Added: 3 years ago
From: AssociatedPress
Views: 5,061
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (224)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • I DID THAT! im so proud of my self.

  • _YOURFREEGAYWEBSITE...C0M_ lol not in ong bak

  • _YOURFREEGAYWEBSITE(DOT)C0M_

     these people arent christians, they are "extremists"Fuck them, sick motherfuckers!!! doing that at a funeral, lock em up and throw away the key!!

  • _YOURFREEGAYWEBSITE.C0M_ I see from your comments to BB that you equate homosexuality with pedophilia. This is common. Using that logic, when a man rapes a little girl, all hetrosexual behavior is condemned.

  • You can equate all aberrant. Not all aberrant behavior can be as disgusting as pedophilia and homosexuality.

  • Stupidity like those who have no clue about the actual spectrum of their own species has no redeeming social benefit for any civilization, and should be laughed out of any serious public discussion.

  • Fortunately the louder you complain, the greater will be my voice. You're a narcissist to think you can silence the opposition by dismissing it so arrogantly.

    My public contribution to the debate on this issue does benefit civilization. It reminds everyone the opposition has a voice.

  • Is it narcissistic to be autonomous? Half of knowing a new vocabulary word is knowing what it means. Your 'voice' to deny another person's autonomy is entitlement, and it's dirty. Re: "Maybe you should take a..." If you recall, you were confused between the roles of citizen, referendum, & judiciary. I understand each of their functions & recognize those who don't when they complain about judges who do their part at the levers of government.

  • Now you're going to be a pedant and give me vocabulary lesson? The epitome of narcissism.

    I'm not confused one bit about how government works. I didn't complain about the role of judges per say. But, I'm well aware that their role isn't to cross the line into legislation. They've been checked by the people.

  • I'll school you in a few lessons if you stick around long enough.

    Judges often give some info about how rulings are made. When you have online access to view those rulings, you forfeit your right to complain without having your facts in order - like which part, more specifically, do you see our Republican appointed judges leaping from restraint to activism?

    Answer: you won't find it b/c it goes back to how CA's constitution was written. They did their job. Now bore someone else.

  • Let me make it simple for you.

    The ruling wasn't unanimous.

  • Neither are elections, but it doesn't make them any less valid.

  • I read the decisions. But the constitution you seem to interpret along with the majority of 1 was interpreted differently by the minority. That being said, the CA Constitution was obviously ambiguous enough to warrant interest in amending it. Prop 8 was the answer - and short of a second coming or an amendment that changes the Federal Constitution, its there to stay. Move on.

  • Your argument is both disingenuous & dishonest. The state constitution wasn't ambiguous, but perfectly clear which gave the majority the grounds to warrant their decision. As for Prop H8, that will be overturned & enshrined into the dustbin of history. Then, we'll be holding the feet of those nasty religions and their bigoted apologists to the fire and make them pay taxes, as political organizations are supposed to do.

  • You can't overturn an amendment to a constitution. Its not in the judicial purview. You can, however, repeal it with another referendum and amendment. Good luck with that LOL! The only other way is to attack the Federal constitutionality. The SCOTUS isn't about to grant Cert for this.

    You have the nerve to call religions nasty and in the same sentence call others who support them bigoted?! That makes you a shining example of hypocrisy.

  • No, the answer is to tax the shit out of superstitious half-wits and the institutions that churn them out in litters with a superiority complex on their shoulders. They're the ones who end up costing society with more problems with a sense of entitled arrogant ignorance. No apologies, no regrets.

  • The 1st amendment restricts the federal government from making any law prohibiting the exercise or respecting the establishment a State religion. Of course, the Constitution isn't something your respect, how could anyone expect you to know it? That's an 'arrogant sense of entitlement wrought from ignorance.'

    You can't spit your vile hatred and in the same breath accuse your victims of bigotry then expect to be taken seriously. To me you're a whining hysterical brat devoid of ANY morality.

  • Yeah? While those aren't religions, pal. They're political organizations using religion to avoid paying their fair share of taxes. It's time to call 'em for being the welfare queens that they are and hold their feet to the fire. They'll think twice before slithering around the bedrooms of any other citizens. They messed with the wrong crowd - some of us haven't had our first cup of coffee and won't until this is a done deal.

  • LOL What does coffee have to do with it? Now you have something against coffee?

  • "To me you're a whining hysterical brat devoid of ANY morality." Walk a mile in my pumps, babe. Until your autonomous rights are on the line, help yourself to a nice big cup of stfu and stay out of the way if you don't want to get mowed over. We're going to turn this mother around, and no one is getting in the way. Guarantee it.

  • Yes....I can see it now. A hundred thousand hysterical pump-wearing queers walking down the mall from the Lincoln memorial east to the Supreme Court chanting, "We're going to turn this mother around."

    BWAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA *choke* *cough* HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

  • Love coffee, and crabby without it.

    The supreme court dealing that will overturn Prop H8 is here in S.F., not D.C. Did I mention my pumps were cleats and steel toes?

  • The CA Supreme Court has no standing to bring any appellate action regarding prop 8. The only thing that can overturn it is another amendment or an action by the SCOTUS. That's it. Nothing else.

  • The state supreme court can and likely will overturn Prop 8 on sufficient grounds . The state's high court has the sole authority to interpret the state constitution as it is a state matter, not federal. PolySci 101. No federal grounds have been raised in this case.

  • I didn't say the Federal Supreme Court could overturn it. But you're right about a federal case being brought....that's the point.

    With regard to the State Supreme Court, they have no standing. Period. They can not overturn prop 8. The Court can only overturn laws and other courts. It must be repealed by another referendum. I don't know how much clearer I can be. Look it up.

  • No one, other than you, is making Prop 8 a federal case. It isn't.

    Your comprehension of the appropriate legal avenues for this case is poor. The same holds true with regard to the referendum process, though I realize not every state has it and, therefore, it isn't always clear for some.

    The shelf life of Prop H8 depends entirely on what the state supreme court rules. Voters cannot just start passing arbitrary amendments at will. Again, polysci 101.

  • Your girlfriends disagree and are crying about the 14th Amendment. The SCOTUS CAN find a State constitution federally unconstitutional. PoliSci 101.

    No State or Federal case has been brought to challenge your Constitution, therefore neither Court has standing! If there is NO CASE, there can be no appeal! That's the only kind of case a Supreme Court can hear. An appeal! Voters CAN pass amendments and DID. Nothing unconstitutional about it.

  • Gurlfriend, you're clearly confusing the scope & role of the federal/state courts. Prop H8 deals with the state constitution. Why you keep yammering on about the SCOTUS is anyone's guess. You have no idea how the referendum process works, like most Prop H8 proponents. Voters cannot use the referendum process to discriminate, which is why anti-miscegenation laws were overturned in CA. You may want to enroll at your local community college for a brush up on basic poly sci.

  • I've got a degree in Political Science. I don't need another. I'm well acquainted with roles of the various branches of government.

    You ask why I keep bringing up the SCOTUS and its role with prop 8. I JUST told you. Others on your side are considering challenging the federal constitutionality with the 14th amendment with "Discrimination" being the cause of action. The only other way is to amend it again....Like prohibition (21st amendment). That's it. Only two ways. Now sit down.

  • I'd get a refund if the referendum and/or judicial process is that confusing for you.

  • we're all going to die soon f*** everything in site

  • _YOURFREEGAYWEBSITE._COM_ this is retarded. I like it!

  • Homosexuals are so nasty, dirty & intolerant. We owe them nothing.

  • Next up: Have sex with your dog day, where gays stay at home and marry/fuck their pets

  • Too bad many heterosexuals already do that.

    LOL!

  • "Lavender Day", "I think its fabulous"

    Ive never laughed so hard.

  • Aw fuck it! The people have spoken & it's a done deal. Not only that, but Fag-out day, was a Queen-size flop! You guys need to mind your own business.Getting married, is a hetero thing .

  • Well, The Gays sure proved their point! Did you see how they shut down the whole economy? You didn't? Well, San Francisco @ least? No? Hmmm.....

  • I'm all for gay rights, marraige, etc... however, we're in an ECONOMIC CRISIS. We can't afford to lose jobs over some show of force like this. I didn't expect many would volunteer, and thats how it seems to have worked out.

  • HEADLINE:

    "Day Without a Gay" ends, world survives

  • It is a strange form of protest, and I agree with anyone who holds that view. It is an extension of the philosophy behind coming out. The homosexual population is hidden. Although some stereotypes may hold true in some cases, sexuality is rarely obvious. By coming out, a homosexual re-engages society. Family, friends, and even enemies become part of the new social framework. Shifting paradigms helps to educate society as to its exact composition. It is healthy for gay and straight communities.

  • GAY

  • What is it with Gay people and their preference for the word "fabulous" .

  • We would like to work with you setting up Dating Site for you at no cost. You can earn money if you have users registering with or without becoming a payment member. privatelabel.gkiss@gmail. com

    Yahoo IM: jamespotter4908

    MSN IM: jamespotter4908

  • Celebrating the day God burned all the fags in Sodom And Gomorrah.

  • it was a good idea but it can't work.. people can't take off work.. they would be fired by most employers. another way will have to be found.

  • Soooooo gay ! Ok I am gay myself but some times i think my own people go a little to far.

  • I think they should extend this to at least a month, maybe a year...or two.

  • If you wanted to go to a hair salon today, you were out of luck.

  • What problem?

    Oh, and nice job preaching eugenics...put's you in fitting company.

  • Gay is not a behavior... it's a religion. You have no proof that it is genetic, and insist it is because no one has proof to disclaim it. You preech how gays are better "tend to score above average in IQ", and how their beliefs should be encouraged. If that isn't like a religion, I don't know what is. It's a religion trying not to be a religion so it can enforce it's beliefs using without being stopped by church and state laws. Scary though huh?

  • Actually, Homosexuals, tend to score above average in IQ. But that doesn't mean they aren't off-kilter.

  • So uhhhh, how well was the turn out? I didn't see the stock market crash... or... uh. Anything noteworthy in the news.

  • This is beautiful. More power to you.

  • how about being queer for a year?

  • brouhajoe: Don't bother arguing anymore. It's crystal clear that Stinkfingerr is an ignorant, homophobic, red-neck. He hasn't got a clue.

  • The "Buggery Bug" strategy will fail as most employers will welcome a day free of homosexual whining.

  • Everyone, please take note that StinkFinger is posting new comments rather than replying directly to my refutations of his arguments, seemingly in the hope that I will not be notified of his replies.

  • That's the kind of reasoning that likely turned Blacks against you. They just were turned off having their nobel civil rights struggle equated with a bunch of people who go around buggering each other! Who, could blame them ?

  • 1st: I don't personlaly know any black people who are "against" me. Maybe you think that the only people who care about equality under the law and our Constitution are homosexuals, but I am not one.

    2nd: civil rights is not a struggle owned by any one group, it is a matter of equality. whether one is black or gay or a woman (all biological), one has every right to demand equality under the law, or civil rights.

  • buggerinjoe, Sometimes a comment or question is so convoluted or inaccurate that truth lies outside it's scope. Yours for instance.Better to start fresh. As for blacks being against you; that was about the matter I outlined only. But you know that don't you cupcake?

  • Well, again, the "matter outlined" was the black vote against equal marriage rights being fostered by people equating equality under the law to the civil rights movement. You said this had turned blacks against "me," implying that you think I'm a homosexual. My rights are not at stake here, so again, black people haven't turned against "me" in any way. As for the other part of it, this IS a civil rights issue, whether any particular group wants it to be or not.

  • Every point you've made here today has been entirely refuted, admit it or counter and directly address where I'm wrong.

  • Too bad it's not a states rights issue, it's a Constitutional issue. Separate but equal is not equal under the law, we decided that a long time ago. State bans on equal rights violate Article IV(1), as does DOMA. Face it, you are fighting against equality & freedom for millions of American citizens you've never met based on your own personal bigotry. You are thus no better than bigots of the past who fought against other groups that made them feel icky...blacks, women...you should be ashamed.

  • BTW, If you want someone to blame for the passage of prop 8, blame the blacks, who voted overwhelmingly for it.Couldn't have done it without them!

  • It wouldn't have passed without any 10% chunk of the voters, regardless of what arbitrary group you choose to divide out of the majority vote. It wouldn't have passed if white people hadn't voted, or women, or men, or freckled people...etc. Black people accounted for 10% of the vote, latinos about 17%, white about 70%.....hey, blame the whites or the latinos, prop 8 wouldn't have passed without them.

  • Homosexuals have the same rights as straights to marry someone of the opposite sex. It's not our fault they don't want to. They just don't get to redefine marriage.

  • i believe its the straights redifining marriage. look it up, what did marriage mean 200 years ago, definetly not what it means now. Knowledge is power, go read about it.

  • You believe wrongly. 200 years ago gays attempting to marry would have been hanged.

  • I think he's referring to polygamy when he talks about marriage having been redefined from 200 years ago. However, if you want to go back further, you'll find that homosexual marriage has existed in many cultures throughout recorded history.

  • Well, neither is germane to the matter at hand.

  • Actually, it completely defeats your point either way. If you're saying marriage shouldn't be redefined, you're wrong, as it is always redefined by contemporary culture...see polygamy. If you're saying marriage has always been between a man and woman, and gay people are trying to redefine it...you're wrong again, as marriage has never ONLY been between a man and woman, homosexual marriages have existed throughout history.

  • And it is those against equal rights, not homosexuals, who are trying to "redefine" marriage in our culture today, by passing a Constitutional amendment.

  • "Hello boss, I'm feeling FABOULOUS!!!! today, I cant make it in today"

  • As a matter of fact, animals know better than 'some' humans....

  • Puzzlebox, I submit you are 'puzzled', with absolutely no proof you post a blatant lie...

  • Animals doo doo it.

  • For perspective, how about a call in to work straight day?

  • Stink, if gays took away your right to marry I would say go all for it.

  • nobody took away your right to marry because you never had it. plus 2 guys being married sounds like a pain in the ass

  • They always had that right (as stated by the Supreme Court), it just took a ban on gay marriage and a challenge to that ban to UPHOLD the right that they have had.

  • OH NO!! A Day without a Gay? That means no florist shops, beauty supply or attendants in the men's rooms. Oh gee. How about "A County Without Gays." HELLOOOOO FRISCO!!!

  • So what do the gay guys plan to do with their day off? Get drunk, & watch a re-run of PokeButt mountain ? Engage in some public fisting? What?

  • THUMBS UP

  • Animals don't even do it!, as soon as I see my lab smoking the dog next door, I'll accept it. Until then, It will always be a pathetic sickness.

  • perry, Animals do do it, it is a well known documentation. You need to read up more on the subject before making ignorant responses and making up your own ignorant opinion.

  • Grow up, all you homophobic morons. Lying about gays does nothing to improve your political stance; it highlights the fact that you can't formulate a clear, cohesive argument using facts alone. YouTube moderators need to delete homophobic comments and hostile rhetoric. There's nothing constructive about irrational, hate-fulled feedback from individuals propogating lies and emotive extremist propaganda.

  • It's not fear of homosexuality. Its disgust! Wake up and call it what it is.

    There are no YouTube moderators. Its called free-speech...something you wackos know nothing about. Who needs to lie when the facts speak for themselves?

  • You are incorrect, which is not surprising. YouTube is moderated and abuse involving "hate speech against a protected group" (including "Sexual orientation/gender idenity") is not tolerated by YouTube administrators. To quote YouTube: "we don't permit hate speech (speech which attacks or demeans a group based on race or ethnic origin, religion, disability, gender, age, veteran status, and sexual orientation/gender identity)." Violators may be subject to account termination. Keep this in mind.

  • I do keep it in mind. That's why I haven't been hateful...just factual. So don't threaten me, pinhead. Even YouTube respects the 1st amendment even if you cretins don't.

  • the act of having gay sex is behavior, sexuality is not.

  • Nope. Sexuality is behavior. Look it up.

  • Nope wrong. Sexuality is an identity. I'm looking at the definition right here in both my Psychology AND Sociology textbooks, both latest edisions. Nice try! You seem to be confused.

  • I won't get into a semantics debate with you. You lost. Move on.

  • You wont get into a debate because you proved you have NO idea what youre talking about. I didnt lose. Everyone lost by Prop 8, because now it is deemed appropriate that popular vote can take away civil rights. This affects everyone, let alone when some American doesnt have the equal rights promised to them, democracy fails.

  • how is this for an idea

    gay suicide day the ultimate and final protest

  • That wouldn't work. Everyday is suicide day with these hysterical basket cases. But they're more interested in the drama than ending it.

  • Bud, you might be onto something if all gay people died today many people would be saddended and maybe wake up to the issue. My parents, my work, my friends they would be devistated for sure, and maybe care more about the issue. It also wouldn't end homosexuality considering heterosexuals breed homosexuals, as my parents were straight and most gay people's parents are straight. I actually know of some parents who became activists due to their son or daughter commiting suicide.

  • but for a couple of years we wont hear all the bitching and moaning, which may make it worth it.

  • The Politics of Tantrum.

  • The truth about GAYS not discussed in the media, and hidden from public view, is that they can only exist around heterosexuals with small children. The greatest secret of all time, is the relationship between pedophiles and homosexuals.. Pedophiles damage the children by molestation, and these children grow up to be homosexuals.. This is why homosexuals protect pedophiles.. Its a dirty little secret, in the damp, dark and filthy corners of the Catholic Church..

  • If 1000 Gay men or women over the age of 18 can prove that they can exist on a remote island for 100 years, without corrupting small children, also without the intervention of heterosexuals contributing to the population, then I will believe they are a separate "RACE" of people..

    But thats not going to happen, cause being GAY, is a "sexually deviant behavior" and should be classified as such, as it has for thousands of years..

    Stay home, and stay away from children and schools!

  • This is retarded.

  • Ineffective. The gays are randomly spread in the workforce like many Americans and besides do they really think they can afford to walk off their jobs in the midst of a recession? Do what you want, but be prepared to rewrite your resumes and dip into your savings when you lose your jobs.

  • Anyone notice that the people writing negative comments here have done so more than once? Like their homophobia is an itch they just can't scratch? Like it's a neurotic compulsion? Actually, here's an idea - do you want to finally end that drive to post homophobic comments on anything gay related? COME OUT OF THE CLOSET.

  • This is stupid. The latino immigrant movement that this is based on, is based on the fact that there is a tendency for latino immigrants work in particular sectors of the economy. so if all of them don't show up for work, that really makes a statement--who is going to clean your house or cut your grass?

    Gays are spread much more randomly through the economy, so there's no strong impact in a particular sector. This issue of same sex marriage just isn't related to work like immigration is.

  • protest are futile NO ONE CARES until someone DIES!

  • This is exactly what small business owners need during this booming business cycle we're going through. I hope everyone that pulls this stupid shit gets fuckin fired. Finding a new job should be a breeze given the current situation. Idiots. I don't have anything against gays though, at least you're not spittin kids out every nine months, fuckin up traffic even more.

  • Having a job is a privilege not a right. What a stupid turn in such a cornball movement. It indicates an irrational mind.

  • Tell that to your teachers next time they strike.

  • What a stupid reply. A bunch of U.S. drama spoiled queens who are victimized from nothing. Trying to act as if they are in such pain. The 21st century Nazis.

  • I think the euphemism here is 'corn-hole.' Not cornball. ;)

  • Pity the poor straight guy who wakes up with the flu that day & has to decide if he should call in sick!

  • No shit huh?

  • I think Gay people are completely lost. I grow tired of the left coast and Hollywood elite trying to make this seem normal.

  • " Hello, boss? I'm a Homo. That makes me a very sick person, so I wont be in today "!

  • RETARDED.

  • " Hello, boss? I like to bugger other men, so I wont be in today "!

  • Just give them the right to marry. Why do any of you care? It's not like they are forcing you to be gay with them. It's so stupid that people would be bothered by two people of the same sex getting married. It's not your life, it's theirs! Let them marry if they want to!

  • I'll see if Rachael Maddow phones in!

  • What if you're straight and already planned to call out on that day? Now everyone at work will think you are gay, when in reality you just made plans that can't wait.

  • " Hello, boss? This, is Bruce. I wont be in today- I'm a FAG"!

  • Whatever, call in Gay. See how quickly your gay call gets you in the unemployment line with the rest of the gays. But, I bet all you people calling in gay will claim "discrimination" even when you know damned well you deserved to be fired for pulling a stunt like that.

  • Being gay isn't a choice, they were born that way. There are biological and physiological factors behind being gay. In addition, studies have shown that many members of various animal species have exhibited homosexual tendencies.

  • Blah, blah, blah.

    Sexuality is behavior. Pure and simple.

  • So science and facts are just "blah blah blah" to you? Enjoy your alternate universe.

  • Science has shown sexuality to be a behavior. Thank you for reiterating.

  • No, actually it hasn't. Go read the book "Our Stolen Future".

  • I've got a better book for YOU to read. The Bible.

  • And once again we get back to the issue of facts... hmm... what should I believe? Factual studies that can be replicated and able to be proved? Or a book of nothing more than beliefs, where even the believers admit that they do not take everything in there literally? I think I will go with the book of scientific facts that can be proved, thank you.

  • He loves you anyway ;)

  • And I'm sure Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy loved me as well, doesn't really mean anything since they never really existed.

  • technichic, You are smugly intolerant, & so deserve no toleration yourself .

  • Santa Claus and the tooth fairy are secular figments. But if you need that kind of affirmation... *pats head*

  • And God would be a religious figment. What's your point?

  • My point is you need a hug. Real bad.

  • uhh...not from you, I don't.

  • So what you are saying is that homosexuals are kin to animals in the wild who lack intelligence?

  • No, I'm just saying that is an additional reason showing it isn't a choice - they obviously can't choose to be gay. I wouldn't expect a cretin like yourself to be able to understand simple sentences though *headpat*

  • gays are wonderful people. who they have sex with doesn't mess your life. get a life and stop messing with other peoples lifes because you guy are jerks.

  • Kev - you must be responding to the wrong person, because I am very supportive of gay people - I'm not "messing" with anyone.

  • opps my bad

  • Eff, you are right so we should be able to make people who are left handed not be able to marry, if we wanted to. How about religion, you choose your own religion, so we should be able to tell Buddhist they can't marry if we want to, I mean what is a constitution? Who the hell cares. If it is a lifestyle choice than we should be able to vote against them marrying. I bet you own a car, that is a lifestyle choice, I think we should be able to make it illegal for those who own a car to marry.

  • Left-handed? Only if you're left-handed and queer.

    PuzzleBox, don't speak about gays as if you weren't one. Even if you had not already admitted it, you're irrational thought process gives you away.

  • I hate this shit. Whenever you take a stand as a heterosexual, some homosexual comes along and tells you all about how you are "really deep down inside gay". I guess some people just can't accept the fact that no, not everyone is gay, it's just a few random freaks in a gargantuan population.

  • "a few random freaks"???? oh my goodness, you could not be more wrong......... define a few........like hundreds of millions, and by freaks? what do you mean you moron?!

  • No, actually I did already mention it City. Not that it matters because 90% of my friends are straight and hold the same beliefs, as does my family. Anyone who has gotten to know a gay person well enough tends to be more likely to let them marry. I have yet to meet one person who got to know me well and still would say "No, I don't think you should be able to marry." They see I am a mongomous loving person and no need for me not to be able to marry.

  • Actually, I'm close friends with two gay couples and have been for several years. They don't share your beliefs, but maybe that's a factor of region rather than orientation.

    If you're monogamous, you are an exception in the gay community.

  • the thing about monogamous gay couples is that you never notice them or see them out in clubs/bars, there are far more monogamous gay people than you would immagine, they just usually quietly go about their lives and no body knows they are there

  • So you are close to two gay couples who are not monogamous? Maybe that is just a regional thing like you said. How do they not share my beliefs? Are they in relationships and never want to be married? I find that hard to believe. I have yet to meet any two people who stay together for a long period of time and don't wish to get married, gay or straight. Secondly, I am hardly the minority, you know two gay couples, I know dozens and each of us get into monogous relationships.

  • I didn't say they weren't monogamous. But inferred my opinion on same-sex marriage is a result of not knowing any gay couples:

    "Anyone who has gotten to know a gay person well enough tends to be more likely to let them marry."

    I disagree.

    Secondly, you are definitely in the minority. Best estimates say only 10% of the population are homosexuals. The proposition you supported did not pass. Unless you're a white male, you couldn't be more minority.

  • Marriage = 1 man & 1 woman. Been like that for what... tens of thousands of years? But now we are "enlightened" so let's change it all up so we start teaching all the peculiar different sexual persuasions. Where does it end. Go have your "partners". I don't want you sullying the name of wife and husband.

  • Read up, there is polygomy in the bible and still continues in many places of the world. You think that bible was written tens of thousands of years ago? People became "enlightened" as you said and decided it was only okay to be married to one person, and even when that happened men were still able to have concubines, them being a man or woman. Marriage began as an exchange of property, we have evolved it to be something much more than that and no, not tens of thousands of years ago.

  • I don't care if there is polygamy in the Bible, its not part of our contemporary morality. Now you want to attack the Bible and anyone who professes faith in that book. What next, the Koran? Muslims are much more violent with their opposition to homosexuality. Don't look to the Bible to rationalize your sexuality.

  • You are an idiot they are the ones attacking us, I am just responding to them as to why they aren't okay with polygamy if it is their religion that makes them against homosexuality and once again you have yet to give any legal reason to why homosexuals should not be able to wed. It doesn't do any harm to you or anyone else, but it would make me and others much happier. Or is that it, you just don't want to see gay people be happier. Is this your way of making yourself feel superior?

  • You've gone down the list. Religion, legal, now "you just don't want people to be happy." You've also thrown in the ubiquitous, "it doesn't do any harm to you."

    Lots of immoral acts do me no harm but that doesn't mean I should object to them. Foul language and lewd behavior on television, Strip bars in the neighborhood, poor quality food at the school cafeteria. I object to Homosexuality for many reasons, not the least of which is they demand to be an exception. You're pathetic.

  • Again you proof my point for me. Foul language, strip bars, poor quality of food are all LEGAL. Why? Because there is no LEGAL reason for them not to be. It is just your opinion. Like same sex marriage, it is your opinion that it is wrong, but you have no LEGAL reason for why it should not exist. You keep naming off things you dislike that are legal, which proves to everyone that just because you don't like it doesn't mean it should be illegal. There are tons of things that are legal I dislike.

  • Inanity.

    Behavior is restricted by law; immoral, harmful, distasteful, dangerous. The majority gets to decide which behaviors should be restricted by voting on propositions or electing representation that best reflects their ideals. God bless America!

  • Again Sexuality is not a behavior. Second, good luck convincing the court that homosexuality is harmful to the public. Reality simply won't back you up. Third, since it is an identity (such as race, religion, even gender!) it, BY LAW, cannot be discriminated against.

    The Cali constitution deems marriage as a right. Rights cannot be taken from a minority by the majority.

    "The greatest danger lies...in the body of the people operating by the majority against the minority." James Madison

  • Marriage isn't a right anymore than a driver's license - even to heterosexuals. Sexuality isn't an immutable characteristic like race or gender and religion is specifically protected by the first amendment. Whether homosexuality is harmful to the public is a matter of opinion. The bottom line is that California's public thought it was harmful enough to change their Constitution.

    You lost. Get over it or move to MA.

  • First, Loving vs. Virginia states that marriage IS a right to be protected. Also the Cali STATES it as a right. Second, sexual orientation is "immutable". Again, textbooks are proving to be smarter than you. Third, your personal homophobia does not justify discriminatory legislation. This is about legality, not opinion. America doesn't work like that! People also thought blacks mixing with whites was somehow harmful, yet rights weren't taken by popular vote for them to marry.

  • Textbooks? You're kidding....

    Sexuality is a behavior, thus its changeable. That makes it immutable. Race, Gender, Age...these are things that aren't changeable. Legislation is by the people. This is a Democratic Republic. Law is determined by the people. Proposition 8 is legal. Your point about blacks is moot since race is immutable. Marriage is a rite, not a right. If you're marrying for benefits, you're marrying for the wrong reasons.

  • sexuality its self is not a behaviour. One can behave as a certain sexuality and live a certain life style but that in its self does not define one's sexuality. I always knew I was gay but lived a straight life style for almost 40 years, but even though my behaviour was straight I was always gay.

  • Homosexual BEHAVIOR is the subject of the argument when applied to the 14th amendment of the American constitution. For purposes of the legal argument, the BEHAVIOR is not a protected immutable characteristic like gender or race. All behavior is changeable.

    That being said, marriage is not a right guarantied by any constitution. Not even to heterosexuals. The matter at hand is same-sex marriage. Not whether you think your 'sexuality' is innate or not.