This is fucking ridiculous. Teachers aren't going to ever be forced to teach this...it's a political issue not a freaking health issue. Religions just like tradition....so how about the religions do whatever they want and allow people to do whatever the hell they want? It's not the governments job to tell someone who they can and cannot marry.
@soccerplayer173 I think its just the evolution part of the problem working itself out. One of the facets is tolerance vs. acceptance. This society tolerates the gay life style, but it doesn't accept it. Many people probably believe finalizing a decision in court can establish that they have to or don't have to accept it.
One of the things we see over and over again in the U.S. is that court rulings cant change public opinion, they can only reinforce or undermine it.
It is a fact that Proposition 8 doesn't deny the rights of homosexuals, but why not give them the right to get married? I feel sorry for all the homosexuals who are not allowed to enjoy being married.
@DrQuantumPhysicsMan It's such a diverse and multifaceted issue, that's why its one of the more interesting political topics. Just as interracial marriage was fighting against 150 years of bigotry and American social cast system, gay marriage is fighting against 8,000 years of homosapien cultural implied law.
It's one thing to fight against a society's norms, its another to fight against a species norms. Just one more aspect of why it can be a fascinating topic to look at.
As I said before if mankind does not repent, the Heavenly Father will inflict a very serious punishment on the whole world; a punishment the likes of which has never happened before. It will be a punishment greater than the deluge, Fire will fall from the sky and will wipe out a great part of humanity, sparing no one. The survivors will find themselves so desolate that they will envy the dead. -Our Lady of Akita! Pray your ROSARY!
Kids might not get divorced, but plenty of "Straight Marriages" do. This ad is stupid they outed them selves with that statement. And kids are conceived through sex not marriage, if that is how they want it why are there such things as Sperm Banks or adoption centers(because not everyone can have children).
A neurotic sexual fetish affected by modeling the opposite sex parent to compensate for a complication of intimacy with distant or absent mother or father is hardly a basis for a marriage relationship. Underlying all neurotic conditions are ego problems accompanied by low self-esteem. Once the person begins engage in homosexual relations it becomes a sexual addiction with an intense compulsive desire for only same sex relationships. Self-esteem will not improve until the person abstains.
@sunhayabusaify The state has little interest in your 'love.'. That people CAN procreate without marriage is precisely why the state encourages that it take place within marriage.
If marriage is for the sole purpose of procreating, then anyone above the age of 40-45 should be barred from marriage-- after all, there is no expectation that they will make babies. Moreover, we should insure that couples who do not plan to have children be prevented from marrying. Additionally, if a het couple does not procreate w/in 5 years, their marriage should be annulled on the grounds that they have not procreated. They should also be prosecuted for fraud and misrepresentation.
The purpose served by the license is not an obligation on the part of a license holder. You do not have to practice law if you have a law license, you do not have to drive if you are issued a drivers license.
The conditions on the license are related to the interest served by the license. Once the conditions are met, whether the individual chooses to use the license as the state intended is up to the individual.
Well, it is unconstitutional now (as of 2/7/2012)! The Supreme Court will most likely decide on this ruling of the 9th Judicial Circuit Court of California. The US Supreme Court will deem it unconstitutional now too! Why? Because, according to the US Constitution: "The rights of a majority will not decide the rights of a minority" (here GLBTQ people). That includes a vote by the people of the US! Confuse a kid? Kids are not so stupid... Case Exaple: Anne Frank!
@nnjhansen How about this then? We define marriage as a mutually beneficial arrangement between two consenting adults. There, everybody's happy and there's no wiggle room for pedophilia or zoophilia. Then we stay out of everyone else's business and focus on spousal abuse. You know, REAL issues.
@shinobi67 Everyone would not be happy. What about those who wish to have their mutually beneficial arrangement between three or more consenting adults recognized?
The ability to marry is not contingent on an individual's desire to procreate but on the general ability of the type of relationship in question to do so. Man/woman can, man/man and woman/woman cannot.
@nnjhansen Well, alright. As long as all partners maintain an equal stake in the relationship and all make the conscientious decision to be part of it, why not? Also, please stop with this "marriage is based on the ability to procreate" tangent. It's making you sound like even more of a soulless automaton than if you simply were against it for religious reasons. At least you're fairly eloquent, I could respect religious differences.
@nnjhansen Before I go into an explanation about how I believe, personally, that the state's only real place in determining marriage eligibility is ensuring that all parties are able to consent and that, socially speaking, marriage should first and foremost be based on the love between consenting adults and their ability to provide a stable and fulfilling relationship for each other and any children they may raise, adopted, fostered or, perhaps, procreated, what do you believe it is?
@nnjhansen And yes, you have given me proof. Court cases, official statements and the like (which have been all flagged as spam by "someone" but that's hardly an indicator in either direction of their veracity). That just proves, to me, perhaps not to you, that something needs to change. If the main purpose of marriage, determined by state governments, is procreation, then some eyes seriously need to be opened.
@shinobi67 Why do you believe the state has any interest in who you love? Do you honestly want government officials determining the appropriate levels of love and commitment you may or may not have for another person?
The only legitimate reason for the state to involve itself in the intimate relationship between consenting adults is if that relationship can result in another human being.
@nnjhansen Perhaps I wasn't clear. The ONLY influence the state should have in determining a person's eligibility to marry is determining the ability of all parties to consent to the action. So, no one is able to cheat the system and marry a 12 year old or their favorite dog. Sure, those people won't be happy, but those actions are abusive to the extreme.
@shinobi67 So, the only role the state should have in determining the eligibility to obtain a state license is determining whether the person actually wants the license?
Why exactly is the state issuing the license then?
@nnjhansen Now, for once, please answer my questions. Do you, in fact, believe that same sex couples should not be afforded the same privileges with regards to marriage hat heterosexual couples have because such a relationship cannot produce offspring? If so, what about surrogates, adoption, fostering or any other option that would allow a loving and stable (well, as stable as a heterosexual couple) family to provide a positive influence in a child's life?
@shinobi67 "Do you, in fact, believe that same sex couples should not be afforded the same privileges with regards to marriage hat heterosexual couples have because such a relationship cannot produce offspring?"
Yes, marriage exists to encourage responsible procreation and child rearing. In the absence of even the general ability to further that interest, there is no reason to redefine marriage the way you desire. Such a redefinition would divorce the institution from that interest.
@nnjhansen I mean, sure they wouldn't produce the child themselves but isn't ensuring that all children have a chance at a happy, healthy and safe life more important than adding more and more mouths to our steadily growing population?
@nnjhansen An earlier poster, who you brushed off, had a point. By this chain of logic that you're creating, any marriage between a heterosexual couple with one or more sterile partners would be in danger of forced annulment. And you didn't even address a valid point. What about adoption? There are plenty of children abandoned by their "procreation-able" heterosexual parents.
@nnjhansen This is not to say that gay couples cannot adopt children currently, however by allowing for them to pursue equal protections to heterosexual couples it'd definitely make the process a lot easier than it is currently. Not to say that adoption is particularly simple for heterosexual couples either, but here we are.
@nnjhansen But, for the sake of argument, pull up any sort of official, contemporary document that makes the claim that the ability to marry is based on the general ability of a type of relationship to produce offspring. I checked most of your comments and, in the ones I've read so far, you've yet to provide a source.
“The institution of marriage as a union of man and woman, uniquely involving the procreation and rearing of children within a family" Baker v Nelson, MN, 1971
"One of the leading and most important objects of the institution of marriage under our laws is the procreation of children, who shall with certainty be known by their parents as the pure offspring of their union... This is implied in the very nature of the contract of marriage." Carris v. Carris, NJ, 1873
@shinobi67 "There was a rational basis for the legislature to draw the line between opposite-sex couples, who as a generic group are biologically capable of reproducing, and same-sex couples, who are not. This is true, regardless of whether there are some opposite-sex couples that wish to marry but one or both partners are physically incapable of reproducing." Morrison v. Sadler, IN, 2005
@shinobi67 "We hold that the State has a legitimate interest in encouraging procreation and child-rearing within the marital relationship" Standhardt v. Superior Ct., AZ, 2003
"Since marriage was instituted to address the fact that sexual contact between a man and a woman naturally can result in pregnancy and childbirth, the Legislature's decision to focus on opposite-sex couples is understandable." Hernandez v. Robles, N.Y. 2006
i want gays to have their rights but call it something other than marriage. thatll make the christians happy and gays get what they want. my personal word for them is garriage. oh and their is no reason to teach marriage. its a love thing and lets face irt schools don't need to teach love
I think what needs to happen in America is instead of changing what Marriage means America needs to first change the meaning of Republican from "conservative" to Traditionalist. Some people are falling for the non-political meaning of Conservative when they view the republican party.
" kids don't get divorce! let along gay attraction!"
if that's the problem then why don't you ban divorce to??! and you think kids aren't 'capable' of understanding same sex attraction? well what about GAY KIDS you idiots?! besides i was FULLY capable of understanding same sex attraction when i was 7 (when i first heard about it) -.-
I remember being about 8 or 9 and watching the news and there was a lesbian activist defending gay marriage and i can still remember thinking to myself :
Well Prop. 8 is banned in CA. So fuc* it. People are people....black, white, straight, gay. It doesn't matter. And idk about you but I think not being able to marry is a huge denial of rights. Stupid conservatives.
As I posted before the US Constitution is not the Bible, so while homosexuality is a sin according to the Bible. A law that bans a homosexual marriage IS UN-Constitutional, this has nothing to do with the sanctity of marriage, and if you want a law to keep the sanctity of marriage you would ban divorce...
@nnjhansen Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. Section 1. 2ns sentence No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States. Wow no wonder people try to make un-Constitutional laws, they don’t even know what’s in their own Constitution.
@MrJihadJesus Oh mercy me, I'm gettin' the vapors, won't someone think of the children. *ahem* Sorry, a bit of parody there. But since people marked you for spam then, apparently, no, they can't think of a non-religious reason.
Democrats need to push a new sanctity of marriage act that defines marriage as being between two consenting adults. I'm so tired of all the bullshit from right- wingers about how allowing gay marriage is a slippery slope leading to polygamy and people marrying their dog. Just define marriage as the legal union of two consenting adults and lets move the fuck on. The country's ready...it'll be ok. Everybody just fucking chill...
This is so sad, I feel embarrassed for the idiots in this commercial. Fucking butt out, I'm gay and I'm going to get married weather you fucking like it or not.
Yes let's protect the sanctity of Kim Kardashian's 74 hr. wedding *sarcasm...and britney spears 24 hr wedding...or Mit Romneys god knows how many marriages because we all know straight couples are so much better *more sarcasm*
What a horrible commercial, the information is incorrect, the video work its self is horrible (especially for being in California) the actors are probably never going to get other work. Just bad in all ways *sigh.....
So many people underestimate children. Obviously there are some things that go beyond them, but there are plenty of children who understand gay marriage perfectly, just as they understand divorce and many other things. There are video's in the sidebar that prove this. The point of being a kid isn't to stay naive and ignorant for as long as possible, it's to grow and learn so you can become a happy adult. If you're not going to bother to teach them, then they'll always be confused.
This commercial really shocks me; to begin with, it is very dramatically shot (why this dramatic music seriously?), which makes it ridiculous and overplayed. Then, what they are saying is outrageous, the basic meaning being "change is bad". To finish with, I am amazed at the number of likes on this video. I am amazed that Prop 8 ever passed. I cannot believe such bigoted commercials can still be broadcasted on national TV nowadays.
when I was 8 I was able to understand that every person should have equal rights, and that includes being able to marry. I find it sad how an eight year old can be more open-minded and intelligent than these oppressive losers.
You were a very smart eight-year-old, and you just made a comment there that was a million times better than anything that was said in this nauseous video.
"kids don't get divorced, let alone gay attraction"
um... I was 12 when I realized I was bisexual, all of my gay friends have known since they were children, so yes, we do get gay attractions as children.
Also, marriage is not about having children. Thousands of elderly couples, sterile couples and people who just don't want to have kids, get married all the time. So marriage is NOT about having children.
This is why we need a couple of disney movies with two gay princes or princesses who fall in love. Kid will ask mum or dad "why" - mum or dad will say "because some people fall in love with other people who are the same as them." End of story. = )
@TGIAustin911 You said, "This is we need a couple of disney movies with two gay princes or princesses who fall in love. Kid will ask mum or dad "why"- mum or dad will say "because some people fall in love with other people who are the same as them." End ff story.= )
SO you thought this was the end of the story. That people will fall down and believe your lies with no rebuttal so to speak... Ha Ha ha lol. Even common sense says that a man's private goes with a woman's. >continue>
@TGIAustin911 >continue> Oh the grossness that a man would empty his seed in crap shoot of another man is despicable to say the least. It is grossness and perversion of sexuality at the highest level...
@Rockioe But dude, don't you think old people doing the dirty is gross too? Or thinking about your parents doing it is gross? I do - but I don't say to my grandparents "You are perverted sinners!!" - that's ridiculous. And what you evidently don't understand is that some people are simply physically incapable of being attracted to the opposite sex - so what they do in private isn't really perverted, it's just the result. And why do you care about some one else's sex life ANYWAY!?
@Rockioe Just like you chose your gender and natural hair colour, eh? Totally a choice - yeah no doubt it..... oh no..... none whatsoever......... (*sarcasm*)
@Rockioe More like "Jesus Christ saved me from 27 years of homosexuality... and then 3 weeks later I killed myself because of horrible psychological abuse and torture."
@shinobi67 You said, "More like "Jesus Christ saved Me from 27 years of homosexuality... and 3 weeks later I killed myself because of horrible psychological abuse and torture". Why don't you come up with legitimate material. You folk in bed with the homosexual agenda spout off claims that have no substance. Many people not only homosexuals have been freed spiritually by Jesus Christ.
It is amazing that in Haiti that witch doctors have no power when born again Christians >continued>
@shinobi67 >continued> rise up and praise their God or share of Jesus authority. Homosexuality is a bottom line spiritual problem and always will be~~Rom.1:18-32 emphasis lesbians v.26 gay men v. 27; 1Cor. 6:9... The only solution is for the homosexual to realize his or her sin and cry out to Jesus Christ for help. The Bible says all have sinned and fall short of God's glory~~Rom.3:23. Homosexuality is not the only sin. There are fornicators, thieves, drunkards etc.
@Rockioe You had me up until "ask Jesus 4 HELP." Now, either you're a troll or an idiot. I'll be willing to go with either option. Also, I'm really uncomfortable with your obsession with my sex life. Please, stop it, it's really rather creepy.
@Rockioe Whats funny is that you had to think about gay sex just to write that comment. Here's an idea, why don't you ignore us gay/lesbian/bisexual people and live a happy life?
@TGIAustin911 Don't hold your breath! Disney's as conservative as they come! I don't doubt that eventually parents will be telling that to their kids, though. You can't stop change, and you only hurt yourself by fighting it.
@Colgruv Yeah probably a little optimistic.... But anyway I like the idea! Lol - I never could imagine myself in the prince's shoes, I always wanted to be in that long beautiful gown = )
These yes on prop 8 commercials just baffle me, and I think it just proves what a narrow minded place their arguments come from!! Also, it won't change the definition of marriage, because it's not like you're taking any rights away from straight married couples!!
@MrHarajukuLuva Of course it will change the definition of marriage, that is the entire purpose. Marriage was defined by the people of CA in their law (prop 22) as the union of one man and one woman. A handful of judges took it upon themselves to change that definition and the purpose of Prop 8 was to restore it.
@nnjhansen I'm looking at it as not so much as a change as it is an addition, because like i said, it doesn't take anything away from straight couples. If prop 8 were to fail, marriage between a man and a woman will still remain the same, its just that the same sex will now be able to have each and every single one of those same rights. As for looking for the "safety of our children", I know first hand that someone is born gay because i have never or ever will be attracted to a woman
@MrHarajukuLuva It is a complete and fundamental change. Marriage is defined as the union of a man and a woman because that union is unique in its potential consequence to the rest of society.
@nnjhansen I'm not saying this in an attacking way because your responses have been very respectful, but I'm curious as to how you feel gay marriage will specifically damage this society so much and why it's so wrong, because I'm just sort of missing why straight couples should feel so threatened
@MrHarajukuLuva First, I think the question is how redefining marriage would improve society? You want to fundamentally redefine a building block of society, the onus is on you to explain how it improves society.
Now I do believe that redefining marriage will harm society by completely divorcing the institution from its long-standing social purpose but that does not relieve those you want to change the institution of the onus to show how it improves society.
@nnjhansen I'm not saying that gay marriage will magically cure all that is wrong with the world, but i am saying that it will add to the society's progression and in many ways, even help children out there who are gay wont feel ashamed...to answer your question from before on how it will improve society? One reason off the top of my head, maybe there wouldn't be so many gay teen suicides out there, and this will bring them a step closer into telling them that its ok to be who you are
@MrHarajukuLuva How will redefining marriage have any impact on gay teen suicide? That is quite a leap? Marriage does not nor should it exist so that people who are not part of it can feel better about themselves.
@nnjhansen I'm not saying it'll cure gay teen suicide, but it'll probably help society in giving the message that there isnt anything wrong with being gay, and it'll bring us that much closer. I'm really still not clear though and how you think adding gay couples to the title of marriage will be harmful...cuz its simple that if you're not gay, dont marry someone of the same sex!! and its not divorcing the institution from its long standing purpose because nothing is being taken away
@MrHarajukuLuva I'm sorry but the idea that marriage has anything to do with gay teen suicide is just absurd. One has nothing to do with the other.
Marriage exists as a civil institution to further a specific societal purpose. If you remove the condition for marriage that ties the institution to that purpose, you divorce the institution from the purpose. It becomes an institution without a social purpose.
@nnjhansen ok, once again, im not saying its a cure to gay suicide, im just giving you an example of what approving gay marriage can possibly do in terms of acknowledging that something is ok rather than condemning it!! And once again, you're not removing the condition for marriage because it doesnt affect families or straight couples...its not like if prop 8 failed, gay people get benefits that straight people dont...nothing would have changed in terms of rights you already have!!!
@MrHarajukuLuva Speaking of some possible second or third order effect is just not a reason to redefine a basic societal institution.
You are removing a condition of marriage, the condition that requires one man and one women. Whether it effects opposite couples is irrelevant, it effects the definition of marriage. Marriage as an institution would be fundamentally changed and divorced from its purpose.
@nnjhansen But you aren't removing a condition that requires one man and one woman, because marriage will ALWAYS include one man and one woman regardless if gay couples can marry...to me, i just personally feel like prop 8 is a little selfish because the fact is, my life has nothing to do with your life, yet you can choose who i want to marry and affect my life in such an important way, don't you personally think that's a little wrong?...
@nnjhansen the "definition" of marriage. Really... what about all the marriages that only last weeks or months. Doesn't that hurt the definition of marriage more than same sex couples. marriage is just a word its the rights that matter. Why deny and people rights because of a hatred for who they are? I never learned about marriage in school, and as far as sex ed well sex ed is all about diseases and the reproductive system so honestly that wouldn't change either. this is just obstructionism.
@nnjhansen I speak of the right for gays to marry. that the definition of marriage should be set as 2 that love eachother. It shouldn't be restricted to the marriage of opposite genders.
@SpreaddEm No state denies homosexuals the ability to marry. The conditions and restrictions on marriage apply equally to all regardless of sexual preference. No one has the right to marry whomever they want.
The institution of civil marriage exists to further a societal interest, only the union of a man and a woman can further that interest.
If marriage should not be restricted to a man and a woman, why should it be limited to two people?
@nnjhansen "no state denies homosexuals the ability to marry". only a few states at of the union are allowed marriage or civil union. In Utah they have allowed polygamy. Only straight people marry who they want.
@SpreaddEm No state even asks about sexual preference. The conditions and restrictions on marriage apply equally to all people without regard to sexual preference.
@nnjhansen If the social interest is procreation, then that is a flat argument. There are plenty of heterosexuals who don't or cannot have children. Is their marriage still considered valid?
Try again. And lets see if you can use reasoning in your argument.
@braveheart1779 There are also plenty of people with law license who decide not to practice law. Does that mean the state's interest in issuing law licenses is invalid?
@nnjhansen What if I said it shouldn't? What if I don't understand why three interested parties should not be permitted to validate their love for each other? Why don't you tell me the real dangers of having affirmed polyamorous relationships as opposed to assuming that it is a universal wrong?
@nnjhansen And that purpose is... what exactly? Procreation? Well, sorry, if that's the case, you might as well take away my right to marry anyone, since I don't plan on procreating. I would like to adopt though, which I will remind you is something that homosexual couples are more than capable of doing.
As a kid I actually thought marriage was about two people loving each other and now I'm 15 and still think that I don't know why gender matters it is irrelevant to love
It's quite obvious that the authors of this video have a "religious" problem with gay people. But they didn't have the courage to come out and say it. Instead they manufactured distorted lies and bogeymen to scare people. Disgusting.
They might have an argument IF and only IF straight married couples didn't get extra benefits. Because they get benefits they are denying gay couples these same benefits.
@flavorysoup They get benefits because they qualify for them.. If you do not qualify for the license, you are not entitled to the benefits that go with the license.
Seriously, why does it matter on either side? The title of "married" has very little meaning at this point anyways. Where are we living, 13th century England?
@plusmin09 Must you use the f-word??? There are ladies on these boards?? Do you talk this way in real life? You think you have to swear to prove you're a man? What type of woman would want to date or marry a guy who uses such language?? I can't believe I go to watch this video and one of the very first comments uses the f-word!!
@cindybin2001 Ladies on this board (?) ... Ya, I don't assume women are more sensitive to swearing, nor did I use it to establish any type of masculinity. I can't believe you go on to youtube and are so shocked by profanity.
In the end though, let me apologize for offending you. It was not my intention.
@plusmin09 Well there is the saying that a gentleman shouldn't swear in front of a lady. It just drives me nuts that so many guys swear on these boards! Would you talk that way in real life, in mixed company? We ladies can READ what you type, you know! But anyway, thanks for apologizing. Usually they just cuss me out all the more!
This ad is just confusing and weird. It doesn't identify anything to do with the bill, it just says that kids shouldn't be 'screwed up' by being taught that two people who love each other shouldn't be allowed to marry. Which is bullshit. If you are male or female, gay or straight, if you love someone be they male or female so much that you want a marriage, you should have that option available to you.
@DarkEvilWorm002 Civil marriage exists to serve a societal interest, not every loving type of relationship has the potential to satisfy that interest. The state does not issue licenses because people love each other.
@DarkEvilWorm002 Oh that's right, use the sh-word. Here I was reading your comment with interest, and you had to go and ruin it all by using profanity. Now I don't even want to read it! Why do you talk this way? To prove you're a man? Do you realize there are LADIES on these boards? Do you talk this way in real life? It's so crude and offensive!
@cindybin2001 I'm sorry if I offended you. I only really swear if I'm upset or angry about something, because it's a great way to blow off steam. I'm usually a polite young guy, but, you know, we all need a little something to blow off steam. Vent some anger. If you want to know more, go watch the LoadingReadyRun video Swearing.
By the way, I am gay so finding and impressing ladies isn't really in my interests.
@cindybin2001 Ladies curse too. And people don't curse to show their masculinity, they do it to blow off steam or to show how passionate they are about the issue or to show how ridiculous that it even is an issue. It's okay you don't like cursing, but I for one don't like having to come on here and see half of the posts are you complaining about one or two curse words. Grow up.
@10trojan10 Yes I know ladies curse, and that is terrible! Think of how a woman comes across when they do that, and the type of guy they're going to attract! And you tell me to "grow up"? You should be agreeing with me and supporting me in trying to help people understand how crude and offensive it is to use profanity, especially to just type it here on the Internet for all to see. People need to wake up and see how offensive this is. You should join me in trying to help them.
@xXxSailorNekoxXx Right? WTF is that shit? How can you be dumb enough to say that when the writing is on the wall? Especially when you're the one that wrote it! What, do their minds just go blank automatically?! Or are they just full of shit? Boggles my mind...
"Marriage has never denied gay couples the rights to live as they choose"
No it's just left them without well over 1,000 legal benefits that protect not only them, but their children as well. It's quite telling that all these commercials were basically nothing more than scare tactics... that's about all the opposition to marriage equality have to go with.
@TiffanyMarie105 What benefits are you referring to? CA law affords all the substantive legal benefits and protections of marriage to same sex couples through domestic partnership.
@nnjhansen I'll readily admit to not knowing much about California state law.
I do know that because of DOMA immigration benefits aren't included. There was a well publicized case of a legally married same sex couple in San Francisco where one of them was being deported because they lacked the benefits an opposite sex couple would have. Not only were they each being separated from the love of their lives, but the other was the primary caretaker since one had aids.
@nnjhansen Understood, guess I'm just frustrated that marriage equality isn't already an reality in this Country and frustrated that we are so far behind other Countries in that regard. I have a lot of gay and lesbian friends who would want nothing more than to marry and it pains me that they can't. I don't feel it's fair and I certainly don't feel it's just.
Yeah, no kids are gay. That's exactly how it works.
SuperFantasticFox 3 hours ago
wtf
raksha1985 2 days ago
This is fucking ridiculous. Teachers aren't going to ever be forced to teach this...it's a political issue not a freaking health issue. Religions just like tradition....so how about the religions do whatever they want and allow people to do whatever the hell they want? It's not the governments job to tell someone who they can and cannot marry.
soccerplayer173 3 days ago
@soccerplayer173 But the government does do it, some times they have too.
For example, Inner family marriage is outlawed in the US.
Aleckael 2 days ago
@Aleckael Why do they have to do this, though? I realize they do, including in my own home state, but I believe it's completely unnecessary.
soccerplayer173 1 day ago
@soccerplayer173 I think its just the evolution part of the problem working itself out. One of the facets is tolerance vs. acceptance. This society tolerates the gay life style, but it doesn't accept it. Many people probably believe finalizing a decision in court can establish that they have to or don't have to accept it.
One of the things we see over and over again in the U.S. is that court rulings cant change public opinion, they can only reinforce or undermine it.
Aleckael 1 day ago
It is a fact that Proposition 8 doesn't deny the rights of homosexuals, but why not give them the right to get married? I feel sorry for all the homosexuals who are not allowed to enjoy being married.
DrQuantumPhysicsMan 4 days ago
@DrQuantumPhysicsMan It's such a diverse and multifaceted issue, that's why its one of the more interesting political topics. Just as interracial marriage was fighting against 150 years of bigotry and American social cast system, gay marriage is fighting against 8,000 years of homosapien cultural implied law.
It's one thing to fight against a society's norms, its another to fight against a species norms. Just one more aspect of why it can be a fascinating topic to look at.
Aleckael 2 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
As I said before if mankind does not repent, the Heavenly Father will inflict a very serious punishment on the whole world; a punishment the likes of which has never happened before. It will be a punishment greater than the deluge, Fire will fall from the sky and will wipe out a great part of humanity, sparing no one. The survivors will find themselves so desolate that they will envy the dead. -Our Lady of Akita! Pray your ROSARY!
sgal88 5 days ago
That bald guy is a much better actor than the woman.
soxfan849 6 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
GAY PRIDE FOREVER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :)
100JBspecial1on1 1 week ago
This video is actually comical in how misguided it is...
agess3191 1 week ago
Dumb and Dumber
Xoletta 1 week ago
Seperate but equal? That didn't work in the South during the Civil Rights Movement either.
pfpnewhope 1 week ago
Hateful. If you REALLY want to protect marriage outlaw divorce or shut up.
pfpnewhope 1 week ago
"gay couples lose none of their rights or privileges". Except the right to marry.
ultrakinglink 1 week ago 3
@ultrakinglink Can't lose something you never had.
Aleckael 2 days ago
If marriage is just about having children...why are straight childless couples still allowed to be married?
That just makes no sense.
:/
Marriage is not, and never has been about having children.
stevelysteve 1 week ago
im gonna hope this is just fanmade
someone tell me this did not air on tv in cali for real?
supervamp78 1 week ago
Kids might not get divorced, but plenty of "Straight Marriages" do. This ad is stupid they outed them selves with that statement. And kids are conceived through sex not marriage, if that is how they want it why are there such things as Sperm Banks or adoption centers(because not everyone can have children).
The18Subject 1 week ago
this guy is sooo gay.
dayweed85a 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
A neurotic sexual fetish affected by modeling the opposite sex parent to compensate for a complication of intimacy with distant or absent mother or father is hardly a basis for a marriage relationship. Underlying all neurotic conditions are ego problems accompanied by low self-esteem. Once the person begins engage in homosexual relations it becomes a sexual addiction with an intense compulsive desire for only same sex relationships. Self-esteem will not improve until the person abstains.
amerlibmov 1 week ago
Marriage is abuot love ,not abut making children.People can make children without marriage.
sunhayabusaify 2 weeks ago
@sunhayabusaify The state has little interest in your 'love.'. That people CAN procreate without marriage is precisely why the state encourages that it take place within marriage.
nnjhansen 1 week ago
kids are a lot smarter than we give them credit for.
yo5612 2 weeks ago
@yo5612 i mean seriously! "they don't understand... of course they do! it's love!
yo5612 2 weeks ago
"Kids don't get divorce". And yet we still do it, seems like your argument against gay marriage is out the window.
NoahHorwitz 2 weeks ago 7
If marriage is for the sole purpose of procreating, then anyone above the age of 40-45 should be barred from marriage-- after all, there is no expectation that they will make babies. Moreover, we should insure that couples who do not plan to have children be prevented from marrying. Additionally, if a het couple does not procreate w/in 5 years, their marriage should be annulled on the grounds that they have not procreated. They should also be prosecuted for fraud and misrepresentation.
ChucklesCody 2 weeks ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
@ChucklesCody You are very confused.
The purpose served by the license is not an obligation on the part of a license holder. You do not have to practice law if you have a law license, you do not have to drive if you are issued a drivers license.
The conditions on the license are related to the interest served by the license. Once the conditions are met, whether the individual chooses to use the license as the state intended is up to the individual.
nnjhansen 2 weeks ago
wtf? This is so dumb.....
MysteriousNicSociety 2 weeks ago
You wave your flag, tell me I'm free, then use the word fag, to fuck with me.
Freest country on earth. So long as you're a straight patriotic male bitween 18 and 70....
domydirtywork196 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@domydirtywork196 You are free.
nnjhansen 2 weeks ago
"Kids can't even understand divorce" Um, do they realize how many children in this country have divorced parents?
aquagrl63 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Well, it is unconstitutional now (as of 2/7/2012)! The Supreme Court will most likely decide on this ruling of the 9th Judicial Circuit Court of California. The US Supreme Court will deem it unconstitutional now too! Why? Because, according to the US Constitution: "The rights of a majority will not decide the rights of a minority" (here GLBTQ people). That includes a vote by the people of the US! Confuse a kid? Kids are not so stupid... Case Exaple: Anne Frank!
macrent2 2 weeks ago
If you want to define marriage according to your own beliefs you're nothing less than a bigot. Simple as that.
dmcarefuldriver 2 weeks ago
@dmcarefuldriver Whose beliefs should we base the definition on? Yours?
nnjhansen 2 weeks ago
@nnjhansen How about this then? We define marriage as a mutually beneficial arrangement between two consenting adults. There, everybody's happy and there's no wiggle room for pedophilia or zoophilia. Then we stay out of everyone else's business and focus on spousal abuse. You know, REAL issues.
shinobi67 2 weeks ago
@shinobi67 Everyone would not be happy. What about those who wish to have their mutually beneficial arrangement between three or more consenting adults recognized?
The ability to marry is not contingent on an individual's desire to procreate but on the general ability of the type of relationship in question to do so. Man/woman can, man/man and woman/woman cannot.
nnjhansen 2 weeks ago
@nnjhansen Well, alright. As long as all partners maintain an equal stake in the relationship and all make the conscientious decision to be part of it, why not? Also, please stop with this "marriage is based on the ability to procreate" tangent. It's making you sound like even more of a soulless automaton than if you simply were against it for religious reasons. At least you're fairly eloquent, I could respect religious differences.
shinobi67 2 weeks ago
@shinobi67 Tell me, what do you believe the societal purpose of marriage is?
Why does it exist as a civil institution which the state licenses?
nnjhansen 2 weeks ago
@nnjhansen Before I go into an explanation about how I believe, personally, that the state's only real place in determining marriage eligibility is ensuring that all parties are able to consent and that, socially speaking, marriage should first and foremost be based on the love between consenting adults and their ability to provide a stable and fulfilling relationship for each other and any children they may raise, adopted, fostered or, perhaps, procreated, what do you believe it is?
shinobi67 2 weeks ago
@nnjhansen And yes, you have given me proof. Court cases, official statements and the like (which have been all flagged as spam by "someone" but that's hardly an indicator in either direction of their veracity). That just proves, to me, perhaps not to you, that something needs to change. If the main purpose of marriage, determined by state governments, is procreation, then some eyes seriously need to be opened.
shinobi67 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@shinobi67 Why do you believe the state has any interest in who you love? Do you honestly want government officials determining the appropriate levels of love and commitment you may or may not have for another person?
The only legitimate reason for the state to involve itself in the intimate relationship between consenting adults is if that relationship can result in another human being.
nnjhansen 2 weeks ago
@nnjhansen Perhaps I wasn't clear. The ONLY influence the state should have in determining a person's eligibility to marry is determining the ability of all parties to consent to the action. So, no one is able to cheat the system and marry a 12 year old or their favorite dog. Sure, those people won't be happy, but those actions are abusive to the extreme.
shinobi67 2 weeks ago
@shinobi67 So, the only role the state should have in determining the eligibility to obtain a state license is determining whether the person actually wants the license?
Why exactly is the state issuing the license then?
nnjhansen 2 weeks ago
@nnjhansen Now, for once, please answer my questions. Do you, in fact, believe that same sex couples should not be afforded the same privileges with regards to marriage hat heterosexual couples have because such a relationship cannot produce offspring? If so, what about surrogates, adoption, fostering or any other option that would allow a loving and stable (well, as stable as a heterosexual couple) family to provide a positive influence in a child's life?
shinobi67 2 weeks ago
@shinobi67 "Do you, in fact, believe that same sex couples should not be afforded the same privileges with regards to marriage hat heterosexual couples have because such a relationship cannot produce offspring?"
Yes, marriage exists to encourage responsible procreation and child rearing. In the absence of even the general ability to further that interest, there is no reason to redefine marriage the way you desire. Such a redefinition would divorce the institution from that interest.
nnjhansen 2 weeks ago
@nnjhansen I mean, sure they wouldn't produce the child themselves but isn't ensuring that all children have a chance at a happy, healthy and safe life more important than adding more and more mouths to our steadily growing population?
shinobi67 2 weeks ago
@shinobi67 "...they wouldn't produce the child themselves"
Exactly, and therefore would not further the state's interest in marriage.
nnjhansen 2 weeks ago
@nnjhansen An earlier poster, who you brushed off, had a point. By this chain of logic that you're creating, any marriage between a heterosexual couple with one or more sterile partners would be in danger of forced annulment. And you didn't even address a valid point. What about adoption? There are plenty of children abandoned by their "procreation-able" heterosexual parents.
shinobi67 2 weeks ago
@nnjhansen This is not to say that gay couples cannot adopt children currently, however by allowing for them to pursue equal protections to heterosexual couples it'd definitely make the process a lot easier than it is currently. Not to say that adoption is particularly simple for heterosexual couples either, but here we are.
shinobi67 2 weeks ago
@nnjhansen But, for the sake of argument, pull up any sort of official, contemporary document that makes the claim that the ability to marry is based on the general ability of a type of relationship to produce offspring. I checked most of your comments and, in the ones I've read so far, you've yet to provide a source.
shinobi67 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@shinobi67
“The institution of marriage as a union of man and woman, uniquely involving the procreation and rearing of children within a family" Baker v Nelson, MN, 1971
"One of the leading and most important objects of the institution of marriage under our laws is the procreation of children, who shall with certainty be known by their parents as the pure offspring of their union... This is implied in the very nature of the contract of marriage." Carris v. Carris, NJ, 1873
nnjhansen 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@shinobi67 "There was a rational basis for the legislature to draw the line between opposite-sex couples, who as a generic group are biologically capable of reproducing, and same-sex couples, who are not. This is true, regardless of whether there are some opposite-sex couples that wish to marry but one or both partners are physically incapable of reproducing." Morrison v. Sadler, IN, 2005
nnjhansen 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@shinobi67 "We hold that the State has a legitimate interest in encouraging procreation and child-rearing within the marital relationship" Standhardt v. Superior Ct., AZ, 2003
"Since marriage was instituted to address the fact that sexual contact between a man and a woman naturally can result in pregnancy and childbirth, the Legislature's decision to focus on opposite-sex couples is understandable." Hernandez v. Robles, N.Y. 2006
Need more?
nnjhansen 2 weeks ago
@nnjhansen let everyone get married. that's nobody's beliefs, it's just plain tolerance and acceptance.
dmcarefuldriver 2 weeks ago
Gay couples don't lose their rights? What about their right to get MARRIED?
nicoleca0427 2 weeks ago
@nicoleca0427 Couples do not have a right to get married, all marriages are subject to conditions and restrictions.
nnjhansen 2 weeks ago
i want gays to have their rights but call it something other than marriage. thatll make the christians happy and gays get what they want. my personal word for them is garriage. oh and their is no reason to teach marriage. its a love thing and lets face irt schools don't need to teach love
MrSyme101 2 weeks ago
@MrSyme101 hows about instead we give gays the word marriage and christians "shams"
idaman12345 2 weeks ago
I think what needs to happen in America is instead of changing what Marriage means America needs to first change the meaning of Republican from "conservative" to Traditionalist. Some people are falling for the non-political meaning of Conservative when they view the republican party.
MrNintoku 2 weeks ago
Never once was I taught about marriage in school. This is so silly! People are so stupid.
KingWallflower 2 weeks ago
"what? why can't a man marry a man and a woman marry a woman? a man can marry a woman and what's the difference?" .
and i was EIGHT! so yeah, before you say kids don't "get" same sex attraction you wanna do some research on it you bigots!
Bil1ie 2 weeks ago
@Bil1ie well spoken!
Linu86 2 weeks ago
" kids don't get divorce! let along gay attraction!"
if that's the problem then why don't you ban divorce to??! and you think kids aren't 'capable' of understanding same sex attraction? well what about GAY KIDS you idiots?! besides i was FULLY capable of understanding same sex attraction when i was 7 (when i first heard about it) -.-
I remember being about 8 or 9 and watching the news and there was a lesbian activist defending gay marriage and i can still remember thinking to myself :
Bil1ie 2 weeks ago
It's interesting how prejudice and fear can be made to sound so reasonable! This change is already happening so get used to it! We are everywhere.
pfpnewhope 3 weeks ago
Well Prop. 8 is banned in CA. So fuc* it. People are people....black, white, straight, gay. It doesn't matter. And idk about you but I think not being able to marry is a huge denial of rights. Stupid conservatives.
LavLavxoxo 3 weeks ago 9
As I posted before the US Constitution is not the Bible, so while homosexuality is a sin according to the Bible. A law that bans a homosexual marriage IS UN-Constitutional, this has nothing to do with the sanctity of marriage, and if you want a law to keep the sanctity of marriage you would ban divorce...
bulrydrdan 3 weeks ago
@bulrydrdan "A law that bans a homosexual marriage IS UN-Constitutional"
What portion of the Constitution does it violate?
nnjhansen 3 weeks ago
@nnjhansen Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. Section 1. 2ns sentence No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States. Wow no wonder people try to make un-Constitutional laws, they don’t even know what’s in their own Constitution.
bulrydrdan 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@bulrydrdan What privilege or immunity is abridged by a law prohibiting same sex marriage?
nnjhansen 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Can anyone give me a good, non religious, reason to be against same sex marriages?
MrJihadJesus 3 weeks ago
@MrJihadJesus Oh mercy me, I'm gettin' the vapors, won't someone think of the children. *ahem* Sorry, a bit of parody there. But since people marked you for spam then, apparently, no, they can't think of a non-religious reason.
shinobi67 2 weeks ago
Democrats need to push a new sanctity of marriage act that defines marriage as being between two consenting adults. I'm so tired of all the bullshit from right- wingers about how allowing gay marriage is a slippery slope leading to polygamy and people marrying their dog. Just define marriage as the legal union of two consenting adults and lets move the fuck on. The country's ready...it'll be ok. Everybody just fucking chill...
butuh13 3 weeks ago
This is so sad, I feel embarrassed for the idiots in this commercial. Fucking butt out, I'm gay and I'm going to get married weather you fucking like it or not.
JacobsAquarium 3 weeks ago
Yes let's protect the sanctity of Kim Kardashian's 74 hr. wedding *sarcasm...and britney spears 24 hr wedding...or Mit Romneys god knows how many marriages because we all know straight couples are so much better *more sarcasm*
Arella17 3 weeks ago
As if a conservative would take a stand when their job is at stake...
Colgruv 3 weeks ago
my sister is 7. she understands gay marriage as much as i do.
plushalligator 1 month ago
Why does he keep yelling at her when she tells him she gets it? Ridiculous homophobic commercial.
dancer8164 1 month ago
What a horrible commercial, the information is incorrect, the video work its self is horrible (especially for being in California) the actors are probably never going to get other work. Just bad in all ways *sigh.....
JusBenLawyered 1 month ago
So many people underestimate children. Obviously there are some things that go beyond them, but there are plenty of children who understand gay marriage perfectly, just as they understand divorce and many other things. There are video's in the sidebar that prove this. The point of being a kid isn't to stay naive and ignorant for as long as possible, it's to grow and learn so you can become a happy adult. If you're not going to bother to teach them, then they'll always be confused.
mashit13 1 month ago
This commercial really shocks me; to begin with, it is very dramatically shot (why this dramatic music seriously?), which makes it ridiculous and overplayed. Then, what they are saying is outrageous, the basic meaning being "change is bad". To finish with, I am amazed at the number of likes on this video. I am amazed that Prop 8 ever passed. I cannot believe such bigoted commercials can still be broadcasted on national TV nowadays.
Meilinoa 1 month ago
when I was 8 I was able to understand that every person should have equal rights, and that includes being able to marry. I find it sad how an eight year old can be more open-minded and intelligent than these oppressive losers.
itsonlyemmaa 1 month ago
@itsonlyemmaa
You were a very smart eight-year-old, and you just made a comment there that was a million times better than anything that was said in this nauseous video.
RCSVirginia 1 month ago
"kids don't get divorced, let alone gay attraction"
um... I was 12 when I realized I was bisexual, all of my gay friends have known since they were children, so yes, we do get gay attractions as children.
Also, marriage is not about having children. Thousands of elderly couples, sterile couples and people who just don't want to have kids, get married all the time. So marriage is NOT about having children.
This commercial really made me laugh.
AnakarayaRavenclaw 1 month ago
This is why we need a couple of disney movies with two gay princes or princesses who fall in love. Kid will ask mum or dad "why" - mum or dad will say "because some people fall in love with other people who are the same as them." End of story. = )
TGIAustin911 1 month ago 19
@TGIAustin911 You said, "This is we need a couple of disney movies with two gay princes or princesses who fall in love. Kid will ask mum or dad "why"- mum or dad will say "because some people fall in love with other people who are the same as them." End ff story.= )
SO you thought this was the end of the story. That people will fall down and believe your lies with no rebuttal so to speak... Ha Ha ha lol. Even common sense says that a man's private goes with a woman's. >continue>
Rockioe 1 month ago
@Rockioe So, all of those lovely heterosexual couples who engage in anal sex and BDSM lack common sense do they? Nope, guess they're just kinky!
shinobi67 2 weeks ago
@TGIAustin911 >continue> Oh the grossness that a man would empty his seed in crap shoot of another man is despicable to say the least. It is grossness and perversion of sexuality at the highest level...
Rockioe 1 month ago
@Rockioe But dude, don't you think old people doing the dirty is gross too? Or thinking about your parents doing it is gross? I do - but I don't say to my grandparents "You are perverted sinners!!" - that's ridiculous. And what you evidently don't understand is that some people are simply physically incapable of being attracted to the opposite sex - so what they do in private isn't really perverted, it's just the result. And why do you care about some one else's sex life ANYWAY!?
TGIAustin911 1 month ago
@TGIAustin911 You have bought into the lie that the gay lifestyle is fine by you. Thus, it is your choice. A bad one indeed. Yet still a choice.
For those who desire to be free from the gay lifestyle go to YT vids:
Ladies:
Ex Gay Testimony
Men:
Jesus Christ saved Me from 27 years of homosexuality
Rockioe 1 month ago
@Rockioe Just like you chose your gender and natural hair colour, eh? Totally a choice - yeah no doubt it..... oh no..... none whatsoever......... (*sarcasm*)
TGIAustin911 1 month ago
@Rockioe should rename those vids
fraudulent testimony
and religion brainwashed me to becoming straight
since thats what the content is
mermaidsareppl222 1 month ago
@Rockioe More like "Jesus Christ saved me from 27 years of homosexuality... and then 3 weeks later I killed myself because of horrible psychological abuse and torture."
shinobi67 2 weeks ago
@shinobi67 You said, "More like "Jesus Christ saved Me from 27 years of homosexuality... and 3 weeks later I killed myself because of horrible psychological abuse and torture". Why don't you come up with legitimate material. You folk in bed with the homosexual agenda spout off claims that have no substance. Many people not only homosexuals have been freed spiritually by Jesus Christ.
It is amazing that in Haiti that witch doctors have no power when born again Christians >continued>
Rockioe 2 weeks ago
@shinobi67 >continued> rise up and praise their God or share of Jesus authority. Homosexuality is a bottom line spiritual problem and always will be~~Rom.1:18-32 emphasis lesbians v.26 gay men v. 27; 1Cor. 6:9... The only solution is for the homosexual to realize his or her sin and cry out to Jesus Christ for help. The Bible says all have sinned and fall short of God's glory~~Rom.3:23. Homosexuality is not the only sin. There are fornicators, thieves, drunkards etc.
Ask Jesus 4 HELP.
Rockioe 2 weeks ago
@Rockioe You had me up until "ask Jesus 4 HELP." Now, either you're a troll or an idiot. I'll be willing to go with either option. Also, I'm really uncomfortable with your obsession with my sex life. Please, stop it, it's really rather creepy.
shinobi67 2 weeks ago
@shinobi67 I guess you reject TRUTH. To each his own,,,
Rockioe 2 weeks ago
@Rockioe I'm a girl, actually. But yeah, guess so. Have a pleasant weekend and happy Valentine's Day.
shinobi67 2 weeks ago
@shinobi67 Thank you, and have a great Valentine's Day as well...
Rockioe 2 weeks ago
@Rockioe Whats funny is that you had to think about gay sex just to write that comment. Here's an idea, why don't you ignore us gay/lesbian/bisexual people and live a happy life?
AnakarayaRavenclaw 1 month ago
@Rockioe Why do you think about gay sex so much? Stop it. Merciful Odin, most gay and lesbian couples I know don't think about sex as much as you do.
shinobi67 2 weeks ago
@TGIAustin911 yeah but if that happens to you, you happen to be a fag!
lzekl 1 month ago
@lzekl Well fuck.... how did you figure out I'm a fag? We've got an Eienstein here everyone!!!!
TGIAustin911 1 month ago
@TGIAustin911 Don't hold your breath! Disney's as conservative as they come! I don't doubt that eventually parents will be telling that to their kids, though. You can't stop change, and you only hurt yourself by fighting it.
Colgruv 3 weeks ago
@Colgruv Yeah probably a little optimistic.... But anyway I like the idea! Lol - I never could imagine myself in the prince's shoes, I always wanted to be in that long beautiful gown = )
TGIAustin911 3 weeks ago
Comment removed
MrHarajukuLuva 1 month ago
These yes on prop 8 commercials just baffle me, and I think it just proves what a narrow minded place their arguments come from!! Also, it won't change the definition of marriage, because it's not like you're taking any rights away from straight married couples!!
MrHarajukuLuva 1 month ago
@MrHarajukuLuva Of course it will change the definition of marriage, that is the entire purpose. Marriage was defined by the people of CA in their law (prop 22) as the union of one man and one woman. A handful of judges took it upon themselves to change that definition and the purpose of Prop 8 was to restore it.
nnjhansen 1 month ago
@nnjhansen I'm looking at it as not so much as a change as it is an addition, because like i said, it doesn't take anything away from straight couples. If prop 8 were to fail, marriage between a man and a woman will still remain the same, its just that the same sex will now be able to have each and every single one of those same rights. As for looking for the "safety of our children", I know first hand that someone is born gay because i have never or ever will be attracted to a woman
MrHarajukuLuva 1 month ago
@MrHarajukuLuva It is a complete and fundamental change. Marriage is defined as the union of a man and a woman because that union is unique in its potential consequence to the rest of society.
nnjhansen 1 month ago
@nnjhansen I'm not saying this in an attacking way because your responses have been very respectful, but I'm curious as to how you feel gay marriage will specifically damage this society so much and why it's so wrong, because I'm just sort of missing why straight couples should feel so threatened
MrHarajukuLuva 1 month ago
@MrHarajukuLuva First, I think the question is how redefining marriage would improve society? You want to fundamentally redefine a building block of society, the onus is on you to explain how it improves society.
Now I do believe that redefining marriage will harm society by completely divorcing the institution from its long-standing social purpose but that does not relieve those you want to change the institution of the onus to show how it improves society.
nnjhansen 1 month ago
@nnjhansen I'm not saying that gay marriage will magically cure all that is wrong with the world, but i am saying that it will add to the society's progression and in many ways, even help children out there who are gay wont feel ashamed...to answer your question from before on how it will improve society? One reason off the top of my head, maybe there wouldn't be so many gay teen suicides out there, and this will bring them a step closer into telling them that its ok to be who you are
MrHarajukuLuva 1 month ago
@MrHarajukuLuva How will redefining marriage have any impact on gay teen suicide? That is quite a leap? Marriage does not nor should it exist so that people who are not part of it can feel better about themselves.
nnjhansen 1 month ago
@nnjhansen I'm not saying it'll cure gay teen suicide, but it'll probably help society in giving the message that there isnt anything wrong with being gay, and it'll bring us that much closer. I'm really still not clear though and how you think adding gay couples to the title of marriage will be harmful...cuz its simple that if you're not gay, dont marry someone of the same sex!! and its not divorcing the institution from its long standing purpose because nothing is being taken away
MrHarajukuLuva 1 month ago
@MrHarajukuLuva I'm sorry but the idea that marriage has anything to do with gay teen suicide is just absurd. One has nothing to do with the other.
Marriage exists as a civil institution to further a specific societal purpose. If you remove the condition for marriage that ties the institution to that purpose, you divorce the institution from the purpose. It becomes an institution without a social purpose.
nnjhansen 1 month ago
@nnjhansen ok, once again, im not saying its a cure to gay suicide, im just giving you an example of what approving gay marriage can possibly do in terms of acknowledging that something is ok rather than condemning it!! And once again, you're not removing the condition for marriage because it doesnt affect families or straight couples...its not like if prop 8 failed, gay people get benefits that straight people dont...nothing would have changed in terms of rights you already have!!!
MrHarajukuLuva 1 month ago
@MrHarajukuLuva Speaking of some possible second or third order effect is just not a reason to redefine a basic societal institution.
You are removing a condition of marriage, the condition that requires one man and one women. Whether it effects opposite couples is irrelevant, it effects the definition of marriage. Marriage as an institution would be fundamentally changed and divorced from its purpose.
nnjhansen 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@nnjhansen But you aren't removing a condition that requires one man and one woman, because marriage will ALWAYS include one man and one woman regardless if gay couples can marry...to me, i just personally feel like prop 8 is a little selfish because the fact is, my life has nothing to do with your life, yet you can choose who i want to marry and affect my life in such an important way, don't you personally think that's a little wrong?...
MrHarajukuLuva 1 month ago
@nnjhansen the "definition" of marriage. Really... what about all the marriages that only last weeks or months. Doesn't that hurt the definition of marriage more than same sex couples. marriage is just a word its the rights that matter. Why deny and people rights because of a hatred for who they are? I never learned about marriage in school, and as far as sex ed well sex ed is all about diseases and the reproductive system so honestly that wouldn't change either. this is just obstructionism.
SpreaddEm 1 month ago
@SpreaddEm Marriages that only last weeks or months do not redefine marriage at all.
What rights are you referring to?
nnjhansen 1 month ago
@nnjhansen I speak of the right for gays to marry. that the definition of marriage should be set as 2 that love eachother. It shouldn't be restricted to the marriage of opposite genders.
SpreaddEm 1 month ago
@SpreaddEm No state denies homosexuals the ability to marry. The conditions and restrictions on marriage apply equally to all regardless of sexual preference. No one has the right to marry whomever they want.
The institution of civil marriage exists to further a societal interest, only the union of a man and a woman can further that interest.
If marriage should not be restricted to a man and a woman, why should it be limited to two people?
nnjhansen 1 month ago
@nnjhansen "no state denies homosexuals the ability to marry". only a few states at of the union are allowed marriage or civil union. In Utah they have allowed polygamy. Only straight people marry who they want.
SpreaddEm 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@SpreaddEm No state even asks about sexual preference. The conditions and restrictions on marriage apply equally to all people without regard to sexual preference.
The State of Utah has never allowed polygamy.
No one is allowed to marry whomever they want.
nnjhansen 1 month ago
@nnjhansen If the social interest is procreation, then that is a flat argument. There are plenty of heterosexuals who don't or cannot have children. Is their marriage still considered valid?
Try again. And lets see if you can use reasoning in your argument.
braveheart1779 3 weeks ago
@braveheart1779 There are also plenty of people with law license who decide not to practice law. Does that mean the state's interest in issuing law licenses is invalid?
nnjhansen 3 weeks ago
@nnjhansen What if I said it shouldn't? What if I don't understand why three interested parties should not be permitted to validate their love for each other? Why don't you tell me the real dangers of having affirmed polyamorous relationships as opposed to assuming that it is a universal wrong?
Colgruv 3 weeks ago
@nnjhansen And that purpose is... what exactly? Procreation? Well, sorry, if that's the case, you might as well take away my right to marry anyone, since I don't plan on procreating. I would like to adopt though, which I will remind you is something that homosexual couples are more than capable of doing.
shinobi67 2 weeks ago
saying marriage isn't just between a man woman will cost millions of taxpayer money? Please!
cheezpleaze105 1 month ago
As a kid I actually thought marriage was about two people loving each other and now I'm 15 and still think that I don't know why gender matters it is irrelevant to love
MrWorldwideCitizen 1 month ago
It's quite obvious that the authors of this video have a "religious" problem with gay people. But they didn't have the courage to come out and say it. Instead they manufactured distorted lies and bogeymen to scare people. Disgusting.
bndkllr2 1 month ago
@cupcakes12ism No couple has a 'right' to be married. Marriage has always been subject to conditions and restrictions.
nnjhansen 1 month ago
They might have an argument IF and only IF straight married couples didn't get extra benefits. Because they get benefits they are denying gay couples these same benefits.
flavorysoup 1 month ago in playlist Prop 8
@flavorysoup They get benefits because they qualify for them.. If you do not qualify for the license, you are not entitled to the benefits that go with the license.
nnjhansen 1 month ago
Where i came from all school are government assist christian school.
Everybody expect marriage to be between a man and a woman.
Strange country this is.
mrtigretiger 1 month ago
WHO THE FUCK CARES!?
Seriously, why does it matter on either side? The title of "married" has very little meaning at this point anyways. Where are we living, 13th century England?
plusmin09 1 month ago
@plusmin09 Must you use the f-word??? There are ladies on these boards?? Do you talk this way in real life? You think you have to swear to prove you're a man? What type of woman would want to date or marry a guy who uses such language?? I can't believe I go to watch this video and one of the very first comments uses the f-word!!
cindybin2001 1 month ago
@cindybin2001 Ladies on this board (?) ... Ya, I don't assume women are more sensitive to swearing, nor did I use it to establish any type of masculinity. I can't believe you go on to youtube and are so shocked by profanity.
In the end though, let me apologize for offending you. It was not my intention.
plusmin09 1 month ago
@plusmin09 Well there is the saying that a gentleman shouldn't swear in front of a lady. It just drives me nuts that so many guys swear on these boards! Would you talk that way in real life, in mixed company? We ladies can READ what you type, you know! But anyway, thanks for apologizing. Usually they just cuss me out all the more!
cindybin2001 1 month ago
@cindybin2001 Well we don't live in the 1950's anymore....
10trojan10 1 month ago
The sarcasm is exquisite.
johnnycharco 1 month ago
This Yes on Prop 8 commercial is not just offensive and bigoted; it is stupid, as well.
RCSVirginia 2 months ago
To see a wonderful counterpoint to this, take a look at the YouTube video:
"3 generations of women against Prop 8" by thecitizenjones
RCSVirginia 2 months ago
its very simple science; a gay can't spreed the gay just like a straight can't spreed the straight, its not a germ.
Sow why is it weird to teach them about gay marriage or homosexuality?.
If the kid turns gay then the kid was already destine to be gay.
ITS NORMAL ITS EVEN FOUND ON ANIMAL AND PLANTS!.
LoboDeBayamon 2 months ago
This ad is just confusing and weird. It doesn't identify anything to do with the bill, it just says that kids shouldn't be 'screwed up' by being taught that two people who love each other shouldn't be allowed to marry. Which is bullshit. If you are male or female, gay or straight, if you love someone be they male or female so much that you want a marriage, you should have that option available to you.
DarkEvilWorm002 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@DarkEvilWorm002 Civil marriage exists to serve a societal interest, not every loving type of relationship has the potential to satisfy that interest. The state does not issue licenses because people love each other.
nnjhansen 2 months ago
@DarkEvilWorm002 Oh that's right, use the sh-word. Here I was reading your comment with interest, and you had to go and ruin it all by using profanity. Now I don't even want to read it! Why do you talk this way? To prove you're a man? Do you realize there are LADIES on these boards? Do you talk this way in real life? It's so crude and offensive!
cindybin2001 1 month ago
@cindybin2001 I'm sorry if I offended you. I only really swear if I'm upset or angry about something, because it's a great way to blow off steam. I'm usually a polite young guy, but, you know, we all need a little something to blow off steam. Vent some anger. If you want to know more, go watch the LoadingReadyRun video Swearing.
By the way, I am gay so finding and impressing ladies isn't really in my interests.
DarkEvilWorm002 1 month ago
@cindybin2001 Ladies curse too. And people don't curse to show their masculinity, they do it to blow off steam or to show how passionate they are about the issue or to show how ridiculous that it even is an issue. It's okay you don't like cursing, but I for one don't like having to come on here and see half of the posts are you complaining about one or two curse words. Grow up.
10trojan10 1 month ago
@10trojan10 Yes I know ladies curse, and that is terrible! Think of how a woman comes across when they do that, and the type of guy they're going to attract! And you tell me to "grow up"? You should be agreeing with me and supporting me in trying to help people understand how crude and offensive it is to use profanity, especially to just type it here on the Internet for all to see. People need to wake up and see how offensive this is. You should join me in trying to help them.
cindybin2001 1 month ago
How bout NO
Gaychick8 2 months ago
Yeah, gays lose none of their privileges.
Except, y'know... marriage.
xXxSailorNekoxXx 2 months ago 48
@xXxSailorNekoxXx Right? WTF is that shit? How can you be dumb enough to say that when the writing is on the wall? Especially when you're the one that wrote it! What, do their minds just go blank automatically?! Or are they just full of shit? Boggles my mind...
phorse 1 month ago
Wow! I wouldn't want a teacher to mold my child!
Boudiga 2 months ago
@kiss my gay ass u hater
MsMatiasb 2 months ago
"Marriage has never denied gay couples the rights to live as they choose"
No it's just left them without well over 1,000 legal benefits that protect not only them, but their children as well. It's quite telling that all these commercials were basically nothing more than scare tactics... that's about all the opposition to marriage equality have to go with.
TiffanyMarie105 2 months ago
@TiffanyMarie105 What benefits are you referring to? CA law affords all the substantive legal benefits and protections of marriage to same sex couples through domestic partnership.
nnjhansen 2 months ago
@nnjhansen I'll readily admit to not knowing much about California state law.
I do know that because of DOMA immigration benefits aren't included. There was a well publicized case of a legally married same sex couple in San Francisco where one of them was being deported because they lacked the benefits an opposite sex couple would have. Not only were they each being separated from the love of their lives, but the other was the primary caretaker since one had aids.
TiffanyMarie105 2 months ago
@TiffanyMarie105 Prop 8 (the subject of this video) would have no effect on federal law. It was a state initiative.
nnjhansen 2 months ago
Comment removed
TiffanyMarie105 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@nnjhansen Understood, guess I'm just frustrated that marriage equality isn't already an reality in this Country and frustrated that we are so far behind other Countries in that regard. I have a lot of gay and lesbian friends who would want nothing more than to marry and it pains me that they can't. I don't feel it's fair and I certainly don't feel it's just.
TiffanyMarie105 2 months ago
@TiffanyMarie105 Marriage equality?
What is meant by that phrase?
If you wish to redefine marriage, say so. Do not pretend you are just looking to make two unequal things magically equal.
nnjhansen 2 months ago