorate and got away with it.
Marriage is a business agreement, granted by the Sec'y of State, that allows you rights and priviledges. Rights and priviledges that you want to deny to the gay community because of some 4000 year old comments in a book that as the video says, you pick and choose from.
OPE08 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"I am not the only one that see what extreme liberal lawyers and "gay" extremist are really trying to do to us.
Heterosexuals will not be pushed to believe in your sexuality. We can tolerate your sexuality but we will not be force to accept it by making it law.
Just like there is NO law to accept heterosexual views".
Why should there be a law to cater to your homo-sexuality views???
kairy99 3 years ago
can we get a polygamist play,,,?
you know 1 where we show polygamists rights are being abused.
sadskippy 3 years ago
Polygamy pretty much always leads to child molestation, evidenced by the fact that the original Mormon leaders all had 4th or 5th wives who were 14 or 12.
Nobody, nobody sane that is, argues that the age of consent should be lowered to 12. Whereas everyone submitting a request for a marriage License to the Sec'y of State has to be a consenting Adult....
OPE08 3 years ago
Homosexuality pretty much always leads to HIV death, evidenced by the fact that they are all scared to death of it or are dying.
Nobody, nobody sane that is, argued that marriage should be between the same sex (40 years ago).
What does that tell us about:
incest
polygamy
bestiality
pedophilia
necrophilia RIGHTS in the next 40 years?
Futures so bright,,,, gotta wear shades.
sadskippy 3 years ago
Convince yourself of the ridiculous if it helps you. Your argument was used about inter-racial marriage and it hasn't destroyed Christiandom.
And your comments about hiv/aids are ridiculous.
The things you list are illegal, and for very good reasons, gay marriage was never illegal, it simply wasn't allowed. Two consenting adults denied the rights freely given to others because a small section of the populace are afraid of them.
Sad
OPE08 3 years ago 2
Interacial marriage was a RACE issue and was passed by congress in the civil rights act
race, age, sex, religion,, but NOT SEXUAL ORIENTATION.
This is a great example of how the courts use laws from CONGRESS to make correct rulings.
Too bad you think hiv comments are ridiculous,, you must wish a lot of gay people to die.
sadskippy 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
incest, polygamy, pedophilia, bestiality
all have as much claim to rights as homo's do.
Considering you leave this decision to judges ensures thier acceptance in the future.
Gay marriage IS ILLEGAL. Homosexuality is not ILLEGAL,,,, get it strait please.
Your bigotry towards these other rights using the same argument (your personal values) that society does against gays is troubling.
Your a bigot and a hypocrite.
Now thats sad.
sadskippy 3 years ago
I support marriage for same-sex couples. It's the American thing to do, support equality.
NOtoPROP8 3 years ago 4
What's up with the OBAMANATION comment the "gay" director paid the black lady to scream out and why was their extra blacks playing christians??
What's up with Jack black playing Jesus in a comical way(which is very disrespectful) and then make comments which portrayed Jesus as a bigot and sinner.
kairy99 3 years ago
Jack black and everyone in this play are anti black and anti religion. I will not watch any of their movies or attend anything they do or at. I will boycott anything with you people for disrespecting my black people and christians. If money is the only thing you believe in then thats were I will get you.
kairy99 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
All PRIVILEGES are allowed to civilians, if they do not break the law.
If you drive drunk ,your lisence is taken away. Driving is a Privilege.
If you are a convicted felon, you can't vote. Voting is a privilege.
Being gay is not illegal. They should be allowed the same privileges as any law abidding, tax paying, economy supporting American.
This law Defines discrimination. and it's wrong.
Honeypott310 3 years ago 2
This comment has received too many negative votes show
The intolerance and hate from the homo's is now a 2 way street for me I will show all homo's the same respect they are showing the Christians..This is america and last I checked MAJORITY rules not the losing mob...respect our laws or move your hate filled intolerant immoral shit smelling breath to Canada
Radislav001 3 years ago
I am confident that the Majority wanting continue slavery in the south back in the day.
People can not vote away otheres rights.
Strange you thought your interpreted lack of respect for Christians in this video deserved to be told to move to Canada.
People who can not respect the foundations of this country being the separation of church and state should move to where they don't separate church and state, like Afghanistan.
Kill kids who don't honor ma&pa. Its in the bible! Follow it all.
barbaradering 3 years ago 5
"It does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds." -Samuel Adams
Gay people show respect to those who respect them, like everyone else in this world. If anyone is hating it's you.
goldminevalentine 3 years ago
They are not denying you anything, your demands to impose your version of the world on them is objectionable at the very least. You call them sinners and say they lifestyle is "against god" yet you expect them to respect your views, that is ridiculous. All you religious supporters of the ban claim they are taking something away from you, it is the same argument that the bigots used who fought against interracial marriage. It was wrong then and is still dead wrong now.
amsharper 3 years ago
I'm pretty sure Neil Patrick Harris is in fact openly gay, not a hetero ally like Jack Black.
enigmatically 3 years ago
We got married in OCT and thank people for making these videos
depfox 3 years ago
So can a few judges also over throw Obama's election because they think it is right? And why do gays want to be married? It is not that great.
marxdesign 3 years ago
Good video, I don't think you should include Neil Patrick Harris in your list of heteros, though...seeing as he's a raging 'mo and all. :)
fashionistaJ 3 years ago
You are very adroable! Howdy from Maryland! Great vid! I just finished watching Prop 8: The Musical! It was hilarious and it proved a great point! My husband and I got married in September and were protesting here in MD against prop 8.
lordmakoto 3 years ago 2
You are so gay (in a good way). :)
CyberSword13 3 years ago
Ectoplasmicentity: One of the wonderful things that liberal leaning people gave this nation is a public school system. Go back! Learn to read! Our founding fathers were deists. Our founding fathers were criminals, indentured servants, and slaves. The old puritan faith really didn't last for so very long. Christianity CREATED the dark ages. Liberal thinkers created the Renaissances. I love Christians. They've done wonderful things! It's people like you, exclusionary, dogmatic, morons who ruin it.
thepensivei 3 years ago 2
This comment has received too many negative votes show
It saddens me to see these celebrities bashing Christianity such as they did in the musical. Yes it had a catchy tune but it made my stomach turn. Christianity has changed this world for the better. America was founded with Judeo-Christian values and not this secular nation like the liberal revisionist historians want to portray. The more lefist liberalism expands in the US, the more darker this world will become. Christian America is all thats left to prevent another Dark Ages.
ectoplasmicentity 3 years ago
Yea seriously, get your facts straight. They were making fun of christianity because the bible was used for a sleuth of horrible things, for instance the justification of slavery in the south, and now they're picking and choosing verses out of the bible to single out gays. Not to mention how accurate the video was in regards to christians picking and choosing and being ok with things that make a profit- regardless of how immoral it is.
dannyh007 3 years ago 3
They did'nt "BASH" anybody. They just pointed out a little of the hypocracy behind prop 8. The separation of church and state is in the constitution for reason. Though not strictly applying to the issue of gay marriage. Religious convictions do not give one group the right to determine the rights of any other group. Prop 8 goes directly against, at the very least, the RIGHT of LIFE, LIBERTY and THE PERSUIT OF HAPPINESS>
ibphotos 3 years ago 6
Mohnadas Gandi "I like your christ,I do not like your christians,Your christians are so unlike your christ"
pdx954 3 years ago 6
OMG that is so true. I in fact do know about mr harris too. i corrected my self in the video right after i said his name but like i mentioned.. quality sucks on my phone's video camera! lol.
jmet03 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
gay marriage will never be legalized if we can have a say in it.
DesolationoftheDolls 3 years ago
They're NOT bashing Christianity.
There's plenty of room for true Christians to agree with everything said there. But radical right-wing Christians interpret the bible to fit their political views and ignore the true message of Christianity, which is basically to love thy neighbor, love Jesus, and do unto others as you would have them do unto you.
There's nothing about hate or trying to control the actions of others there. That's the Christianity I was raised under. How about you?
eidco 3 years ago 8
If Jesus had a grave He'd be turning over in it watching the way "Christians" have become SO unChristlike in this matter. As a former missionary and a straight Christian woman I implore my brother's and sisters to remember who He is not who the religion of today has made Christ to be.
REALCHICK17 3 years ago 4
Yay keep spreading the word. You rock! I'm a sucker for people supporting the cause so... you just earned yourself a subscriber! I don't know how much you actually care lol.. Anyway, see ya :-D
Luaeria 3 years ago 2
thanks!! i love subscribers! i'm josh btw.
jmet03 3 years ago
HAHA! Someone totally knocked on the door and scared the shit out of me! lol
jmet03 3 years ago