per previous note- So we don't live in an "Traditional" world so there for why not view society for what it is... cause it takes all kinds to make this world work!
Gay marriage is NOT a civil rights issue. When were gay people in the back of the bus? had to use separate water fountains? Were discriminated against? Civil rights act of 1964 states that you cant discriminate based on race, color, religion, national origin, gender NOT SEXUAL ORIENTATION.
Actually, Obama said he doesn't support MARRIAGE between two people of the same sex. What's more, he said he would leave it up to the states to decide. If he were to come in and tread on our state's rights, there would be an incredible backlash.
prop. 8 promotes discrimination....um i didnt know we vote on civil rights! quit being ignorant people stop worrying about marriage and worry about the presidential candidates, the economy sucks right now and all people care about is that two people who love eachother should not have the right to marry just because they are same sex, you can copy and paste stuff out of a book all day but i believe God doesnt make people gay and then punish them for it later, open your minds people.vote no on8
Nobama: There are tons of blue codes in California. I can tell you as a matter of fact that in public schools, that's not enforced: they have a lot better things to do than to sit around talking about marriage period.
19Ana87: The bottom line I'm trying to get across is that teaching these differences will be detrimental, not helpful. These are young children we're talking about. These are not mentally nor psychologically capable adults who already have a foundation to build on, in terms of mentality; they're building the foundation with the things surrounding them in society.
you are talking about things that are already destroyed because science already proved such things. you can teach children about sexuality in school not earlier. and if talking about same sex couples would effect them... heterosexuality would effect them as well. if you start talking about sexuality too early it has effects on young children but not the sexuality itself. it doesn't matter what kind of sexuality you are talking about.
19Ana87: Claiming that teaching heterosexual marriage to children will damage their perception of society is a logical fallacy, since society itself is based on heterosexual marriage, or in other words, the creation of posterity. That's what society is. I don't say that society has "no place" for homosexuality (after all, homosexuality exists), but children must be taught to comprehend that society is, at its core, comprised of heterosexual marriage.
the studies i told you about are facts from psychologists being taught in psychology classes all over the world. if you took a psychology class youd know about that stuff.
you on the other hand, have not and are still fighting for something you lost on. children children children. SOME CHILDREN ARE HOMOSEXUALS TOO. leave that be
do you have children of your own? do you work at school or places with children? are your opinions from group of children... or just your own childhood? nuff said
lilaznballaz1022: I assure you I've taken psychology classes before, I know plenty about perceptions, and I even live with a registered psychologist. The processes behind the human mind, although they're not completely understood even by anyone on this earth, are not entirely lost on me -- the truth is the truth, regardless of the setting it's learned in.
but have you worked with children? do you have children of your own? .. do you know for sure how they will react? what are your experiences in that field
because ill tell you i work with children everyday during my school year, and the summer. and i know well enough how children act with all this mumbo jumbo
lilaznballaz1022: I know that the great majority of my mentality is based on what and how my parents taught me, both verbally and nonverbally. The mind, even at a young age, captures all this information together, frames it, and creates the perception (the "information filter," as you will) through which reality is treated. You and I both know that that's basic psychology, and the earlier on the stigma is introduced, generally, the harder it is to remove or alter (generally).
mmm not quite i don't know what you mean actually. my parents taught me man and woman. they dont believe in homosexuals. theyre voting yes on prop 8, im voting no. until they found out someone in my family close to us is gay, they have different views. myself, i didnt like the thought of gays , id say "ew youre gay" but you grow up with the right people, some of my gay friends for ex. , then you learn and change. i guess im more fortunate than you to have the opportunity to escape the box.
lilaznballaz1022: Open-mindedness is necessary, as you stated, for making a conscientious decision about the future. I've chosen yes on 8 after an evaluation of what I believe would be best for the future, and I do stand for it. I'm not "better" than other people or anything. I've only chosen what I believe will turn out best, and I wish all people would look at the issue with open-mindedness as well.
lol because its the magical snap. we thought about it, and we dont want everything to be "how it is" and we know we know, people snap then get somewhere or something appears or w/e. but we thought. screw conventional ideas, lets just do w/e. since this was just an american democracy project, and not film, we didn't think anyone would care or catch it. lol but good catch
Without any disrespect to the valiant efforts of single mothers, gay adoptive parents, etc, their efforts will generally fall short of providing everything to a child.
Generally, two men will not be able to achieve the level of nurture, emotional bonding, and care as a mother can provide. And I know from personal experience the loss that results from lacking a father figure in the home.
If you disagree, that's fine. But this is really the crux of Prop 8.
NObama, I see: you think that the way you love another person is superior to the way someone else loves another person. You think it's okay to change the law to take away the rights of people who've never done anything to you other than try to live their personal lives in dignity.
I didn't say anything about my love being superior to anyone else's. Do you find it easier to make up things that I said, and then argue with strawmen?
My entire point thus far has been that a child is best served in a home where there is both a mother and a father. In their hearts, Californians raising children know this to be true.
Regarding "taking away people's rights", go read the California Family Code § 297.5. Surprise surprise.
Of course, these days the ideal nuclear family only exists somewhere in the neighborhood of half the time or less.
But the fact that we fail to achieve the ideal is no reason to abandon the pursuit of it. Imagine if we took that attitude with public education!
Although every citizen is guaranteed their equal rights, that does not force the State to honor every family arrangement as being equally ideal for children.
That's what I mean when I say there is no right to marriage. It's not something we (as citizens) are entitled to demand from our fellow citizens (the State).
The State CHOOSES to recognize and endorse marriage as a statement on the benefits of marriage to society. The chief benefit of this is, I believe, the formation of the nuclear family unit, which is the most ideal environment in which to raise children. Ideally, every child deserves a mother and a father.
For your info, I'd rather have a gay co-worker of mine raise my kids should my wife and I die suddenly, than to have them turned over to Britney Spears or shuttled around in foster centers for the next decade.
I'm speaking about generalities. What else could we possible speak about when it comes to the State picking something so broad and sweeping for its endorsement?
I'm unfamiliar with the studies you refer to. To be honest, I'm have my doubts of the accuracy of such studies which claim to FACTUALLY establish that children raised by homosexual parents are healthier.
If you're talking about physical health, that's possible, since a lot of gay couples in San Fran (for example) are better well off than the national average.
But what could the size of such a study be? And the controls? And how many decades duration? I don't buy it.
Continuing my point, domestic partnerships basically already have everything married couples have WITH ONE EXCEPTION...
That exception is moral status, respect, and endorsement from the State that their partnership is in every way as "good" (both for themselves and society) as a traditional man/woman partnership.
My point is that the State has no obligation to bestow this endorsement of a gay union, any more than the State is required to recogize marriage at all.
I think you're getting closer to understanding my point, quite an accomplishment for 500-character snipets!
Domestic partnerships (gay or otherwise) currently have all the legal rights, privileges, responsibilities, etc as do married couples. See Family Code § 297.5, of which I only quoted the first section.
The passage of Prop 8 restricts married couples to men/women pairs only, but does so with no curtailing of the rights listed in the Family Code.
Family Code § 297.5 -- (a) Registered domestic partners shall have the same rights, protections, and benefits, and shall be subject to the same responsibilities, obligations, and duties under law, whether they derive from statutes, administrative regulations, court rules, government policies, common law, or any other provisions or sources of law, as are granted to and imposed upon spouses.
nobama... so basically you're saying that they have everything that a married couple would have... without the actual title of being married?
that's still not good enough you have to see that though. because it means people aren't treating each others equally by not giving homosexuals the right to be married. its just not the same. and i understand, you're trying to show other examples... but when it comes to it. homosexuals can not be legall married if this prop passes. equality for all.
any culture which sanctions same-sex marriage will place childrens rights at odds with adult desires. The January 2007 Ontario court ruling that a child could have three parents was inevitable because with same-sex marriage the concept of biological parenthood is immediately displaced. Same-sex reproduction immediately involves a third party. The idea of a "legal parent" replaced the idea of a natural parent.
Gays can promise eternal love and it's called civil union..marriage is for men and woman. california code 297.5f clearly states registered same sex partners shall have the same rights regarding descrimination as those provided to spouses....so they are lying when they say this is about rights they already have the same rights. they just want to be able to tell the children in school it's ok to be gay and parents have no say because of anti-descrimination laws that will take hold.
The rights and privileges that same-sex partnerships are afforded are all the same as traditional marriages under California law. See Family Code § 297.5.
vote yes on 8 so children in california don't have to start learning of homosexualityin school. calif code 297.5f clearly states they already have the same right . prop 8 eliminates teachers from being able to teach it in school..vote yes on 8
what if a child is homosexual. then you strip their right of learning about discrimination to themselves. WHAT IF YOUR OWN COUSIN, SON DAUGHTER, NIECE, NEPHEW, FRIENDS KID , ANY CHILD THAT'S related to you... is homosexual. then you're just taking away from them. you dont know who's homosexual from just your eyes... people are in the cloest homosexuals yanno. and no, gaydars aren't real
what most brainless californians dont understand is that discrimination is wrong, 2 PEOPLE can love, meaning man and woman, man and man, woman and woman, PEOPLE can LOVE who they love, No on Prop 8. Love is Love, Discrimination is wrong, if you vote yes on 8, equal right will come in effect, that means you are a discriminator, shame on you!!! i vote no on prop 8. prop 8 is another word for discrimination of homosexuals, that breaks the equality law if you vote yes, so vote no on prop 8
webmike720: Proposition 8 is not about discrimination. It is not about love, because love exists regardless of what happens on Proposition 8. Marriage does not determine love. No civil rights will be lost whatsoever by the gay community if Proposition 8 passes. Discrimination is not the issue.
amyleona2: Proposition 8 does not withhold any rights from homosexual couples at all. The California Family Code, clause 297.5, mandates that all domestic partners receive all benefits given to traditional marriage couples. No rights are lost at all.
It's not that easy. Religious free speech will be challenged if Proposition 8 fails, and churches may eventually lose their tax-exempt status (effectively removing religious freedom). That is not equality.
amyleona2: Yes they will. Any group that challenges gay rights (including religious groups who, by belief, do not accept homosexual practices) will be discriminated and challenged. It has already happened in Canada, one of six countries that have legalized gay marriage. If a government agency such as the Alberta Human Rights Commission can stop a minister from teaching his church's doctrine about marriage, then it won't be long before everyone's free speech rights will be in jeopardy.
then every marriage should be banned because otherwise nothing is fair! i do not like to be taught about straight sexuality as well but i have to accept it! So others have to accept gays and gay sexuality as well. and it also helps to prevent young people from diseases because if they know about gay sexuality they know how to stay safe if they are gay.
19Ana87: Then that's attempting to change marriage again. The only fair solution is to keep marriage the way it is, which is what Yes on 8 will accomplish.
Gays are not "unaccepted." A gay person can live a full and fulfilling life, if they so choose. Marriage does not affect that. Nor will changing the definition of marriage prevent diseases from spreading.
but we have not every right! it is not fair to have less rights. this means we are second class humans. you cannot take a human right away for something you do not choose. you cannot choose sexuality! homosexuality is not a choice it is a fact same as heterosexuality or any other sexuality.
19Ana87: The concepts of total fairness and total equality are not possible, realistically. There will always be opponents, regardless of what issues are faced. To completely favor one is to overthrow the other, which is not fair. American government is a balance of majority rule and minority rights. Compromises are made. That's why we have such things as civil unions: they aren't perfect, but they are compromises, which serve a lot to the purpose.
i just don't accept a compromise in the case of human rights. gay marriage has no effect on other peoples life. it has effects on the married couple. so live and let live!
19Ana87: The repercussions of letting Proposition 8 fail would take away rights from other people. One is how same-sex marriage will be taught in schools to children, even as young as in kindergarten, whether the parents agree to that or not; parents have the right to decide what's taught to their children.
Religious freedom of speech will be impeded, as well, in process of time. It already happened in Alberta, Canada, and would be well on the way here.
and i have to be taught about straight sex and lifestyle!!! and i do not want to listen. i have to agree to that too even if i do not agree!talking about sex starts in school not earlier! and it will not take away the freedom of speech or just not more than now because i cannot say openly i do not like straights and i do not accept them( just as an example). so why should you have the right to talk about things free but me as a gay not?
19Ana87: Teaching young children about same-sex marriage will be debilitating to their ability to form perceptions about society and sexes. You and I know that there are fundamental differences between man and woman. A five-year-old child hasn't formed those distinctions yet. It is not fair to begin to confuse children as to what men and women really are, by teaching them, in school, that a man's marriage to either a man and to a woman is just "what happens," especially against a parent's will.
this is the reason why we have to talk about straight and gay sex and about every other sexuality. talking about it doesn't confuse young children or did it confuse me that i grew up with straight sexuality? No! I am gay and my whole family is straight. and we both know that if we teach young children the facts of life it is easier for them to be a good person later and not being an ignorant one.
19Ana87: Society (or the perpetuation of posterity) is based on procreation, which is generated only between a man and a woman. The differences that exist between male and female must be understood well. This is why learning about traditional marriage is not debilitating to a child's perception: because that is the order of nature, for creating posterity and society.
you didn't hear about science yet huh? there it is already out that homosexuality is nature as well! and talking about homosexuality doesn't make children gay. i have my examples for this because i know a gay family but their child is straight!
19Ana87: Whether it makes children gay or not, it does damage a child's perception as to the differences between men and women, which are fundamental.
lilanzballaz1022: You and I both know that a child definitely doesn't finish the perception-forming process by age 5, although it is certainly well on the way. A child of that age cannot comprehend many things that there are about gender (and if it were possible, not all children progress mentally at that rate).
it doesn't damage anything. see recent studies. there it is. a fact you cannot deny. i also had psychology classes so you cannot convice me with your opinion because i studied the facts.
It was on TV!these differences have nothing to do with teaching about gay sex because they will teach them about both, straight and gay life.so children will be much better informed about the reality than they are now. you see else there wouldn't be discrimination of minorities. but young people start to discriminate because they only know this lifestyle and any other lifestly is wrong in their eyes because it is different from what they've learned in school or at home.
19Ana87: It has everything to do with gay marriage and traditional marriage, because traditional marriage is how society continues. To remove or confuse a child's perception about that will cause damage in life -- and all against a parent's will, no less. In this, damage is caused.
as i said it doesn't damage a child if it is taught about different lifestyles it just helps to understand other people or different lifestyles and it might stop such kind of homophobia! also traditional marriage will continue even if gay marriage is allowed you can already see it in countries with gay marriage. just because there is gay marriage humans will not turn to homosexuals! and children will not be homosexuals just because they know about it.
19Ana87: I can show you how it's detrimental to a child to be taught about same-sex marriage at a young age.
You know the difference between men and women. What if you didn't know that differences existed between men and women? What if they were all categorized as the same sex, or in other words, if the cognitive differences between men and women ceased to exist? Such core principles as identity would be detrimentally affected.
you do not listen right? as i said differences will still be taught. there will be a plus....a plus so straight and gay sexuality will be taught. so what you are talking about will never happen. and to your first point i can show you that it doesn't effect children because they will know much more about nature and life.
Teaching same-sex marriage in school alongside traditional marriage gives the message that same-sex marriage is "just as good" as traditional marriage regarding society as a whole, and based on the things I've explained, that notion is detrimental to a child's development.
also same-sex marriage is as good as traditional marriage you know why... i'll tell you . marriage is an institution of love and support and gays marry because of the same reason... because they love each other and they want to support each other!
just because they can't get children makes it worse than traditional marriage?? WTF??? What is with people who can't have children because of illness they can still marry even if they can't have children on their own!
children need to be taught about nature! and homosexuality is nature! and it is already proved that teachng about both lifestlyes doesn't damage a child.
so best regards now. i do not discuss about the same arguments ever and ever again. you can vote for whatever you want. but what a pity that people in 2008 still deny the truth and still believe that science is wrong.looking back on galileo galilei and the earth as a disc or we know better now (after so many years of denying) as a globe!
19Ana87: The line of reasoning that same-sex marriage is as good as traditional marriage has absolutely nothing to do with the welfare of the children, who are put in jeopardy by it. Of course love can exist in any relationship. The question is about the children's future. If same-sex marriage is made legal at the detriment of the children, it's entirely selfish, and cannot be understood as a decision for the "common good," because the very act puts another group at a disadvantage.
well because you deny arguments of science. science already proved that it doesn't damage children but you still believe it does so what shall i say for me there are no new arguments because i know the facts but you use the children all the time. so what's new?
19Ana87: I repeat what I stated earlier: that saying "I have studies that prove it" truly doesn't prove anything. That's hearsay, at best. Facts must be presented at the table in order to be considered.
well sorry that i do not know a website for TV Science! i watched it on tv but just to give it back to you do not have the proved facts as well you just use it as your fact. and these aren't proved...it's just your opinion. but i wish you the best with your lifestyle. i will leave now because it is pretty late here!
19Ana87: I don't intend to carry on since it appears that our conversation is over, but it's quite understood, in general human psychology, that parenting (or childhood experiences) lay a large foundation for how the rest of life will turn out -- it alters chances of drug dependence, enrolling in college, etc. The burden of evidence lies on the person that attempts to refute what's already placed as the understood assumption.
sorry but i had psychology and i will repeat it as well homosexuality is nature same as heterosexuality. nothing really nothing happens to children if we teach them about every kind of lifestyle. they just know how to deal with it in a better way and so homophobia will be destroyed and homosexual people will not suffer from ignorant people anymore. and well just to mention homophobia is a disease not being homosexual! good night!
19Ana87: At no point did I state that homosexuality is a disease, or that homosexuality doesn't happen. I state that it is best for society, in process of raising children, that same-sex marriage not be taught to children, because that's not how society as a whole works. Homosexuality exists, but society is not perpetuated by it, and erasing the differences between male and female would be detrimental to certain things, such as personal identity, in children.
homosexuality does nothing and the only thing what's best is to teach young children about everything in the world so that they can grow up to good adults and not ignorant ones! It's best for society to show that people are different and nothing will chnage to bad it will change to a much better society than now!
honestly, if you work with children, they're not as dumb as they look. or act. i work at a school with students all the time, and they do the most amazing things. at the young or older ages.
this is an average done by famous psychologists and sociologists
age 5 - children know gender stereotypes
age 6 - more complex info about your own sex
age 8- know more about opposite sex
the schema of the mental map is well developed even before the time they get into the 3rd grade. i was age 6 in kinder
lilaznballaz1022: I don't intend to say that children lack intelligence, but more that they lack mental capacity. Teenagers' brains are still, in full, developing by ages 16 and 17, or even 18 in some cases; children, in turn, are far less capable to comprehend what their own reality is.
One example: mental illnesses, as we know, are the realities that people form within the mind, and we all have the capability to form that mental reality based on what happens to us in childhood.
lilaznballaz1022: Neither you nor I can deny that a person's perceptions on reality are based, almost wholly, in childhood. In this the relation is made to mental illness: that this perception and this reality are formed in childhood. Incorrect instruction, therefore, can change a child's reality, whether they know it or not.
you fail in the last comment again. i can deny a person's perceptions on reality based , almost wholly, in childhood. you're going back with the same arguments trying to crawl yourself out. if you wanna vote yes, then go vote yes. you cant argue with this... come with a new argument thats not children, then you might have a better chance, until then. goodluck, keep saying your EXACT same stuff... and see how far that gets you.
lilaznballaz1022: We both know how perceptions are based concretely in childhood, for a fact. Things that are mistaught, or misconceptions that are believed, since childhood, can only be removed by far-reaching methods (extreme experiences, therapy, etc) later on in life. It is undeniable, and the evidences regarding it are many.
its like youre saying the women can't love women either.
its like youre saying that that 5 year old child can't be gay and must be straight
its like youre saying that they WOULD ONLY teach about homosexuality at a younger age, totally not thinking about the fact that they are able to teach it in middle school , in high school , when thoughts are formed properly to think.
p.s. I take psychology - a child is developed to know gender stereotypes by age 5. dont believe me? take a classs
Free speech and religious beliefs have nothing to do with private individuals getting married. You don't have a right under the first amendment to have everyone be the same as you. Believe what you want to believe, say what you want to say, but don't treat others like second class citizens.
colonelmatterson: The issue is not to deny the existence of homosexuality. Two big worries regarding Proposition 8 are that, if it fails, same-sex marriage will be taught to young children in schools, and religious freedom will be challenged. No person should be persecuted for what they believe, but that will happen in process of time if Proposition 8 fails, as shown in the Alberta Human Rights Commission case.
Same sex marriage is not a topic of teaching just as marriage is not a topic of teaching in schools for young children. The case in Massachusetts was so overblown. But the Supreme Court has already ruled that parents may not interfere in state run curricula. Parents do have the choice of where they want their kids to go to school. It still isn't a good reason to destroy equal rights under the California constitution because of fears about a possible, but marginal conflict about public education.
colonelmatterson: It still does, though, show that the door's open for more things to happen like the Massachusetts story; for example, the class of first-graders in San Francisco that was taken on a field trip to see a lesbian marriage. Though I can understand that not all risks are confirmed, the possible risks are apparent.
Do you really believe that because something happened in San Francisco among a local community that is very accepting of others and doesn't view gay marriage as a "risk," that people in other communities will randomly have lesbian marriage field trips? Is there some secret gay marriage suprise-squad biding its time in Auburn just waiting for our state to reaffirm equal protection under the constitution?
TO ALL THE LOVELY PARENTS WHO WATCH THIS VIDEO AND SAY "I WANT TO PROTECT MY CHILD FROM THIS STUFF" wouldn't it be ironic if your child is homosexual? but you just never knew? it's not a choice to many people to be homosexual, it's just how they are. So if you, a parent, want to vote yes on prop 8, but DID NOT KNOW YOUR CHILD.. was homosexual yourself, it means your taking away their future rights. think about that
1) Kids will be taught gay lifestyles in grade school.
2) Pastors will be persecuted and sued for "hateful" and "discriminatory" speech if they preach anti-gay teachings from the Bible.
3) Individuals will be sued for their personal beliefs if they "discriminate" against gays, even if against their religious beliefs (ex. San Diego doctor forced to artificially inseminate lesbian couple despite his religious beliefs and availability of willing doctors). YES ON 8!
im against prop 8, everyone should vote no on it. and theres definitely hypocrisy with you guys saying that yet one of you don't support it. and you dont have to give us the disclaimer you are not homosexual. just because you make this doesnt make you homosexual
True, so much good could be accomplished if parents talked to their children more. This is much needed.
But what we also need is an environment children can learn in (the public schools) that does not spend its time indoctrinating them in gay marriage philosophy. If Prop 8 fails, teachers will be required to teach gay marriage as equal to traditional marriage to children as young as five.
personally , as someone who was NEVER learned about gay marriage in school... and as someone who is working to get their teacher credential, having over hundreds of hours in a classroom teaching students...
i say teachers , they know it or not... talk and teach about more senseless bullshit than gay marriage. gay marriage/ homosexuals is almost a type of race now, and there is mos def a "racism" to homosexuals. i say teaching it at schools... is good. and can be educational.
Dear Mr.Nobama2012 I show my sincerest apologies in my informal comment that I posted up earlier today. That is very unprofessional of me, and I should have had a more prominent response than what I have written.
But because this isn't a FREAKING ESSAY, AND ITS JUST YOUTUBE. I DONT GIVE A DAMN OF MY INFORMALITIES. suck it up, its youtube, not my freaking term paper. Love Dearly,
True, marriage is not defined by who is denied it. Marriage is better defined by who is granted it.
Every child deserves a mother and a father in the home. Although this is not possible in many instances of separation or death, the state has every duty to endorse traditional families as the ideal building block of the next generation.
This is not about hating gays, or taking away rights. It's about doing what is best for our children.
okay,,single parents take care of their kids alone because they have to not because they want to. raising a child alone is hard and assholes like you dont understand.
I think it is crazy that voters can change the State Constitution. There was a time when Blacks could not Marry Whites. Would it have been OK to change the Constitution to prevent interracial marriage?
Being Gay is not a choice anymore than being Black, Brown, or a Redhead. It is time that people (Christians) stop pushing their beliefs on other people. There are many religions in this world and NONE of them are based on facts but are based on faith.
Way to go on the vid! I'm going to post it on my myspace. Don't listen to those bigoted homophobic bastards. Their words just go to show why we need to vote NO on prop 8. If they don't like us they can go live somewhere else that will "tolerate" their hatefulness.
don't you love how the gay bashers look up no on prop 8 vids just to talk shit about it? now we all know what........ straight gay bashers do with their lives? cheers
I Have to ask, what logical reason is there for voting yes on prop 8? Since churches have cause more pain and suffering than anything else that surely cant be a logical reason to vote yes on it, and since the bible mentions nothing about sin between a man marrying a man that cant be a reason, and since gays and lesbians really dont do anything more than what a straight man does their and their lifestyle isnt that much diff from any other american, other than they are gay... whats the logicality?
Defining gay marriage restricts religious liberty (In Massachusetts Catholic charities can't adopt out as their doctrine is "discriminatory") and restricts parental rights (In Massachusetts, homosexual fairy tales were taught as equal treatment without parental authority). I want to protect my kids against what I, as a parent, feel is morally wrong. What about my rights? Why take over the definition of marriage? Domestic partnerships give gays ALL of the same rights. Marriage isn't a right.
Homosexual Marriage is not about rights. It is about changing society. Look at all other groups that have been denied marriage, did they let the law stop them? No. In the day of slavery did laws prevent two slaves jumping over a broomstick and calling themselves what ever they wanted? No
If you are gay and want to call yourself married, have your own ceremony and call it whatever you want and stop dictating what society calls marriage.
Not Exactly really all in all the reason for prop 8 is actually to remove those codes, in case you never really read the law it will actually over ride the family code you just put in there... the reason for this is that its a church law, plain and simple... people use the words "family values" and "gay/lesbian lifestyle, embracing" to make it seem wrong, when in reality, its about as normal as breathing air or making children
A lot of gay couples have children... in fact california encourages gay couples to adopt children in foster care because it has been shown they provide loving homes. The only threat to these children are hate mongers like you attacking there families. NO ON 8
This vote will not change the fact that gay couples can, have been, and will continue to have and raise children. All it will do is damage there families and hurt these children.
Do you want to do that? That is what you will accomplish.
The fact is that gay couples adopt children and provide stable homes that are better than nothing.
But it's still not ideal. The ideal setting for every child is to have a mother and a father, and we shouldn't back away from what we call ideal simply because we cannot achieve it all the time.
not only do they adopt, but they have there own biological children. This vote will not stop that... it will only punish those children for what you believe.
The reason that would effect any religious belief is that force churches to except a belief that is exceptable for same sex marriage. That would be a government abridging or creating a government religion. Just a thought that I had. Even though there is no such thing as separation of church and state, this would not be. No on 8 would not even change any rights that homosexuals have now.
Please vote yes on prop 8. I you vote no then you are voting against my right to religious freedom. Not only does it take away the religious freedom but it is a direct attack the the Unites States constitution. This does not do one thing or ad one thing to homosexual right.
hahah, nice vid guys!
Joenval4ever 1 year ago
For real equality abolish marriage altogether....
LouisPlume 1 year ago
per previous note- So we don't live in an "Traditional" world so there for why not view society for what it is... cause it takes all kinds to make this world work!
sellernodoubt 2 years ago
MARRIAGE IS SO GAY
ixiiioviii 2 years ago
Gay marriage is NOT a civil rights issue. When were gay people in the back of the bus? had to use separate water fountains? Were discriminated against? Civil rights act of 1964 states that you cant discriminate based on race, color, religion, national origin, gender NOT SEXUAL ORIENTATION.
ultima3210 2 years ago
you keep telling yourself that but it is a civil rights issue
idaman12345 2 years ago
Actually, Obama said he doesn't support MARRIAGE between two people of the same sex. What's more, he said he would leave it up to the states to decide. If he were to come in and tread on our state's rights, there would be an incredible backlash.
whatevalife6 3 years ago
OMG sooo frkn FUNNAY
YOU GUYS ARE AWESOME
balletkido 3 years ago
i voted NO on prop 8 , btw nice vid XD
sasunaru0403 3 years ago
I voted yes On prop 8 cuzz I alzo belive that marrige should only be between a man and a woman. Jesus Christ what is this world coming too?
mestisoboy 3 years ago
we're coming to a world that believes that maintaining a single definition is more important then granting people all the same rights.
JigsawMaster 3 years ago
Too true. "Because that's not what the word means" is the single worst argument I've ever heard for anything.
ChainChompKing 3 years ago
we don't live in a theocracy.faith is a personal belief.
obamawill2008 3 years ago
vote no on prop 8!
skierdude02 3 years ago
Enough is enough! Only the facts will answer everyone's questions and opinions. Please view the facts at: .com/watch?v=4JZIJnJWZBQ
LiluBob 3 years ago
lol
niamtxiv 3 years ago
prop. 8 promotes discrimination....um i didnt know we vote on civil rights! quit being ignorant people stop worrying about marriage and worry about the presidential candidates, the economy sucks right now and all people care about is that two people who love eachother should not have the right to marry just because they are same sex, you can copy and paste stuff out of a book all day but i believe God doesnt make people gay and then punish them for it later, open your minds people.vote no on8
flipkid619 3 years ago 2
No on 8/HATE!
chimpapino19 3 years ago 2
colonelmatterson,
You're mistaken about marriage being in the curriculum of schools.
Education Code § 51890 mandates that "responsibilities of marriage and parenthood" be a part of the curriculum of all California public schools K-12.
So don't be too surprised if those 2nd grade books in MA showing men kissing end up in kindergarden classes here.
NObama2012 3 years ago
Nobama: There are tons of blue codes in California. I can tell you as a matter of fact that in public schools, that's not enforced: they have a lot better things to do than to sit around talking about marriage period.
colonelmatterson 3 years ago 2
Great video guys! Keep up the good work!!!
reticulum4 3 years ago 6
19Ana87: The bottom line I'm trying to get across is that teaching these differences will be detrimental, not helpful. These are young children we're talking about. These are not mentally nor psychologically capable adults who already have a foundation to build on, in terms of mentality; they're building the foundation with the things surrounding them in society.
slb1900000 3 years ago
you are talking about things that are already destroyed because science already proved such things. you can teach children about sexuality in school not earlier. and if talking about same sex couples would effect them... heterosexuality would effect them as well. if you start talking about sexuality too early it has effects on young children but not the sexuality itself. it doesn't matter what kind of sexuality you are talking about.
19Ana87 3 years ago
19Ana87: Claiming that teaching heterosexual marriage to children will damage their perception of society is a logical fallacy, since society itself is based on heterosexual marriage, or in other words, the creation of posterity. That's what society is. I don't say that society has "no place" for homosexuality (after all, homosexuality exists), but children must be taught to comprehend that society is, at its core, comprised of heterosexual marriage.
slb1900000 3 years ago
the studies i told you about are facts from psychologists being taught in psychology classes all over the world. if you took a psychology class youd know about that stuff.
you on the other hand, have not and are still fighting for something you lost on. children children children. SOME CHILDREN ARE HOMOSEXUALS TOO. leave that be
do you have children of your own? do you work at school or places with children? are your opinions from group of children... or just your own childhood? nuff said
lilaznballaz1022 3 years ago
lilaznballaz1022: I assure you I've taken psychology classes before, I know plenty about perceptions, and I even live with a registered psychologist. The processes behind the human mind, although they're not completely understood even by anyone on this earth, are not entirely lost on me -- the truth is the truth, regardless of the setting it's learned in.
slb1900000 3 years ago
but have you worked with children? do you have children of your own? .. do you know for sure how they will react? what are your experiences in that field
because ill tell you i work with children everyday during my school year, and the summer. and i know well enough how children act with all this mumbo jumbo
lilaznballaz1022 3 years ago
lilaznballaz1022: I know that the great majority of my mentality is based on what and how my parents taught me, both verbally and nonverbally. The mind, even at a young age, captures all this information together, frames it, and creates the perception (the "information filter," as you will) through which reality is treated. You and I both know that that's basic psychology, and the earlier on the stigma is introduced, generally, the harder it is to remove or alter (generally).
slb1900000 3 years ago
mmm not quite i don't know what you mean actually. my parents taught me man and woman. they dont believe in homosexuals. theyre voting yes on prop 8, im voting no. until they found out someone in my family close to us is gay, they have different views. myself, i didnt like the thought of gays , id say "ew youre gay" but you grow up with the right people, some of my gay friends for ex. , then you learn and change. i guess im more fortunate than you to have the opportunity to escape the box.
lilaznballaz1022 3 years ago
lilaznballaz1022: Open-mindedness is necessary, as you stated, for making a conscientious decision about the future. I've chosen yes on 8 after an evaluation of what I believe would be best for the future, and I do stand for it. I'm not "better" than other people or anything. I've only chosen what I believe will turn out best, and I wish all people would look at the issue with open-mindedness as well.
slb1900000 3 years ago
Hahaha thisis Amazing VOTE NO ON Prop 8!!!!!
JackTyler789 3 years ago
Why do you snap after you reached the place???
impulse26us 3 years ago
lol because its the magical snap. we thought about it, and we dont want everything to be "how it is" and we know we know, people snap then get somewhere or something appears or w/e. but we thought. screw conventional ideas, lets just do w/e. since this was just an american democracy project, and not film, we didn't think anyone would care or catch it. lol but good catch
lilaznballaz1022 3 years ago
wonderful!
uofcrob 3 years ago 2
good for you guys.
:)
-pz
pzap22 3 years ago 2
VOTE NO ON PROP 8
Libra92Rock 3 years ago 3
Continuing...
Without any disrespect to the valiant efforts of single mothers, gay adoptive parents, etc, their efforts will generally fall short of providing everything to a child.
Generally, two men will not be able to achieve the level of nurture, emotional bonding, and care as a mother can provide. And I know from personal experience the loss that results from lacking a father figure in the home.
If you disagree, that's fine. But this is really the crux of Prop 8.
NObama2012 3 years ago
Separate but equal is not equal at all. Vote NO on 8.
colonelmatterson 3 years ago
Colonelmatterson,
Separate but equal is not equal. Right you are.
My point is that gay marriages are not equal. Children are best raised in a home with a mother and father.
VOTE YES ON PROP 8!
NObama2012 3 years ago
NObama, I see: you think that the way you love another person is superior to the way someone else loves another person. You think it's okay to change the law to take away the rights of people who've never done anything to you other than try to live their personal lives in dignity.
colonelmatterson 3 years ago 2
Colonelmatt,
I don't know what you're talking about.
I didn't say anything about my love being superior to anyone else's. Do you find it easier to make up things that I said, and then argue with strawmen?
My entire point thus far has been that a child is best served in a home where there is both a mother and a father. In their hearts, Californians raising children know this to be true.
Regarding "taking away people's rights", go read the California Family Code § 297.5. Surprise surprise.
NObama2012 3 years ago
and the evidence you have to prove that is?
-pz
pzap22 3 years ago
lilaznballaz,
Of course, these days the ideal nuclear family only exists somewhere in the neighborhood of half the time or less.
But the fact that we fail to achieve the ideal is no reason to abandon the pursuit of it. Imagine if we took that attitude with public education!
Although every citizen is guaranteed their equal rights, that does not force the State to honor every family arrangement as being equally ideal for children.
NObama2012 3 years ago
lilaznballaz,
That's what I mean when I say there is no right to marriage. It's not something we (as citizens) are entitled to demand from our fellow citizens (the State).
The State CHOOSES to recognize and endorse marriage as a statement on the benefits of marriage to society. The chief benefit of this is, I believe, the formation of the nuclear family unit, which is the most ideal environment in which to raise children. Ideally, every child deserves a mother and a father.
NObama2012 3 years ago
and if the child is homosexual? if the mother or father are abusive and horrible parents? if the parents neglect the child? MHM.
studies show that a child grown up in a homosexual couple are tended to grow up healthier. just studies, nothing big right.
lilaznballaz1022 3 years ago
lilaznballaz,
For your info, I'd rather have a gay co-worker of mine raise my kids should my wife and I die suddenly, than to have them turned over to Britney Spears or shuttled around in foster centers for the next decade.
I'm speaking about generalities. What else could we possible speak about when it comes to the State picking something so broad and sweeping for its endorsement?
NObama2012 3 years ago
lilaznballaz,
I'm unfamiliar with the studies you refer to. To be honest, I'm have my doubts of the accuracy of such studies which claim to FACTUALLY establish that children raised by homosexual parents are healthier.
If you're talking about physical health, that's possible, since a lot of gay couples in San Fran (for example) are better well off than the national average.
But what could the size of such a study be? And the controls? And how many decades duration? I don't buy it.
NObama2012 3 years ago
lilaznballaz,
Continuing my point, domestic partnerships basically already have everything married couples have WITH ONE EXCEPTION...
That exception is moral status, respect, and endorsement from the State that their partnership is in every way as "good" (both for themselves and society) as a traditional man/woman partnership.
My point is that the State has no obligation to bestow this endorsement of a gay union, any more than the State is required to recogize marriage at all.
NObama2012 3 years ago
lilaznballaz,
I think you're getting closer to understanding my point, quite an accomplishment for 500-character snipets!
Domestic partnerships (gay or otherwise) currently have all the legal rights, privileges, responsibilities, etc as do married couples. See Family Code § 297.5, of which I only quoted the first section.
The passage of Prop 8 restricts married couples to men/women pairs only, but does so with no curtailing of the rights listed in the Family Code.
NObama2012 3 years ago
Family Code § 297.5 -- (a) Registered domestic partners shall have the same rights, protections, and benefits, and shall be subject to the same responsibilities, obligations, and duties under law, whether they derive from statutes, administrative regulations, court rules, government policies, common law, or any other provisions or sources of law, as are granted to and imposed upon spouses.
NObama2012 3 years ago
nobama... so basically you're saying that they have everything that a married couple would have... without the actual title of being married?
that's still not good enough you have to see that though. because it means people aren't treating each others equally by not giving homosexuals the right to be married. its just not the same. and i understand, you're trying to show other examples... but when it comes to it. homosexuals can not be legall married if this prop passes. equality for all.
lilaznballaz1022 3 years ago
any culture which sanctions same-sex marriage will place childrens rights at odds with adult desires. The January 2007 Ontario court ruling that a child could have three parents was inevitable because with same-sex marriage the concept of biological parenthood is immediately displaced. Same-sex reproduction immediately involves a third party. The idea of a "legal parent" replaced the idea of a natural parent.
gevasrenaissance 3 years ago
Gays can promise eternal love and it's called civil union..marriage is for men and woman. california code 297.5f clearly states registered same sex partners shall have the same rights regarding descrimination as those provided to spouses....so they are lying when they say this is about rights they already have the same rights. they just want to be able to tell the children in school it's ok to be gay and parents have no say because of anti-descrimination laws that will take hold.
LOVEEET 3 years ago
"marriage is for men and woman"
"same sex partners shall have the same rights regarding descrimination as those provided to spouses"
yeahh so having the same rights... meaning, they should have the right to marry? mmm okay.
lilaznballaz1022 3 years ago
Hey lilaznballaz,
Oops, check again. Marriage isn't a right. :-)
The rights and privileges that same-sex partnerships are afforded are all the same as traditional marriages under California law. See Family Code § 297.5.
NObama2012 3 years ago
lol nobama2012...
i must admit, it's always quite fun talking to you
lilaznballaz1022 3 years ago
vote yes on 8 so children in california don't have to start learning of homosexualityin school. calif code 297.5f clearly states they already have the same right . prop 8 eliminates teachers from being able to teach it in school..vote yes on 8
LOVEEET 3 years ago
lol you fail with this comment.
what if a child is homosexual. then you strip their right of learning about discrimination to themselves. WHAT IF YOUR OWN COUSIN, SON DAUGHTER, NIECE, NEPHEW, FRIENDS KID , ANY CHILD THAT'S related to you... is homosexual. then you're just taking away from them. you dont know who's homosexual from just your eyes... people are in the cloest homosexuals yanno. and no, gaydars aren't real
lilaznballaz1022 3 years ago
You guys are awesome. It's good to see young people who are not afraid to take a stance, i applaud you :)
Kimbytns 3 years ago
Very good guys. I hope you got an A. It's nice to see young people taking a stance!
tommydogsdad 3 years ago
Yes on 8 hands down!!!
ImNotGayYesonprop8 3 years ago
No on 8 hands down!!!
VixLacrima 3 years ago 3
what most brainless californians dont understand is that discrimination is wrong, 2 PEOPLE can love, meaning man and woman, man and man, woman and woman, PEOPLE can LOVE who they love, No on Prop 8. Love is Love, Discrimination is wrong, if you vote yes on 8, equal right will come in effect, that means you are a discriminator, shame on you!!! i vote no on prop 8. prop 8 is another word for discrimination of homosexuals, that breaks the equality law if you vote yes, so vote no on prop 8
webmike720 3 years ago
webmike720: Proposition 8 is not about discrimination. It is not about love, because love exists regardless of what happens on Proposition 8. Marriage does not determine love. No civil rights will be lost whatsoever by the gay community if Proposition 8 passes. Discrimination is not the issue.
slb1900000 3 years ago
actually it is about discriminating. because you are in love with someone of the same sex you are denied the same rights as others.
amyleona2 3 years ago
amyleona2: Proposition 8 does not withhold any rights from homosexual couples at all. The California Family Code, clause 297.5, mandates that all domestic partners receive all benefits given to traditional marriage couples. No rights are lost at all.
slb1900000 3 years ago
Except the right to be legally married...
Kimbytns 3 years ago
its not marriage. its not the same. all we want is to be treated the same. no better and no worse.
amyleona2 3 years ago 3
It's not that easy. Religious free speech will be challenged if Proposition 8 fails, and churches may eventually lose their tax-exempt status (effectively removing religious freedom). That is not equality.
slb1900000 3 years ago
they will not. this is not a religious argument. it is an argument about equality and human dignity.
amyleona2 3 years ago 2
amyleona2: Yes they will. Any group that challenges gay rights (including religious groups who, by belief, do not accept homosexual practices) will be discriminated and challenged. It has already happened in Canada, one of six countries that have legalized gay marriage. If a government agency such as the Alberta Human Rights Commission can stop a minister from teaching his church's doctrine about marriage, then it won't be long before everyone's free speech rights will be in jeopardy.
slb1900000 3 years ago
in all honesty slb19000(whatever) free speech has been gone for years now. so there's no point in using that argument. goodnight
lilaznballaz1022 3 years ago
it is also not equality if gay marriage is banned! we are all humans and we all deserve the same rights!
19Ana87 3 years ago
19Ana87: Then it can't be an acceptable goal to remove religious rights and educational rights in order to gain same-sex rights.
slb1900000 3 years ago
then every marriage should be banned because otherwise nothing is fair! i do not like to be taught about straight sexuality as well but i have to accept it! So others have to accept gays and gay sexuality as well. and it also helps to prevent young people from diseases because if they know about gay sexuality they know how to stay safe if they are gay.
19Ana87 3 years ago
19Ana87: Then that's attempting to change marriage again. The only fair solution is to keep marriage the way it is, which is what Yes on 8 will accomplish.
Gays are not "unaccepted." A gay person can live a full and fulfilling life, if they so choose. Marriage does not affect that. Nor will changing the definition of marriage prevent diseases from spreading.
slb1900000 3 years ago
but we have not every right! it is not fair to have less rights. this means we are second class humans. you cannot take a human right away for something you do not choose. you cannot choose sexuality! homosexuality is not a choice it is a fact same as heterosexuality or any other sexuality.
19Ana87 3 years ago
19Ana87: The concepts of total fairness and total equality are not possible, realistically. There will always be opponents, regardless of what issues are faced. To completely favor one is to overthrow the other, which is not fair. American government is a balance of majority rule and minority rights. Compromises are made. That's why we have such things as civil unions: they aren't perfect, but they are compromises, which serve a lot to the purpose.
slb1900000 3 years ago
i just don't accept a compromise in the case of human rights. gay marriage has no effect on other peoples life. it has effects on the married couple. so live and let live!
19Ana87 3 years ago
19Ana87: The repercussions of letting Proposition 8 fail would take away rights from other people. One is how same-sex marriage will be taught in schools to children, even as young as in kindergarten, whether the parents agree to that or not; parents have the right to decide what's taught to their children.
Religious freedom of speech will be impeded, as well, in process of time. It already happened in Alberta, Canada, and would be well on the way here.
slb1900000 3 years ago
and i have to be taught about straight sex and lifestyle!!! and i do not want to listen. i have to agree to that too even if i do not agree!talking about sex starts in school not earlier! and it will not take away the freedom of speech or just not more than now because i cannot say openly i do not like straights and i do not accept them( just as an example). so why should you have the right to talk about things free but me as a gay not?
19Ana87 3 years ago
19Ana87: Teaching young children about same-sex marriage will be debilitating to their ability to form perceptions about society and sexes. You and I know that there are fundamental differences between man and woman. A five-year-old child hasn't formed those distinctions yet. It is not fair to begin to confuse children as to what men and women really are, by teaching them, in school, that a man's marriage to either a man and to a woman is just "what happens," especially against a parent's will.
slb1900000 3 years ago
this is the reason why we have to talk about straight and gay sex and about every other sexuality. talking about it doesn't confuse young children or did it confuse me that i grew up with straight sexuality? No! I am gay and my whole family is straight. and we both know that if we teach young children the facts of life it is easier for them to be a good person later and not being an ignorant one.
19Ana87 3 years ago
19Ana87: Society (or the perpetuation of posterity) is based on procreation, which is generated only between a man and a woman. The differences that exist between male and female must be understood well. This is why learning about traditional marriage is not debilitating to a child's perception: because that is the order of nature, for creating posterity and society.
slb1900000 3 years ago
you didn't hear about science yet huh? there it is already out that homosexuality is nature as well! and talking about homosexuality doesn't make children gay. i have my examples for this because i know a gay family but their child is straight!
19Ana87 3 years ago
19Ana87: Whether it makes children gay or not, it does damage a child's perception as to the differences between men and women, which are fundamental.
lilanzballaz1022: You and I both know that a child definitely doesn't finish the perception-forming process by age 5, although it is certainly well on the way. A child of that age cannot comprehend many things that there are about gender (and if it were possible, not all children progress mentally at that rate).
slb1900000 3 years ago
it doesn't damage anything. see recent studies. there it is. a fact you cannot deny. i also had psychology classes so you cannot convice me with your opinion because i studied the facts.
19Ana87 3 years ago
19Ana87: Just stating that recent studies have proven something that is not proven does not prove it.
To the contrary, children must be educated that there are fundamental differences between man and woman.
slb1900000 3 years ago
It was on TV!these differences have nothing to do with teaching about gay sex because they will teach them about both, straight and gay life.so children will be much better informed about the reality than they are now. you see else there wouldn't be discrimination of minorities. but young people start to discriminate because they only know this lifestyle and any other lifestly is wrong in their eyes because it is different from what they've learned in school or at home.
19Ana87 3 years ago
WOOO HIGH FIVE ANA!
lilaznballaz1022 3 years ago
19Ana87: It has everything to do with gay marriage and traditional marriage, because traditional marriage is how society continues. To remove or confuse a child's perception about that will cause damage in life -- and all against a parent's will, no less. In this, damage is caused.
slb1900000 3 years ago
as i said it doesn't damage a child if it is taught about different lifestyles it just helps to understand other people or different lifestyles and it might stop such kind of homophobia! also traditional marriage will continue even if gay marriage is allowed you can already see it in countries with gay marriage. just because there is gay marriage humans will not turn to homosexuals! and children will not be homosexuals just because they know about it.
19Ana87 3 years ago
19Ana87: I can show you how it's detrimental to a child to be taught about same-sex marriage at a young age.
You know the difference between men and women. What if you didn't know that differences existed between men and women? What if they were all categorized as the same sex, or in other words, if the cognitive differences between men and women ceased to exist? Such core principles as identity would be detrimentally affected.
slb1900000 3 years ago
you do not listen right? as i said differences will still be taught. there will be a plus....a plus so straight and gay sexuality will be taught. so what you are talking about will never happen. and to your first point i can show you that it doesn't effect children because they will know much more about nature and life.
19Ana87 3 years ago
Teaching same-sex marriage in school alongside traditional marriage gives the message that same-sex marriage is "just as good" as traditional marriage regarding society as a whole, and based on the things I've explained, that notion is detrimental to a child's development.
slb1900000 3 years ago
also same-sex marriage is as good as traditional marriage you know why... i'll tell you . marriage is an institution of love and support and gays marry because of the same reason... because they love each other and they want to support each other!
just because they can't get children makes it worse than traditional marriage?? WTF??? What is with people who can't have children because of illness they can still marry even if they can't have children on their own!
19Ana87 3 years ago 4
children need to be taught about nature! and homosexuality is nature! and it is already proved that teachng about both lifestlyes doesn't damage a child.
so best regards now. i do not discuss about the same arguments ever and ever again. you can vote for whatever you want. but what a pity that people in 2008 still deny the truth and still believe that science is wrong.looking back on galileo galilei and the earth as a disc or we know better now (after so many years of denying) as a globe!
19Ana87 3 years ago 2
19Ana87: The line of reasoning that same-sex marriage is as good as traditional marriage has absolutely nothing to do with the welfare of the children, who are put in jeopardy by it. Of course love can exist in any relationship. The question is about the children's future. If same-sex marriage is made legal at the detriment of the children, it's entirely selfish, and cannot be understood as a decision for the "common good," because the very act puts another group at a disadvantage.
slb1900000 3 years ago
read the other comment! best regards!
I don't go through the same sh** ever and ever again. You do not have new arguments nor arguments against science!
19Ana87 3 years ago
19Ana87: None of what I call my arguments have really been refuted. I don't see a need to present new ones, because of that.
slb1900000 3 years ago
well because you deny arguments of science. science already proved that it doesn't damage children but you still believe it does so what shall i say for me there are no new arguments because i know the facts but you use the children all the time. so what's new?
19Ana87 3 years ago
19Ana87: I repeat what I stated earlier: that saying "I have studies that prove it" truly doesn't prove anything. That's hearsay, at best. Facts must be presented at the table in order to be considered.
slb1900000 3 years ago
well sorry that i do not know a website for TV Science! i watched it on tv but just to give it back to you do not have the proved facts as well you just use it as your fact. and these aren't proved...it's just your opinion. but i wish you the best with your lifestyle. i will leave now because it is pretty late here!
19Ana87 3 years ago
19Ana87: I don't intend to carry on since it appears that our conversation is over, but it's quite understood, in general human psychology, that parenting (or childhood experiences) lay a large foundation for how the rest of life will turn out -- it alters chances of drug dependence, enrolling in college, etc. The burden of evidence lies on the person that attempts to refute what's already placed as the understood assumption.
slb1900000 3 years ago
sorry but i had psychology and i will repeat it as well homosexuality is nature same as heterosexuality. nothing really nothing happens to children if we teach them about every kind of lifestyle. they just know how to deal with it in a better way and so homophobia will be destroyed and homosexual people will not suffer from ignorant people anymore. and well just to mention homophobia is a disease not being homosexual! good night!
19Ana87 3 years ago
19Ana87: At no point did I state that homosexuality is a disease, or that homosexuality doesn't happen. I state that it is best for society, in process of raising children, that same-sex marriage not be taught to children, because that's not how society as a whole works. Homosexuality exists, but society is not perpetuated by it, and erasing the differences between male and female would be detrimental to certain things, such as personal identity, in children.
slb1900000 3 years ago
homosexuality does nothing and the only thing what's best is to teach young children about everything in the world so that they can grow up to good adults and not ignorant ones! It's best for society to show that people are different and nothing will chnage to bad it will change to a much better society than now!
19Ana87 3 years ago
honestly, if you work with children, they're not as dumb as they look. or act. i work at a school with students all the time, and they do the most amazing things. at the young or older ages.
this is an average done by famous psychologists and sociologists
age 5 - children know gender stereotypes
age 6 - more complex info about your own sex
age 8- know more about opposite sex
the schema of the mental map is well developed even before the time they get into the 3rd grade. i was age 6 in kinder
lilaznballaz1022 3 years ago
lilaznballaz1022: I don't intend to say that children lack intelligence, but more that they lack mental capacity. Teenagers' brains are still, in full, developing by ages 16 and 17, or even 18 in some cases; children, in turn, are far less capable to comprehend what their own reality is.
One example: mental illnesses, as we know, are the realities that people form within the mind, and we all have the capability to form that mental reality based on what happens to us in childhood.
slb1900000 3 years ago
now youre comparing the knowledge of knowing what homosexuality is
... to... mental illnesses o_0 hHAHAHAHAHA.
just stop talking, your arguments arent concrete enough to retaliate, you can keep talking, im out of this one... its not worth the time.
lilaznballaz1022 3 years ago
lilaznballaz1022: Neither you nor I can deny that a person's perceptions on reality are based, almost wholly, in childhood. In this the relation is made to mental illness: that this perception and this reality are formed in childhood. Incorrect instruction, therefore, can change a child's reality, whether they know it or not.
slb1900000 3 years ago
gah gah gah.
you fail in the last comment again. i can deny a person's perceptions on reality based , almost wholly, in childhood. you're going back with the same arguments trying to crawl yourself out. if you wanna vote yes, then go vote yes. you cant argue with this... come with a new argument thats not children, then you might have a better chance, until then. goodluck, keep saying your EXACT same stuff... and see how far that gets you.
lilaznballaz1022 3 years ago
lilaznballaz1022: We both know how perceptions are based concretely in childhood, for a fact. Things that are mistaught, or misconceptions that are believed, since childhood, can only be removed by far-reaching methods (extreme experiences, therapy, etc) later on in life. It is undeniable, and the evidences regarding it are many.
slb1900000 3 years ago
did you know. indian curry is DELICIOUS? LIKE OMGOSH ... IM GUNNA GO GET SOME RIGHT NOW :)
lilaznballaz1022 3 years ago
its like youre saying the women can't love women either.
its like youre saying that that 5 year old child can't be gay and must be straight
its like youre saying that they WOULD ONLY teach about homosexuality at a younger age, totally not thinking about the fact that they are able to teach it in middle school , in high school , when thoughts are formed properly to think.
p.s. I take psychology - a child is developed to know gender stereotypes by age 5. dont believe me? take a classs
lilaznballaz1022 3 years ago
Free speech and religious beliefs have nothing to do with private individuals getting married. You don't have a right under the first amendment to have everyone be the same as you. Believe what you want to believe, say what you want to say, but don't treat others like second class citizens.
colonelmatterson 3 years ago
colonelmatterson: The issue is not to deny the existence of homosexuality. Two big worries regarding Proposition 8 are that, if it fails, same-sex marriage will be taught to young children in schools, and religious freedom will be challenged. No person should be persecuted for what they believe, but that will happen in process of time if Proposition 8 fails, as shown in the Alberta Human Rights Commission case.
slb1900000 3 years ago
Same sex marriage is not a topic of teaching just as marriage is not a topic of teaching in schools for young children. The case in Massachusetts was so overblown. But the Supreme Court has already ruled that parents may not interfere in state run curricula. Parents do have the choice of where they want their kids to go to school. It still isn't a good reason to destroy equal rights under the California constitution because of fears about a possible, but marginal conflict about public education.
colonelmatterson 3 years ago 2
colonelmatterson: It still does, though, show that the door's open for more things to happen like the Massachusetts story; for example, the class of first-graders in San Francisco that was taken on a field trip to see a lesbian marriage. Though I can understand that not all risks are confirmed, the possible risks are apparent.
slb1900000 3 years ago
slb19zeros
Woo! Another pro-Prop 8 blogger! Way to go!
VOTE YES ON PROP 8!
NObama2012 3 years ago
Do you really believe that because something happened in San Francisco among a local community that is very accepting of others and doesn't view gay marriage as a "risk," that people in other communities will randomly have lesbian marriage field trips? Is there some secret gay marriage suprise-squad biding its time in Auburn just waiting for our state to reaffirm equal protection under the constitution?
colonelmatterson 3 years ago 2
TO ALL THE LOVELY PARENTS WHO WATCH THIS VIDEO AND SAY "I WANT TO PROTECT MY CHILD FROM THIS STUFF" wouldn't it be ironic if your child is homosexual? but you just never knew? it's not a choice to many people to be homosexual, it's just how they are. So if you, a parent, want to vote yes on prop 8, but DID NOT KNOW YOUR CHILD.. was homosexual yourself, it means your taking away their future rights. think about that
lilaznballaz1022 3 years ago
GREAT VIDEO(:
Im Bi sexual and i shouldnt have my rights taken away.
Jhoisback1 3 years ago 2
ya ya should!
hckyfrk55 3 years ago
Great work guys! Funny video and an awesome message!!!
Preserve & Celebrate Equality!
*hugs*
MJ
DeLiCioUsFiReS 3 years ago 2
Consequences of Prop 8 failing:
1) Kids will be taught gay lifestyles in grade school.
2) Pastors will be persecuted and sued for "hateful" and "discriminatory" speech if they preach anti-gay teachings from the Bible.
3) Individuals will be sued for their personal beliefs if they "discriminate" against gays, even if against their religious beliefs (ex. San Diego doctor forced to artificially inseminate lesbian couple despite his religious beliefs and availability of willing doctors). YES ON 8!
ivyleaguer4prop8 3 years ago
The truth:
1) Kids will be taught that it's ok for people to be different - we're still all people.
2) Pastors can do whatever they like in their churches, as long as they don't try to make their opinions law.
3) People will not be allowed to discriminate against others because of their own bigotted views.
Also: Gay Lifestyle? No different from the straight lifestyle, my friend.
Kimbytns 3 years ago
im against prop 8, everyone should vote no on it. and theres definitely hypocrisy with you guys saying that yet one of you don't support it. and you dont have to give us the disclaimer you are not homosexual. just because you make this doesnt make you homosexual
newbuffalo 3 years ago
very nice!
JailWeddings 3 years ago
Madarauchiha19,
True, so much good could be accomplished if parents talked to their children more. This is much needed.
But what we also need is an environment children can learn in (the public schools) that does not spend its time indoctrinating them in gay marriage philosophy. If Prop 8 fails, teachers will be required to teach gay marriage as equal to traditional marriage to children as young as five.
I want to have a say in that.
VOTE YES ON PROP 8!
NObama2012 3 years ago
personally , as someone who was NEVER learned about gay marriage in school... and as someone who is working to get their teacher credential, having over hundreds of hours in a classroom teaching students...
i say teachers , they know it or not... talk and teach about more senseless bullshit than gay marriage. gay marriage/ homosexuals is almost a type of race now, and there is mos def a "racism" to homosexuals. i say teaching it at schools... is good. and can be educational.
lilaznballaz1022 3 years ago
lilaznballaz1022,
No offense, but I hope you're not getting your credentials in grammar or writing.
;-)
NObama2012 3 years ago
Dear Mr.Nobama2012 I show my sincerest apologies in my informal comment that I posted up earlier today. That is very unprofessional of me, and I should have had a more prominent response than what I have written.
But because this isn't a FREAKING ESSAY, AND ITS JUST YOUTUBE. I DONT GIVE A DAMN OF MY INFORMALITIES. suck it up, its youtube, not my freaking term paper. Love Dearly,
lilaznballaz1022
lilaznballaz1022 3 years ago
Hey lilaznballaz1022,
Great job with the sentence structure. Keep up the good work.
Truly yours,
Mr. NObama
NObama2012 3 years ago
Vote yes on gay marriage, stop everyone turning gay.
juventudwatson 3 years ago
Of course, because voting to give black people rights made many people suddenly becomre black.
Kimbytns 3 years ago
no on prop 8 take responsiblity with your children something that you never do is talk to them about problems you just try to shield them
Madarauchiha19 3 years ago
Wow, Great Job Guys!
Marriage is not defined by who is denied it.
Vote No on Prop 8.
4uafa 3 years ago
True, marriage is not defined by who is denied it. Marriage is better defined by who is granted it.
Every child deserves a mother and a father in the home. Although this is not possible in many instances of separation or death, the state has every duty to endorse traditional families as the ideal building block of the next generation.
This is not about hating gays, or taking away rights. It's about doing what is best for our children.
VOTE YES ON PROP 8!
NObama2012 3 years ago
Thats why single parents are banned! Right?
(satire)
sammo365 3 years ago
sammo365,
No, that's why single parents are not endorsed as the ideal environment for raising children.
This isn't a conversation about prosecuting people based on their family situation. It's about defining the ideal conditions for raising children.
NObama2012 3 years ago
okay,,single parents take care of their kids alone because they have to not because they want to. raising a child alone is hard and assholes like you dont understand.
raralovesyou143 3 years ago
Ha, really funny video! NO on prop 8 so I can get married one day.
IllusionBomb 3 years ago 2
I think it is crazy that voters can change the State Constitution. There was a time when Blacks could not Marry Whites. Would it have been OK to change the Constitution to prevent interracial marriage?
Being Gay is not a choice anymore than being Black, Brown, or a Redhead. It is time that people (Christians) stop pushing their beliefs on other people. There are many religions in this world and NONE of them are based on facts but are based on faith.
No on Prop. 8 equality is not a choice!
sinsouza 3 years ago 2
A No Vote for Prop 8 is a vote for Satan.
Saying you were born gay is like saying you were born a murderer.
Being gay is wrong. Men have penises and girls have vaginas. Get it!!!
PoojmanSWR 3 years ago
NO ON PROP 8!
Because all of us have LGBTQ friends, family, and co-workers, whether we are aware of it or not. And they all deserve equality under the law.
PLEASE VOTE NO!
frickinmatchbox 3 years ago
NO ON PROP 8.
N0tAR0leM0del 3 years ago 3
This video is telling you to vote NO on Prop 8. Plain and simple.
sfpromo 3 years ago
Way to go on the vid! I'm going to post it on my myspace. Don't listen to those bigoted homophobic bastards. Their words just go to show why we need to vote NO on prop 8. If they don't like us they can go live somewhere else that will "tolerate" their hatefulness.
yosemiterob 3 years ago 5
keep in the closet homos..nobody wants to see that shit
jus4suewebb 3 years ago
don't you love how the gay bashers look up no on prop 8 vids just to talk shit about it? now we all know what........ straight gay bashers do with their lives? cheers
piiitttttiiiifulllllllll
lilaznballaz1022 3 years ago
get over it homos..yes on proposition 8
jus4suewebb 3 years ago
I Have to ask, what logical reason is there for voting yes on prop 8? Since churches have cause more pain and suffering than anything else that surely cant be a logical reason to vote yes on it, and since the bible mentions nothing about sin between a man marrying a man that cant be a reason, and since gays and lesbians really dont do anything more than what a straight man does their and their lifestyle isnt that much diff from any other american, other than they are gay... whats the logicality?
reaper06221986 3 years ago 2
Defining gay marriage restricts religious liberty (In Massachusetts Catholic charities can't adopt out as their doctrine is "discriminatory") and restricts parental rights (In Massachusetts, homosexual fairy tales were taught as equal treatment without parental authority). I want to protect my kids against what I, as a parent, feel is morally wrong. What about my rights? Why take over the definition of marriage? Domestic partnerships give gays ALL of the same rights. Marriage isn't a right.
beezers99 3 years ago
Homosexual Marriage is not about rights. It is about changing society. Look at all other groups that have been denied marriage, did they let the law stop them? No. In the day of slavery did laws prevent two slaves jumping over a broomstick and calling themselves what ever they wanted? No
If you are gay and want to call yourself married, have your own ceremony and call it whatever you want and stop dictating what society calls marriage.
j60mike 3 years ago
yes on prop 8 i want a golden state not a rainbow state
310NECIO 3 years ago
lol im not even gunna begin to rip you on this one... it's too easy.
but thanks for your opinions!
lilaznballaz1022 3 years ago
try
310NECIO 3 years ago
hey....that's really clever. Not so much.
sfpromo 3 years ago
Guys....this video is better than any prop 8 pro or con commercial I've seen. Its clever, funny and in the end heartfelt. Thanks for doing this.
sfpromo 3 years ago
That was cute boys. Good job.
However, Prop 8 does NOT infringe on gay rights.
California Family Code §297.5. (look it up!)
California Education Code §51890. (look it up!)
Prop 8 is to protect churches from "hateful" lawsuits that have already transpired in Massachusetts and in England where same-sex marriage is legal.
People who use the term traditional marriage could be sued for hate speech. (LOOK IT UP!)
ADuerksen003 3 years ago
Not Exactly really all in all the reason for prop 8 is actually to remove those codes, in case you never really read the law it will actually over ride the family code you just put in there... the reason for this is that its a church law, plain and simple... people use the words "family values" and "gay/lesbian lifestyle, embracing" to make it seem wrong, when in reality, its about as normal as breathing air or making children
reaper06221986 3 years ago
I have family who are gay and who I love very much.
Once the world is rid of radicals, the rest of us can live in peace.
Don't be sip on Kool-aid from Jim Jones. Do your own research.
Be aware of the McCarthyism involved with this issue.
Vote Yes on 8.
ADuerksen003 3 years ago
Awesome work guys!
StarkFierce 3 years ago
thank yah very very much! =)
lilaznballaz1022 3 years ago
Congratulations!!! Much love to everyone working for full equal rights for EVERYONE
JoeyBoya 3 years ago
thank you very much!! but its not over yet!!! come nov 4th is when we can see if we can celebrate and congratulate or not. so come out to vote!! =)
lilaznballaz1022 3 years ago
A lot of gay couples have children... in fact california encourages gay couples to adopt children in foster care because it has been shown they provide loving homes. The only threat to these children are hate mongers like you attacking there families. NO ON 8
This vote will not change the fact that gay couples can, have been, and will continue to have and raise children. All it will do is damage there families and hurt these children.
Do you want to do that? That is what you will accomplish.
eademe 3 years ago
eademe,
The fact is that gay couples adopt children and provide stable homes that are better than nothing.
But it's still not ideal. The ideal setting for every child is to have a mother and a father, and we shouldn't back away from what we call ideal simply because we cannot achieve it all the time.
NObama2012 3 years ago
not only do they adopt, but they have there own biological children. This vote will not stop that... it will only punish those children for what you believe.
eadeit 3 years ago
The reason that would effect any religious belief is that force churches to except a belief that is exceptable for same sex marriage. That would be a government abridging or creating a government religion. Just a thought that I had. Even though there is no such thing as separation of church and state, this would not be. No on 8 would not even change any rights that homosexuals have now.
patrickuhri 3 years ago
Please vote yes on prop 8. I you vote no then you are voting against my right to religious freedom. Not only does it take away the religious freedom but it is a direct attack the the Unites States constitution. This does not do one thing or ad one thing to homosexual right.
patrickuhri 3 years ago