Religious freedom is freedom to believe FOR YOURSELF, not for everybody else. Some Churches, Synagogues and Temples celebrate same-sex marriage. Some people are agnostics or atheists or interfaith. So if two people of the same sex want to get married and that falls into their own religious beliefs or morals they should be able to get married. IF WE UPHELD RELIGIOUS FREEDOM. Our government should not be defining religious relationships nor kinship on religious grounds. Hitler already did it.
This guy: "Prop8Supporter" Deserves to be blackmailed or worse. It is because of people like him that I can no longer get married in my State. Prop8Supporter; Fuck. You.
Fellow Christians, There is a "hate crimes bill" S.909 that was devised by the Anti-Defamation League of B'nai B'rith in order to criminalize Christianity. Any Good Christian who publicly stands up for traditional marriage or protests the millions of babies murdered by abortion will be thrown in jail like in Canada. Check out truthtellers and watch Rev. Ted Pike's videos explaining the danger and then call your Senators toll free at 877-851-6437 and tell them NO on S.909. Save Our Constitution
men beating their women spouses. how cute. homosexual teenagers getting pushed into traintracks. keeping it simple. if you right-wing hate-preachers can answer me this question, i will be content. before you were born, did you choose to be white or black or asian? did you choose to be heterosexual? did you choose to be born at all? i did not choose to be of pure white heritage, nor did i choose to be straight. i didn't even choose my haircolor. think about it, and maybe you'll be human again.
Your kind are missing a core principal that was recognized in the Declaration of Independence and other humanitarian charters. The respect of the spirit of the individual as the universe has made them and their right to Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness, while not stepping on the rights of others.
Theocracies however seem to me more like a hierarchy directed mob rule. If they have too much power, heaven help those who do not conform, regardless of the facts.
Prop8Supporter thinks..."Gays aren't denied the right to marry someone of the other gender."
But everyone is not the same but everyone should be equal in the eyes of the law. What I hear from these testimonials is; "I believe... I believe... I believe". Well belief isn't enough to decide the rights of others.
Too often, people just accept and believe what they're told, especially if done in the name of 'god'. Many times in history that has proven to be very dangerous, deadly and wrong.
1he courts overturned the will of the people because it was taking away rights from a minority If the people voted to make interracial marriage illegal would the courts overturning that be considered undemocratic or wud it be considered standing up for the minorities rights
2if marriage is only about pro-creation then shouldnt people who are infertile, too old to have kids, who dont want to have kids not have the right to marry? of course not then whats so different about gay people
fuck all of you gay bashing church-going bible-thumping biggots. i just saw the movie MILK, and it was fantastic what that man was able to do even when he had lost his electoion 3 times before he actualy won, and he had to stand up to the church goers that said that being gay was wrong. it is not wrong, it is not a choice, and every one should be allowed to be loved, and every one should be allowed to be married.
Those judges overturned the will of the people because that "will" took away the rights of a minority. One of the roles of the courts and it's representatives is to ensure
wow this guy sounds like he was held up at gun point and forced to say this...he has no meaning or passion in his voice...if you're going to state your opinion at least make it sound like you care
does he know that marriage doesnt automatically mean having kids cause that seemed his big part for keeping marriage straight...DUDE! People have kids when they arent married so i'm just saying..that excuse is like out the window
as a hetrosexual may i make it clear that he doesent represent us all gays have just as much right to be free to love who they wish as much as you are i
Ok keep your government out of our religion. Government should have zero say in the world of marriage. Governments don not give rights they take them away. You all have surrendered yourself to the power of a select few. Limit Government.
If Fags want to m,aryy than find a church that will let fags marry - but stop wasting our time!
No worries. The California Supreme Court decision was very clear that it would not infringe upon the rights of religion.
It doesn't force your church to marry gays. However, gay-friendly churches can't marry us right now because they legally aren't allowed. What about their religious freedom.
Besides, the government issues marriage licenses, not the Church. Marriage is primarily a legal institution, and we want to change the legal definition, not YOUR definition.
No - marriage was never a legal institution until government made it so!
This whole arguement is pointless - people who hate fags and people who love fags are ignoring the central issue - we are relying on the Government to grant us rights! What the Government gives it can take away.
The government grants rights to minorities. Welcome to America. Naturally, rights *could* be taken away. The government isn't responsible for that lately though.
If I recall, voters in California stripped a minority of their rights. And same in Florida and Arizona and several other states.
No America rocks, I'll stay here. But if you think that the Constitution can't be changed then you are in a dream World.
If a Gay Marriage ban is enacted in the Constitution will you abide by it?
Anything Granted to you can be taken away. If you feel safe with a list of rights put down on paper then good for you. I feel safer when I own and defend my own rights.
The Constitution can be changed, but the Courts would simply not allow restriction of rights into the Constitution - besides, it would never pass legislature.
Anything granted to us will not be taken away by the government - it's the beauty of democracy - even if it is taken away, we will change it back.
*sigh* You fail to understand the logic by which America was founded.
"We are protesting and fighting for the right to marry, and influencing those making the decisions."
That is what is happening.
By living here, you implicitly state that you agree with the rules - and you can fight said rules, if they are unjust, but to say that you really "own" your rights is foolish.
No - read the founding father's rights are something granted by being a human being. Government was set up not to give us rights. Government inherently takes them away which is why America was founding upon the principle of LIMITED GOVERNMENT!!!
Rights are "guaranteed" by being a human being. However, they are GUARANTEED by the government of the State in which you reside. They are not guaranteed by being a human being ALONE, or else we would need no involvement of government because we would all inherently have equal rights.
Since that is not true, the government must ASSURE, not PROVIDE, rights for vulnerable minorities.
The Courts have actually consistently sided with us, so we will continue to fight for our rights, which the government is not assuring us.
In any case, the true colors have been shown. You're nothing more than an angry homophobe, worried about the gaining of rights of those who think differently than yourself. Go hide in a cave if you must - the times, they are a-changin'.
This is the double standard ot these pro-Gay/pro-Liberal Holywood agenda. When Gore won the popular vote (meaning by majority), they were mad and they even wanted a COnstitutional amendment to do away with the Electoral College. Now that the MAJORITY of Californians, Mormons and non-mormons voted for Prop 8, they want to repel the popular vote. Please make up your mind people.
We don't live in a direct democracy. We live in a Constitutional Republic.
So we directly elect officials (see: Electoral College has no point in today's society). We do not directly vote on minority rights. In fact, Jefferson spoke directly about not allowing such a thing.
It's why the judicial system exists. If everything were up to the majority, women couldn't vote, blacks couldn't vote, much less marry.
Being gay is against democracy?! wow, applied to state constitution, yet it was turned down twice, so apparently a slightly more than half the state vote will count for all, and we'll imprint it into the constitution because we don't want anymore debating on the subject, we shall pave the way for TYRANN...DEMOCRACY!!!
So he thinks a marriage should be between a man and a woman. Why? Where is his arguement? No where. Like the point of this video. Sheep being led by the nose. He needs to think for himself and stop reading off the queue cards.
This guy does not have a clear opinion. He is being led by whoever produced this video. What is he now going to do to make sure that traditional marriage does not end in divorce. What is he going to do to make sure that all the women having children out of wedlock stop? Nothing. This guy is a sheep, being led by the nose. By the way, judges overturn all types of rulings, higher courts overturn lower court decisions constantly. Get your head out of the sand and think for yourself.
What the hell do you care whether two people who love each other want to get married? How does that affect you? Answer: It doesn't. Can you say "homophobe"?
If you lie to people and scare them into voting then of course they'd support you. Saying that heterosexuals deserve the special title of marriage because of procreation isn't fair to heterosexuals who DON'T want children or can't have children. Should they not be allowed to get married too? AS IF THIS WORLD NEEDS MORE BASTARDS RUNNING AROUND.
the people have spokens yes on 8 americans let's stop them and keep it that way and cut that bullshit out saying it's a human rights things and civil rights wow gays not a right it's a choose.....
thank you for giving me more fight than you shall ever know. I will work tirelessly to overturn prop 8 and any other law or action which denies me or other gay people freedom under the same sky. What ever motivation you have given, you have given raise to a force greater than you. It's one based on one simple truth, freedom will not be withheld without a fight. It's been to long, but I have finally arrived and found my calling. Thank you. A gay, black ex morman who no longer is in hiding.
Why is he even using the word democracy. Oh my god... There are steril (english is not my native language sorry) couples that canät have children and they are straight. Should they also not be able to get married? Cuz they cant have kids? huh??? And marriage itself already has that special status. I (personally) want everyone to at least to expierience marriage or be able to be in a marriage with someone of the same sex...
Constitutional Republics are a deliberate attempt to diminish the threat of MOB-OCRACY thereby protecting dissenting individuals and MINORITY GROUPS from the TYRANNY of the majority by placing theoretical checks on the power of the majority of the population.
We are so fed up being treated like we are evil and in need of surveillance in our rights and in our bedrooms!
What evil is it we are supposed to have done! Confess it with your mouth - on camera!
He's a lawyer? Can't be one that understands the U.S. Constitution. He doesn't realize we live in a constitutional republic. Evidently he's being taught by people who want to live in a theocracy.
Look out everybody. If you want to live in a theocracy just keep sitting on your hands. His kind have been working at nullifying the Constitution for at least 8 yrs. It has been a gradual process. You'll help them by denying civil liberties like marriage, privacy, expressing thought, habeas corpus.
So marriages that can't have children aren't real marriages? The purpose of marriage is to have children? If you don't have children, then you should not be able to marry. You can love and marry someone, unless you want to have children?
When the Nazis came for the communists, I remained silent; I was not a communist. When they locked up the social democrats, I remained silent; I was not a social democrat. When they came for the trade unionists, I did not speak out; I was not a trade unionist. When they came for the Jews, I remained silent; I was not a Jew. When they came for me, there was no one left to speak out.
The argument about "activist judges" ENTIRELY misses the point of the supreme court. When several judges overturned "separate but equal" laws in Brown v the Board of Education, was that a threat to the democratic process? No. The court's job is to protect rights in cases when majority rule fails to do so. And unfortunately it's become painfully obvious that the majority of straight people in California have no interest in protecting the rights of queer people, so the court had to step in.
So according to you, only couples who can reproduce deserve to get married? With that logic, opposite-sex couples who can not reproduce due to financial, biological, and/or personal reasons should be stripped of their right to marry each other. 200 years ago the will of the people was that black people were subhuman, existing only to serve the white man. Did that make it right?
Actually statistically, it was the hispanic and black vote that swung the passing of Prop 8. (: Just thought you should know. (; 70% of African Americans who voted, voted yes on 8 and the majority of hispanics did as well. Do some research.
Protect the Children. The children's minds are so impressionable. Protect the children at all cost. It's good that Prop 8 passed. Childrens' minds can no longer be corrupted in schools.
Corrupted how? By learning that different people live different ways? By learning acceptance and tolerance for views and ideals they may not share? The corruption you speak of stems from homophobia, plain and simple.
Learn this: you do not have the right to limit someone's aspirations.
also if a marriage between man and woman is the only "right" way to marry how come most child abuse, spousal beating and adultery so prominent in straight couple? I mean is it because traditional marriage is just a flawed as any kind of marriage and this proposition is just trying to get a "religious" view in marriage?
ok i dont mean to be immature or anything, but your full of shit. bcuz gay couples all have a man in the relationship. one is either more feminine or manly. i have many friends that are gay, and allof them wish to marry one day. and if you take that away, what else is left? everyone talks shit about gay people. theyre all humans!!! no matter what. its gonna happen maybe not now. but gay marriage Will become legal, EVERYWHERE.
2: If heterosexual marriages deserve special, untouchable status just because they allow for procreation, then it stands to reason that sterile couples or couples who just don't want to have children shouldn't be allowed to marry, either. Is that what you believe?
If not, come up with another reason and try again.
1: Not long ago the majority of U.S. citizens believed that slavery was good and important, and it took the courts' influence to protect and guarantee the rights of those enslaved. Even more recently, the majority of U.S. citizens believed that interracial couples should not be allowed to marry, and again the courts had to step in. Just because a group is a minority doesn't mean they don't have the right to be treated fairly.
Prop 8 is just a well funded hate speech. I'm so tired of seeing all the Yes on Prop 8 signs on my neighbors lawns. It just advertises your hate for other people. I don't understand what message you are sending your children when you don't want two people to love each other? and to use the bible as a reference? You mean the same book that tells you not to cut your fucking hair?
Protect marriage? How are you protecting something that heterosexual couples BARELY live up to? NO ON 8!!!
I'm sorry. This comment fails on multiple levels. First off, the Bible may say that you shouldn't cut your hair OUT OF CONTEXT. Out of context means that you single out a single passage without reading the surrounding passages to gather meaning from them. Second of all, I dont hate gay people, I respect them. But like the man on this video said, I believe straight marriage deserves a special title because it is the NATURAL form of union between humans, this natural form meaning we can procreate.
and no its not taught in schools it will just undersood there is nothing wrong with gay people getting married. Which the children dont have a problem with. But the parents do b/c they jump to the past to decide what the future should hold. Basically the way they were brought up with a mom and a dad is the only way they think. That is how people justify the future.The now means nothing but tradition means alot. So ignorant. Love is love ignorance is ignorance sir.
This guy says he believes MARRIAGE is between a man and a woman. He's in good company. Governor Arnold and Barack Obama also believe marriage is between a man and woman, and yet they OPPOSE Prop 8.
WHY? Because like most folks, they can actually tell the difference between BELIEVING in something and FORCING that belief on everybody else.
WARNING: these "yes" people are clones of Fred Phelps and his demonic preachings. these are the "God Hates Fags" people. the subhumans who think they "love" us more than our families, because they tell us the "truth" about God. there is NO reasoning with them. there is NO getting through to them. it's futile to be nice or mean or angry or human..they are robotic in their beliefs. this is why they can stand in your face and say they love you as they hold a "God Hates Fags" sign.
Im gay and have a traditional marriage. We go to work, take our daughter to the park, pay our bill, and VOTE just like you do. Don't take our rights away just because you have a different belief. If you don't believe in gay marriage, don't have one.
Okay, there are so many things wrong with this. What he's saying is only traditional marriages deserve to be recognized, his exact words! That's discrimination. This video says more against prop 8 that for it.
If "traditional marriage" is for producing a family, then those who are infertile should not be allowed to be married, and children should be mandatory for a marriage to stay valid
What will we have to give up next for the cults, public schools, Halloween, Christmas, TV shows? Next the gays will go to prison. Next you will have to go to prison for speaking up for your rights. Then you will have to go to their cult church. How much will you give up before you give up America to the cults?
Vote no on prop h8te. Vote to keep your freedom. Tell the cults that it stops here now.
Video Tim tells the story of Prop 22, which was found to be unconstitutional by the Supreme Court.
Then the CA Legislature (the ones we elect to make laws, remember?) passed AB 43 in 2006, legalizing same-sex marriage. The governor vetoed it. He wrote in his veto statement that to solve the marriage issue, the CA Supreme Court needed to "finish its rule on the challenge" which had been made to Prop 22.
Funny how Tim left that part out.
You don't think he could be trying to trick voters, do you?
The activist judges as you call them, were the CA Supreme Court, of whom 6 out of 7 are Republican appointees. They did not overturn the rule of law. They found Prop 22 unconstitutional.
If youre really a lawyer, then you know the meaning of these terms and you're deliberately misrepresenting them to sway voters.
If you have to resort to that, it makes me question whether you have any honest arguments in favor of this misguided attempt to meddle with our Constitution.
ok, how moronic is this..I bet this idiot uses birth control..if so he is going against his own reasoning. if u use birth control u should not be allowed to marry according to his logic. such hypocrites. These idiots don't even know that the judiciary branch is suppose to determine the constitutionality of laws.. that's there job !!! where do these idiots get their education ??
Is this guy really a lawyer? 'Cause if he don't know it is the RESPONSIBILITY of courts to protect and defend the constitution, he must be a pretty bad one... Any law or code MUST respect the principles and rules of the constitution.
And if prop 8 is about procreation, should we prohibit marriage for elderly people, or forbit the use of contraception among married couples??? And what of lesbians couple who are using sperm banks to have children?
ok If we pass a law saying idiots like u should be put to death then ur only hope is if the courts decide that law is unconstitutional because it's not a crime to be an idiot.. would u call it tyranny ?
penalize adulterers so that they can protect their marriage! prop 8 should penalize who commit adultery! whoever gets caught sleeping with another man or woman should be jailed or death penalty! and im sure most victims would be heterosexuals!
Yes on 8 (protect marriage) means to lessen divorce cases. fact: they can't protect their marriage because the USA has the highest divorce cases. fact: prop 8 can't protect themselves at all! prop 8 is just hate!
God did not make just man and woman...what about intersexed people you morons?? we exist too and we're not even IN the BIBLE. Until you ignoramuses realize and accept that God created all "diverse" things, this battle will never end and your "precious" children will be exposed to yet another unneccessary war. Good luck.
Well if it is really about having children, polygamy produces even more offspring...hmmm...how about proposition 8.5-marriage is between a man and women? Don't be stupid! Marriage is not about procreation! Sex is. Prop 8 hides behind a "moral" agenda when it is really about a religious vendetta against sexual deviance. Nobody can really say that same sex unions cheapen marriage. Bad people ruin marriage! Are gays and bad people one and the same? I think not.
It was activist judges who made it possible for blacks and whites to marry. mmmmmmm I can see why you wouldnt want to errode merrage any more after that debacle. However, it seems that none of you biggots say one word about ammending the constitution to forbid divorce. If you want to preserve merrage so much then put your money where your mouth is!!
really, what does it matter? Why can't women marry women / men marry men? I mean, they're still humans, and I think it's fine as long as you can LOVE somebody,, I don't care!!
I think prop 8 is total bull shit and the people who vote yes are nuts... ¬___¬
Seriousely,, let people be happy the way they want.. not letting them get married DESTROYS their happiness...
Yes, marriage between man and a woman and biologically create children, but not every man and woman who marry each other HAVE CHILDREN. If the requirement that marriage requires the couple to HAVE CHILDREN then we have taken the issue to a whole other realm. So, are you saying that straight couples without children are not truly married? Are you saying that married couples who adopt are also somehow below those who have biological children? Explain.
Since you're a lawyer, shouldn't you know that wanting the gov't to give a "particular endorsement" of one group over another is kinda the antithesis of equal protection? And doesn't your argument apply with equal force to the CA Supreme Court's very similar 1948 decision of Perez v. Sharpe which held that laws banning interracial marriage were unconstitutional? Be careful not to adopt the same reasoning of the bigots of yesteryear. We've got to learn from history's lessons, my friend.
Activist judges? You mean like the ones that overrode the will of the people and ended segregation ... or the ones who ended the ban on interracial marriage?
As for creating children... I recently got married (a civil service) and the wedding vows didn't say ANYTHING about children. They just talked about love, honor, "till death do us part", etc. Pretty strange, huh? I mean, since, as you say, creating children is the special, defining thing about marriage.
so, tim, what are you going to do with all those babies that straight couples have if they don't want them? there aren't that many infertile people out there. having both a mother and a father caring for a child might be better for the child than having two dads or two moms, depending on the way you look at it - but divorce is legal, right? surely two moms or two dads with children is better for the children and closer to the "traditional family" you talk about than one single parent.
Oh, and by the way, who's paying you? It wouldn't be a "non-profit" organization such as a church affiliated out of state group I hope, because they stand to lose their non-profit status by taking a side on this issue, thus rendering them vulnerable to be taxed just as any other business is, and believe me, if people find out the truth, they will report you.
Dude, Gay Marriage have been in affect for months and have that affected you in any way or form? If you are married, have that affected your marriage. This is about fundamental rights.
bebelove110, Voting yes on 8 does not preserve traditional marriage. Everyone has the right to freedom of religion, and that means you have the right to your views on your marriage and how you want your marriage to be like. Voting yes on 8 introduces discrimination and prejudice into our Constitution and threatens the fundamental morals of equality, justice and fairness that form the foundation of our Constitution.
The will of the people? What if the people want to slaughter all Jews? Or re-enslave all blacks?
You're a lawyer? Obviously not a constitutional lawyer. Do you know what a constitution is? It's a set of basic laws that no subsequent legislation can contradict. Do you know what a judge is partly responsible for? MAKING SURE NO SUBSEQUENT LAWS CONTRADICT THE CONSTITUTION you fucking retard of a lawyer.
I'm not gay, I'm not a huge gay marriage supporter, I just hate bullshit and fucking idiots.
Constitutional law is not as clearly defined as you claim. Several dozen courts who have considered the question have concluded that the constitution does not mandate gay marriage. The state constitutions at issue were closely compared to California's constitution.
There is a reason that judges may overturn decisions by the people, and actually, it is rooted in our original constitution: the framers were worried that the common person's feelings and personal opinions would be too strong to allow them to make rational decisions.
This is why we have the electoral college, instead of just allowing the people to directly elect their president. If the supreme court hadn't stepped in for black rights, women's rights, and many other (at the time) "heated issues," who knows how long it would have taken the public to come around?
Additionally, there's no way this man is a lawyer. Someone of the intelligence displayed in this video could not possibly have passed the bar exam.
When the court "steps in," as you put it, it should do so only with a clear constitutional mandate. Race is clearly a protected category, but whether homosexuality is protected, and whether marriage is actually a civil right, is disputable. Many other lawyers agree with me.
The constitution also does not mention race. It didn't mention public education. It didn't mention a lot of things, but that doesn't mean that the public is automatically going to be educated enough to make an informed decision on most of those issues.
A vote of yes is a vote for continued discrimanation and continued bigotry. Do you really want to consider yourself as narrow minded as that. And besides...how the heck is your own marriage threatened by this. You need to re-examine your motives.
Firstly... who is the drunk behind the camera? Secondly... why should merely male and female couples get the "particular endorsement"? Also, sometimes laws are in violation of the constitution... And for your more "substantive" reason... are you saying only fertile couples should be married? Why do all of you care? You don't have to get married to a person with matching crotch luggage! God doesn't use his power to take human choices away... are you so much better to judge?
First off, the matter of one's ability to reproduce should be no factor in deciding whether or not a relationship is valid. Secondly, I'll have you know that the right of mixed race couples to marry was voted against in the nineteen sixties. Does that make it wrong that it was turned down?
You obviously have no idea what the rule of law means. What about those black-robed monsters who overturned Plessy v. Ferguson? What if we had just left that one to a vote? You are fighting on the side of bigotry no matter how you slice it. Well done.
Are people who oppose driver's licenses for the blind "fighting on the side of bigotry?" Most state courts who considered the issue have decided that gay marriage is not mandated by the constitution, it is best left to the people.
I disagree with you that gay weddings are in any way comparable to blind drivers, but at least now I understand the urgency of your position. It echoes George Wallace's call for "segregation now, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever."
Denying the blind the right to drive improves everybody's life. Denying homosexuals the right to marry has no effect on your life or mine, but a significant impact on the lives of many gay people.
Lawyer, it's telling that you keyed in on my accusation of bigotry, and not the overturning of Plessy. Perhaps your keen legal eye missed the simple truth that some issues are unpopular yet correct.
They were not "activist judges". Most were Republicans. Of course many people disagree with the result, but judges are in fact supposed to overturn laws that are in conflict with the constitution. That is their job. Have you actually read the ruling? If you have not, you are not in a position to condemn it just because you don't like the result.
Many activist judges are appointed by Republicans. The term doesn't mean "appointed by a republican," it means that the judge has used the constitution as an excuse to impose his particular views on votors.
I have read the ruling, and the dissent, and the dissent is correct.
Shifty eyes, searching for words...Why can't someone more articulate explain this position to me? I did not hear any reasons explained for why "marriage" is reserved for heterosexual relationships. You just rephrased the same idea repeatedly.
wow... I guess old people, people who choose to not have children, and people who CAN'T have children shouldn't be able to get married. This is the worst argument for prop 8.
So you're saying only men and women can produce children so only men and women should be allowed to marry? So I guess that means that sterile people shouldn't be allowed to marry, because they can't produce children?
In this election season the people of this country are showing their true colors. Those who are racists attack Obama with all sorts of insults. Those who support prop 8 reveal their stance against human and civil rights. They in essence are saying they are discriminating against a group of people who are different then them. Those gay folks make a mutual aggrement to commit to one another in a marriage and for one to deprive them of it is a sign of bigotry. I thought people were beyond that.
It should come as no surprise that the Mormon religion which used to forbid blacks from joining their cult are the main group behind the proposition that will eliminate the rights of yet another minority group. VOTE NO ON PROP 8!
we can't just change the definition of marriage. That would lead to people getting divorced or remarried or mixed race couples.
wait a minute.....
Tacoflavoredkiss1 9 months ago
We dont all get married to have kids!
dudeboobs15 1 year ago
Stop stuttering pathetic ignorant person, go educate yourself. Learn of what you think prop 8 is. Do not give these people bull shit. So F off.
Next time around, the LGSBT society will prevaile.
NO on Prop H8!!!!!
tacolovr89 2 years ago
States have every right to ban gay marriage.
AmericanAirlinesRule 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Religious freedom is freedom to believe FOR YOURSELF, not for everybody else. Some Churches, Synagogues and Temples celebrate same-sex marriage. Some people are agnostics or atheists or interfaith. So if two people of the same sex want to get married and that falls into their own religious beliefs or morals they should be able to get married. IF WE UPHELD RELIGIOUS FREEDOM. Our government should not be defining religious relationships nor kinship on religious grounds. Hitler already did it.
muellerican 2 years ago 2
This guy: "Prop8Supporter" Deserves to be blackmailed or worse. It is because of people like him that I can no longer get married in my State. Prop8Supporter; Fuck. You.
portylad4 2 years ago 4
Fags like you don't deserve rights.
AmericanAirlinesRule 2 years ago
ha! loserrrrrrrr
jessismg 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Fellow Christians, There is a "hate crimes bill" S.909 that was devised by the Anti-Defamation League of B'nai B'rith in order to criminalize Christianity. Any Good Christian who publicly stands up for traditional marriage or protests the millions of babies murdered by abortion will be thrown in jail like in Canada. Check out truthtellers and watch Rev. Ted Pike's videos explaining the danger and then call your Senators toll free at 877-851-6437 and tell them NO on S.909. Save Our Constitution
standupforfreedom153 2 years ago
the whole marriage/kids thing is a joke, what about infertle and old people they cant have kids so then they really arent married?
idaman12345 2 years ago 8
who ever made these videos is a complete loser
GodlySaiyan 2 years ago 12
This comment has received too many negative votes show
u are so hot. let's fuck.
svlirio2001 2 years ago
men beating their women spouses. how cute. homosexual teenagers getting pushed into traintracks. keeping it simple. if you right-wing hate-preachers can answer me this question, i will be content. before you were born, did you choose to be white or black or asian? did you choose to be heterosexual? did you choose to be born at all? i did not choose to be of pure white heritage, nor did i choose to be straight. i didn't even choose my haircolor. think about it, and maybe you'll be human again.
fishbowl4202 3 years ago 2
Hmm, I guess I expected a lawyer to be more intelligent.
jajohnson7809 3 years ago 2
The state does not have the right to establish a religion...And you're a bigot.
jesuriah 3 years ago 5
to prop 8 supporters;
Your kind are missing a core principal that was recognized in the Declaration of Independence and other humanitarian charters. The respect of the spirit of the individual as the universe has made them and their right to Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness, while not stepping on the rights of others.
Theocracies however seem to me more like a hierarchy directed mob rule. If they have too much power, heaven help those who do not conform, regardless of the facts.
eVVVVV 3 years ago 2
Prop8Supporter thinks..."Gays aren't denied the right to marry someone of the other gender."
But everyone is not the same but everyone should be equal in the eyes of the law. What I hear from these testimonials is; "I believe... I believe... I believe". Well belief isn't enough to decide the rights of others.
Too often, people just accept and believe what they're told, especially if done in the name of 'god'. Many times in history that has proven to be very dangerous, deadly and wrong.
eVVVVV 3 years ago
1he courts overturned the will of the people because it was taking away rights from a minority If the people voted to make interracial marriage illegal would the courts overturning that be considered undemocratic or wud it be considered standing up for the minorities rights
2if marriage is only about pro-creation then shouldnt people who are infertile, too old to have kids, who dont want to have kids not have the right to marry? of course not then whats so different about gay people
wforsythe123 3 years ago
ass holes
D:<
outcastz6 3 years ago
My two problems with this video
1) The reasons the courts are there in the first place is to protect the constitution which is why they struck down prop 22
2) Infertile couples and old people are allowed to marry, and many gay people choose to adopt
whenhen 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
fuck all of you gay bashing church-going bible-thumping biggots. i just saw the movie MILK, and it was fantastic what that man was able to do even when he had lost his electoion 3 times before he actualy won, and he had to stand up to the church goers that said that being gay was wrong. it is not wrong, it is not a choice, and every one should be allowed to be loved, and every one should be allowed to be married.
littlekiller666 3 years ago
Those judges overturned the will of the people because that "will" took away the rights of a minority. One of the roles of the courts and it's representatives is to ensure
equality under the law for all it's citizens.
That includes members ig the LGBT community.
ginb1289 3 years ago
wow this guy sounds like he was held up at gun point and forced to say this...he has no meaning or passion in his voice...if you're going to state your opinion at least make it sound like you care
badreligionrules 3 years ago
does he know that marriage doesnt automatically mean having kids cause that seemed his big part for keeping marriage straight...DUDE! People have kids when they arent married so i'm just saying..that excuse is like out the window
AFILANW 3 years ago
as a hetrosexual may i make it clear that he doesent represent us all gays have just as much right to be free to love who they wish as much as you are i
nezahualcoyotl85 3 years ago
was he reading this?
omgilovemcr 3 years ago 3
Yo, you ugly. No one would marry you.
xanderoz 3 years ago 2
interesting but wrong. when did democracy became better. was it when a group's right were taken away by another group? .
nonthiestnc 3 years ago 2
marriage is a sacred union between man and woman
99988743 3 years ago
According to your religion.
To me, it's between two consenting adults.
Keep your religion out of the government, and I will not boycott your businesses.
kthx.
svenarvidtadhg 3 years ago 3
Ok keep your government out of our religion. Government should have zero say in the world of marriage. Governments don not give rights they take them away. You all have surrendered yourself to the power of a select few. Limit Government.
If Fags want to m,aryy than find a church that will let fags marry - but stop wasting our time!
begby69th 3 years ago
No worries. The California Supreme Court decision was very clear that it would not infringe upon the rights of religion.
It doesn't force your church to marry gays. However, gay-friendly churches can't marry us right now because they legally aren't allowed. What about their religious freedom.
Besides, the government issues marriage licenses, not the Church. Marriage is primarily a legal institution, and we want to change the legal definition, not YOUR definition.
svenarvidtadhg 3 years ago
No - marriage was never a legal institution until government made it so!
This whole arguement is pointless - people who hate fags and people who love fags are ignoring the central issue - we are relying on the Government to grant us rights! What the Government gives it can take away.
begby69th 3 years ago
Uh, wow.
I'm guessing you're in the former.
The government grants rights to minorities. Welcome to America. Naturally, rights *could* be taken away. The government isn't responsible for that lately though.
If I recall, voters in California stripped a minority of their rights. And same in Florida and Arizona and several other states.
svenarvidtadhg 3 years ago
Anything granted to you is a priveledge.
begby69th 3 years ago
Witness, ladies and gentlemen, the forfeit of logic!
svenarvidtadhg 3 years ago
Yes you are out of logic. What is granted can be taken away.
begby69th 3 years ago
Not when it goes against the Constitution to do so.
Welcome to America. Have a good time, and if you hate the fags so much, I suggest you go live in Iran.
svenarvidtadhg 3 years ago
No America rocks, I'll stay here. But if you think that the Constitution can't be changed then you are in a dream World.
If a Gay Marriage ban is enacted in the Constitution will you abide by it?
Anything Granted to you can be taken away. If you feel safe with a list of rights put down on paper then good for you. I feel safer when I own and defend my own rights.
begby69th 3 years ago
The Constitution can be changed, but the Courts would simply not allow restriction of rights into the Constitution - besides, it would never pass legislature.
Anything granted to us will not be taken away by the government - it's the beauty of democracy - even if it is taken away, we will change it back.
svenarvidtadhg 3 years ago
OK - just like Gay marriage right? If you rely on someone else for your rights - you have just ceded them to that person/entity.
begby69th 3 years ago
Your logic does not follow in a republic based on election of representatives.
We are protesting and fighting for the right to marry, and influencing those making the decisions.
However, this is America.
By living in America, you tacitly and implicitly agree to live by its rules - and that is to say, to "cede" one's rights to a representative.
We don't live in a Hobbesian world, either in the War state or the Absolute state.
We don't own all of our rights, nor do we have no control.
svenarvidtadhg 3 years ago
Congratulations - so then by your logic you should now cease hoping for Gay marriage - as you have stated: "Cede one's rights to a representative."
begby69th 3 years ago
*sigh* You fail to understand the logic by which America was founded.
"We are protesting and fighting for the right to marry, and influencing those making the decisions."
That is what is happening.
By living here, you implicitly state that you agree with the rules - and you can fight said rules, if they are unjust, but to say that you really "own" your rights is foolish.
svenarvidtadhg 3 years ago
Then they are not rights! If they are not yours then they are something granted i.e. privledges
begby69th 3 years ago
Again, you misunderstand the meaning of words in the American governmental vernacular.
Rights are things that either are or should be guaranteed by the government.
Hence, why gay marriage is a right.
svenarvidtadhg 3 years ago
No - read the founding father's rights are something granted by being a human being. Government was set up not to give us rights. Government inherently takes them away which is why America was founding upon the principle of LIMITED GOVERNMENT!!!
begby69th 3 years ago
Ugh.
Rights are "guaranteed" by being a human being. However, they are GUARANTEED by the government of the State in which you reside. They are not guaranteed by being a human being ALONE, or else we would need no involvement of government because we would all inherently have equal rights.
Since that is not true, the government must ASSURE, not PROVIDE, rights for vulnerable minorities.
svenarvidtadhg 3 years ago
Well this government has decided you fags have no rights so abide by it dick licker!
begby69th 3 years ago
Wow.
The Courts have actually consistently sided with us, so we will continue to fight for our rights, which the government is not assuring us.
In any case, the true colors have been shown. You're nothing more than an angry homophobe, worried about the gaining of rights of those who think differently than yourself. Go hide in a cave if you must - the times, they are a-changin'.
svenarvidtadhg 3 years ago
This is the double standard ot these pro-Gay/pro-Liberal Holywood agenda. When Gore won the popular vote (meaning by majority), they were mad and they even wanted a COnstitutional amendment to do away with the Electoral College. Now that the MAJORITY of Californians, Mormons and non-mormons voted for Prop 8, they want to repel the popular vote. Please make up your mind people.
alexgomez2 3 years ago
Wait, what?
Fail.
We don't live in a direct democracy. We live in a Constitutional Republic.
So we directly elect officials (see: Electoral College has no point in today's society). We do not directly vote on minority rights. In fact, Jefferson spoke directly about not allowing such a thing.
It's why the judicial system exists. If everything were up to the majority, women couldn't vote, blacks couldn't vote, much less marry.
svenarvidtadhg 3 years ago
You know what else was overturned by judges? Many of the Jim Crow laws, AGAINST the will of the people! Yes on 8! Segregation forever!
crazytvfan815 3 years ago 2
Being gay is against democracy?! wow, applied to state constitution, yet it was turned down twice, so apparently a slightly more than half the state vote will count for all, and we'll imprint it into the constitution because we don't want anymore debating on the subject, we shall pave the way for TYRANN...DEMOCRACY!!!
territh17 3 years ago
So he thinks a marriage should be between a man and a woman. Why? Where is his arguement? No where. Like the point of this video. Sheep being led by the nose. He needs to think for himself and stop reading off the queue cards.
shybearsf 3 years ago
This guy does not have a clear opinion. He is being led by whoever produced this video. What is he now going to do to make sure that traditional marriage does not end in divorce. What is he going to do to make sure that all the women having children out of wedlock stop? Nothing. This guy is a sheep, being led by the nose. By the way, judges overturn all types of rulings, higher courts overturn lower court decisions constantly. Get your head out of the sand and think for yourself.
shybearsf 3 years ago
here here
LovexViolence69 3 years ago
Wait until one of your kids turn out to be gay and then record another video.
designermiami 3 years ago
That is not the point of this video. He is stating that marriage should be defined as a man and a woman.
ma7799 3 years ago
Didn't change my dad's opinion, sure it wouldn't change this guy's. =P
Also, is it just me or does he sound like he's joking? The little chuckle, the uncomfortable attitude. It just seems like a parody.
svenarvidtadhg 3 years ago 2
What the hell do you care whether two people who love each other want to get married? How does that affect you? Answer: It doesn't. Can you say "homophobe"?
philip0460 3 years ago
If you lie to people and scare them into voting then of course they'd support you. Saying that heterosexuals deserve the special title of marriage because of procreation isn't fair to heterosexuals who DON'T want children or can't have children. Should they not be allowed to get married too? AS IF THIS WORLD NEEDS MORE BASTARDS RUNNING AROUND.
yo1o2eggs 3 years ago
Judicial review is apart of our democracy nutjob.
dwbeerma 3 years ago
what do you get when you put a dress shirt & tie on a redneck?
a redneck playing dress up.
JonathanTits 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
the people have spokens yes on 8 americans let's stop them and keep it that way and cut that bullshit out saying it's a human rights things and civil rights wow gays not a right it's a choose.....
MACCAPONE60 3 years ago
thank you for giving me more fight than you shall ever know. I will work tirelessly to overturn prop 8 and any other law or action which denies me or other gay people freedom under the same sky. What ever motivation you have given, you have given raise to a force greater than you. It's one based on one simple truth, freedom will not be withheld without a fight. It's been to long, but I have finally arrived and found my calling. Thank you. A gay, black ex morman who no longer is in hiding.
pcpers 3 years ago
Why is he even using the word democracy. Oh my god... There are steril (english is not my native language sorry) couples that canät have children and they are straight. Should they also not be able to get married? Cuz they cant have kids? huh??? And marriage itself already has that special status. I (personally) want everyone to at least to expierience marriage or be able to be in a marriage with someone of the same sex...
OMGPatte 3 years ago
asshole!
OMGPatte 3 years ago
Constitutional Republics are a deliberate attempt to diminish the threat of MOB-OCRACY thereby protecting dissenting individuals and MINORITY GROUPS from the TYRANNY of the majority by placing theoretical checks on the power of the majority of the population.
We are so fed up being treated like we are evil and in need of surveillance in our rights and in our bedrooms!
What evil is it we are supposed to have done! Confess it with your mouth - on camera!
eVVVVV 3 years ago
He's a lawyer? Can't be one that understands the U.S. Constitution. He doesn't realize we live in a constitutional republic. Evidently he's being taught by people who want to live in a theocracy.
Look out everybody. If you want to live in a theocracy just keep sitting on your hands. His kind have been working at nullifying the Constitution for at least 8 yrs. It has been a gradual process. You'll help them by denying civil liberties like marriage, privacy, expressing thought, habeas corpus.
eVVVVV 3 years ago
So marriages that can't have children aren't real marriages? The purpose of marriage is to have children? If you don't have children, then you should not be able to marry. You can love and marry someone, unless you want to have children?
Is this person a fucking idiot?
JustinWar 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
tjparsell 3 years ago 2
get an open mind
get a valid arguemnt
get a life
get a personality
get fucked.
Waffguin 3 years ago 2
You did not give one substantive argument. All you did was give a personal insult. At least you were able to be creative and use the F-word.
coolkid242 3 years ago
Waffguin is right!!
OMGPatte 3 years ago
The argument about "activist judges" ENTIRELY misses the point of the supreme court. When several judges overturned "separate but equal" laws in Brown v the Board of Education, was that a threat to the democratic process? No. The court's job is to protect rights in cases when majority rule fails to do so. And unfortunately it's become painfully obvious that the majority of straight people in California have no interest in protecting the rights of queer people, so the court had to step in.
johnwaynefantasy 3 years ago
So marriages that can't have children aren't real marriages? The purpose of marriage is to have children? Is that what you're trying to say?
jackalbane 3 years ago 2
Oh my God this is so stupid his reasons are just so dumb that my shit can rebuttal them.
moniequa 3 years ago
So according to you, only couples who can reproduce deserve to get married? With that logic, opposite-sex couples who can not reproduce due to financial, biological, and/or personal reasons should be stripped of their right to marry each other. 200 years ago the will of the people was that black people were subhuman, existing only to serve the white man. Did that make it right?
vincentakavinnyboy 3 years ago
it look like u have to take a piss or something ur fucking boncing all over the place
preserving democracy would mean to not pass 8 u fucking dumb ass
ive seen many pasty white conservatives LIKE YOU watching gay and lesbian porn so u better shut the fuck up
you ho
trvrpope 3 years ago
Actually statistically, it was the hispanic and black vote that swung the passing of Prop 8. (: Just thought you should know. (; 70% of African Americans who voted, voted yes on 8 and the majority of hispanics did as well. Do some research.
tangxperky 3 years ago
Get a fucking tripod.
Person1579 3 years ago
you sait it ;)
DhiscoStu 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
fuck religion
THEdownfallOFmanKIND 3 years ago
Protect the Children. The children's minds are so impressionable. Protect the children at all cost. It's good that Prop 8 passed. Childrens' minds can no longer be corrupted in schools.
ldsdigitalmedia 3 years ago
Corrupted how? By learning that different people live different ways? By learning acceptance and tolerance for views and ideals they may not share? The corruption you speak of stems from homophobia, plain and simple.
Learn this: you do not have the right to limit someone's aspirations.
FinalStrife7 3 years ago
DO YOU ALSO DIVORCE ABOLISHING DIVORCE???
also if a marriage between man and woman is the only "right" way to marry how come most child abuse, spousal beating and adultery so prominent in straight couple? I mean is it because traditional marriage is just a flawed as any kind of marriage and this proposition is just trying to get a "religious" view in marriage?
catch22af 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
KILL ALL MORMONS
then
BAN ALL DIVORCES
MormonsAreBigots 3 years ago
dysfunkshonalkidd 3 years ago
2: If heterosexual marriages deserve special, untouchable status just because they allow for procreation, then it stands to reason that sterile couples or couples who just don't want to have children shouldn't be allowed to marry, either. Is that what you believe?
If not, come up with another reason and try again.
astarrystar 3 years ago
Here is your reason,,
Gay rights are and were made up by a judge.
Incest, polygamy, bestial, pedophile and necro rights CAN and WILL also be made up by a judge in a like manner.
Sooo,,, you want gay rights,,, pass it in congress where we recognize all our other laws.
Just because a judge is doing your dirty work and bypassing congress does not make it right.
To do otherwise is to approve OTHER rights you don't like.
Thats the reason,,, hypocrite
sadskippy 3 years ago
1: Not long ago the majority of U.S. citizens believed that slavery was good and important, and it took the courts' influence to protect and guarantee the rights of those enslaved. Even more recently, the majority of U.S. citizens believed that interracial couples should not be allowed to marry, and again the courts had to step in. Just because a group is a minority doesn't mean they don't have the right to be treated fairly.
astarrystar 3 years ago
Prop 8 is just a well funded hate speech. I'm so tired of seeing all the Yes on Prop 8 signs on my neighbors lawns. It just advertises your hate for other people. I don't understand what message you are sending your children when you don't want two people to love each other? and to use the bible as a reference? You mean the same book that tells you not to cut your fucking hair?
Protect marriage? How are you protecting something that heterosexual couples BARELY live up to? NO ON 8!!!
Torstvet25 3 years ago
I'm sorry. This comment fails on multiple levels. First off, the Bible may say that you shouldn't cut your hair OUT OF CONTEXT. Out of context means that you single out a single passage without reading the surrounding passages to gather meaning from them. Second of all, I dont hate gay people, I respect them. But like the man on this video said, I believe straight marriage deserves a special title because it is the NATURAL form of union between humans, this natural form meaning we can procreate.
D3monHunt3r999 3 years ago
NO ON 8! everyone should have equal rights!!
lololololfunfunfun 3 years ago 3
This has been flagged as spam show
and no its not taught in schools it will just undersood there is nothing wrong with gay people getting married. Which the children dont have a problem with. But the parents do b/c they jump to the past to decide what the future should hold. Basically the way they were brought up with a mom and a dad is the only way they think. That is how people justify the future.The now means nothing but tradition means alot. So ignorant. Love is love ignorance is ignorance sir.
Fiorwestcoast 3 years ago
NO ON PROP 8.
ps. vote for obama
shayaniskute 3 years ago 4
vote no on prop.8!
whollypink 3 years ago 3
This guy says he believes MARRIAGE is between a man and a woman. He's in good company. Governor Arnold and Barack Obama also believe marriage is between a man and woman, and yet they OPPOSE Prop 8.
WHY? Because like most folks, they can actually tell the difference between BELIEVING in something and FORCING that belief on everybody else.
Don't eliminate marriage for ANYONE.
Vote NO on Prop 8.
mike2jb 3 years ago 2
WARNING: these "yes" people are clones of Fred Phelps and his demonic preachings. these are the "God Hates Fags" people. the subhumans who think they "love" us more than our families, because they tell us the "truth" about God. there is NO reasoning with them. there is NO getting through to them. it's futile to be nice or mean or angry or human..they are robotic in their beliefs. this is why they can stand in your face and say they love you as they hold a "God Hates Fags" sign.
NO ON PROP 8
junkforkaryn 3 years ago
Im gay and have a traditional marriage. We go to work, take our daughter to the park, pay our bill, and VOTE just like you do. Don't take our rights away just because you have a different belief. If you don't believe in gay marriage, don't have one.
vegetarianme 3 years ago 2
Enough is enough! Only the facts will answer everyone's questions and opinions. Please view the facts at: .com/watch?v=4JZIJnJWZBQ
LiluBob 3 years ago
Okay, there are so many things wrong with this. What he's saying is only traditional marriages deserve to be recognized, his exact words! That's discrimination. This video says more against prop 8 that for it.
getsuei725 3 years ago
If "traditional marriage" is for producing a family, then those who are infertile should not be allowed to be married, and children should be mandatory for a marriage to stay valid
CyberVillains 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
What will we have to give up next for the cults, public schools, Halloween, Christmas, TV shows? Next the gays will go to prison. Next you will have to go to prison for speaking up for your rights. Then you will have to go to their cult church. How much will you give up before you give up America to the cults?
Vote no on prop h8te. Vote to keep your freedom. Tell the cults that it stops here now.
Wydo1 3 years ago
Marriage has not always been between a man and a woman, on the other hand Christian marriage always has been.
There are records around the world in several cultures that there were same sex unions/marriages that occurred.
in some native American tribes gay marriage and unions occurred
also in ancient Japan. Male Male love was considered the purest love.
Melanesia and in Papua New Guinea, before the introduction of Christianity homosexual relationships were the only recognized relationship
fedorahat10 3 years ago
Keep it to yourself, gimp.
mattbendall 3 years ago
0:17 You can't have equal protection and discriminate
0:50 Reproduction occurs without marriage and vice-versa
Real Reason for your support: You don't think gay couples are legitimate
Alexander James Cárdenas
Director - Great Affinity Productions
greataff 3 years ago
Video Tim tells the story of Prop 22, which was found to be unconstitutional by the Supreme Court.
Then the CA Legislature (the ones we elect to make laws, remember?) passed AB 43 in 2006, legalizing same-sex marriage. The governor vetoed it. He wrote in his veto statement that to solve the marriage issue, the CA Supreme Court needed to "finish its rule on the challenge" which had been made to Prop 22.
Funny how Tim left that part out.
You don't think he could be trying to trick voters, do you?
mike2jb 3 years ago
Hey, Video Tim-
The activist judges as you call them, were the CA Supreme Court, of whom 6 out of 7 are Republican appointees. They did not overturn the rule of law. They found Prop 22 unconstitutional.
If youre really a lawyer, then you know the meaning of these terms and you're deliberately misrepresenting them to sway voters.
If you have to resort to that, it makes me question whether you have any honest arguments in favor of this misguided attempt to meddle with our Constitution.
mike2jb 3 years ago
ok, how moronic is this..I bet this idiot uses birth control..if so he is going against his own reasoning. if u use birth control u should not be allowed to marry according to his logic. such hypocrites. These idiots don't even know that the judiciary branch is suppose to determine the constitutionality of laws.. that's there job !!! where do these idiots get their education ??
victor2cutube 3 years ago
Is this guy really a lawyer? 'Cause if he don't know it is the RESPONSIBILITY of courts to protect and defend the constitution, he must be a pretty bad one... Any law or code MUST respect the principles and rules of the constitution.
And if prop 8 is about procreation, should we prohibit marriage for elderly people, or forbit the use of contraception among married couples??? And what of lesbians couple who are using sperm banks to have children?
carlairving 3 years ago
*****STOP JUDICIAL TYRANNY*******
aliasnate 3 years ago
ok If we pass a law saying idiots like u should be put to death then ur only hope is if the courts decide that law is unconstitutional because it's not a crime to be an idiot.. would u call it tyranny ?
victor2cutube 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
How to protect marriage: Yes on prop 8?
penalize adulterers so that they can protect their marriage! prop 8 should penalize who commit adultery! whoever gets caught sleeping with another man or woman should be jailed or death penalty! and im sure most victims would be heterosexuals!
Yes on 8 (protect marriage) means to lessen divorce cases. fact: they can't protect their marriage because the USA has the highest divorce cases. fact: prop 8 can't protect themselves at all! prop 8 is just hate!
Got2BeDowne69 3 years ago
God did not make just man and woman...what about intersexed people you morons?? we exist too and we're not even IN the BIBLE. Until you ignoramuses realize and accept that God created all "diverse" things, this battle will never end and your "precious" children will be exposed to yet another unneccessary war. Good luck.
Thricearoundthecircl 3 years ago
Well if it is really about having children, polygamy produces even more offspring...hmmm...how about proposition 8.5-marriage is between a man and women? Don't be stupid! Marriage is not about procreation! Sex is. Prop 8 hides behind a "moral" agenda when it is really about a religious vendetta against sexual deviance. Nobody can really say that same sex unions cheapen marriage. Bad people ruin marriage! Are gays and bad people one and the same? I think not.
neosaintuno 3 years ago 3
It was activist judges who made it possible for blacks and whites to marry. mmmmmmm I can see why you wouldnt want to errode merrage any more after that debacle. However, it seems that none of you biggots say one word about ammending the constitution to forbid divorce. If you want to preserve merrage so much then put your money where your mouth is!!
yogabear1962 3 years ago
you want to "preserve our democracy"?
oh yeah, because freedom and equality aren't in our democracy at all.
dude why didn't i think of that before.
lykwut11 3 years ago
Being a lawyer does not mean a damn thing in the real world. Common sense cannot be learned by staying in college longer than most people. Sorry.
I don't always trust judges, but thier overuling may have had to do more with understanding the needs of the people in san fransisco and socal.
YOu are part of the religious right, and we don't care what you say. It's time to move on and be more progressive in the USA.
SEPARATE CHURCH AND STATE!!!!!!!
fast84gti 3 years ago
If there were a true separation between church and state...the government wouldn't have anything to do with marriage at all.
chrissy2944 3 years ago
This is parody, right?
rmadrazo 3 years ago
nuts,,
totally,
really, what does it matter? Why can't women marry women / men marry men? I mean, they're still humans, and I think it's fine as long as you can LOVE somebody,, I don't care!!
I think prop 8 is total bull shit and the people who vote yes are nuts... ¬___¬
Seriousely,, let people be happy the way they want.. not letting them get married DESTROYS their happiness...
NeniioN 3 years ago
tim your lame
vote no on 8 :]
chulowhiskers 3 years ago
dude what's up with the camerawork?
ponyponipone 3 years ago
Yes, marriage between man and a woman and biologically create children, but not every man and woman who marry each other HAVE CHILDREN. If the requirement that marriage requires the couple to HAVE CHILDREN then we have taken the issue to a whole other realm. So, are you saying that straight couples without children are not truly married? Are you saying that married couples who adopt are also somehow below those who have biological children? Explain.
thibaulthalpern 3 years ago
Since you're a lawyer, shouldn't you know that wanting the gov't to give a "particular endorsement" of one group over another is kinda the antithesis of equal protection? And doesn't your argument apply with equal force to the CA Supreme Court's very similar 1948 decision of Perez v. Sharpe which held that laws banning interracial marriage were unconstitutional? Be careful not to adopt the same reasoning of the bigots of yesteryear. We've got to learn from history's lessons, my friend.
Lance734 3 years ago
I think it is questionable to put the rights of the minority up for a vote without judicial oversight. Without oversight, it's mob rule.
astroboyla 3 years ago
Hi Tim,
Activist judges? You mean like the ones that overrode the will of the people and ended segregation ... or the ones who ended the ban on interracial marriage?
As for creating children... I recently got married (a civil service) and the wedding vows didn't say ANYTHING about children. They just talked about love, honor, "till death do us part", etc. Pretty strange, huh? I mean, since, as you say, creating children is the special, defining thing about marriage.
MajorArcana11 3 years ago
vote YES ON 8!
bigtrees0 3 years ago
so, tim, what are you going to do with all those babies that straight couples have if they don't want them? there aren't that many infertile people out there. having both a mother and a father caring for a child might be better for the child than having two dads or two moms, depending on the way you look at it - but divorce is legal, right? surely two moms or two dads with children is better for the children and closer to the "traditional family" you talk about than one single parent.
emonucani 3 years ago
Oh, and by the way, who's paying you? It wouldn't be a "non-profit" organization such as a church affiliated out of state group I hope, because they stand to lose their non-profit status by taking a side on this issue, thus rendering them vulnerable to be taxed just as any other business is, and believe me, if people find out the truth, they will report you.
radicalrealitynow 3 years ago
Does "preserving democracy" include dissolving the clear distinction between church and state?
radicalrealitynow 3 years ago
Dude, Gay Marriage have been in affect for months and have that affected you in any way or form? If you are married, have that affected your marriage. This is about fundamental rights.
danny458 3 years ago
"An 'activist judge'is what the lawsuit's losers call judges who ruled against them"
Don't know exactly where that quote originated,but it's quite accurate.
Conservatives certainly don't mind "activist judges" when they rule in THEIR favor
loudnmouthy 3 years ago 2
Good job. I vote Yes on 8 too. Traditional marriage is best for children and society as a whole.
bebelove110 3 years ago
bebelove110, Voting yes on 8 does not preserve traditional marriage. Everyone has the right to freedom of religion, and that means you have the right to your views on your marriage and how you want your marriage to be like. Voting yes on 8 introduces discrimination and prejudice into our Constitution and threatens the fundamental morals of equality, justice and fairness that form the foundation of our Constitution.
RugbyBooty 3 years ago
The will of the people? What if the people want to slaughter all Jews? Or re-enslave all blacks?
You're a lawyer? Obviously not a constitutional lawyer. Do you know what a constitution is? It's a set of basic laws that no subsequent legislation can contradict. Do you know what a judge is partly responsible for? MAKING SURE NO SUBSEQUENT LAWS CONTRADICT THE CONSTITUTION you fucking retard of a lawyer.
I'm not gay, I'm not a huge gay marriage supporter, I just hate bullshit and fucking idiots.
TheWiseCommenter 3 years ago
Constitutional law is not as clearly defined as you claim. Several dozen courts who have considered the question have concluded that the constitution does not mandate gay marriage. The state constitutions at issue were closely compared to California's constitution.
LawyerForProp8 3 years ago
ZZZZzzzzzzz....
WVUpigskin 3 years ago
There is a reason that judges may overturn decisions by the people, and actually, it is rooted in our original constitution: the framers were worried that the common person's feelings and personal opinions would be too strong to allow them to make rational decisions.
AoAPC 3 years ago
This is why we have the electoral college, instead of just allowing the people to directly elect their president. If the supreme court hadn't stepped in for black rights, women's rights, and many other (at the time) "heated issues," who knows how long it would have taken the public to come around?
Additionally, there's no way this man is a lawyer. Someone of the intelligence displayed in this video could not possibly have passed the bar exam.
AoAPC 3 years ago
When the court "steps in," as you put it, it should do so only with a clear constitutional mandate. Race is clearly a protected category, but whether homosexuality is protected, and whether marriage is actually a civil right, is disputable. Many other lawyers agree with me.
LawyerForProp8 3 years ago
The constitution mentions neither homosexuality nor marriage, therefore, let the people's elected representatives decide.
LawyerForProp8 3 years ago
The constitution also does not mention race. It didn't mention public education. It didn't mention a lot of things, but that doesn't mean that the public is automatically going to be educated enough to make an informed decision on most of those issues.
AoAPC 3 years ago
Right -- the public isnt educated enough to make decisions on the laws that will govern them. Perhaps we should elect you as King, oh wise one?
Prop8Supporter 3 years ago
He's a lawyer? He displays neither eloquence nor charisma; I'd hate to be his client.
Alithian 3 years ago
A vote of yes is a vote for continued discrimanation and continued bigotry. Do you really want to consider yourself as narrow minded as that. And besides...how the heck is your own marriage threatened by this. You need to re-examine your motives.
Billydude9 3 years ago
Firstly... who is the drunk behind the camera? Secondly... why should merely male and female couples get the "particular endorsement"? Also, sometimes laws are in violation of the constitution... And for your more "substantive" reason... are you saying only fertile couples should be married? Why do all of you care? You don't have to get married to a person with matching crotch luggage! God doesn't use his power to take human choices away... are you so much better to judge?
Pointingtothemoon 3 years ago
yes on 8
poshtarka 3 years ago
First off, the matter of one's ability to reproduce should be no factor in deciding whether or not a relationship is valid. Secondly, I'll have you know that the right of mixed race couples to marry was voted against in the nineteen sixties. Does that make it wrong that it was turned down?
realislvoe 3 years ago
He looks and sounds like he's reading from cue cards.
gravearchitecture 3 years ago
Hey there Tim,
You obviously have no idea what the rule of law means. What about those black-robed monsters who overturned Plessy v. Ferguson? What if we had just left that one to a vote? You are fighting on the side of bigotry no matter how you slice it. Well done.
gorgulax 3 years ago
Are people who oppose driver's licenses for the blind "fighting on the side of bigotry?" Most state courts who considered the issue have decided that gay marriage is not mandated by the constitution, it is best left to the people.
LawyerForProp8 3 years ago
I disagree with you that gay weddings are in any way comparable to blind drivers, but at least now I understand the urgency of your position. It echoes George Wallace's call for "segregation now, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever."
Denying the blind the right to drive improves everybody's life. Denying homosexuals the right to marry has no effect on your life or mine, but a significant impact on the lives of many gay people.
gorgulax 3 years ago
Lawyer, it's telling that you keyed in on my accusation of bigotry, and not the overturning of Plessy. Perhaps your keen legal eye missed the simple truth that some issues are unpopular yet correct.
gorgulax 3 years ago
They were not "activist judges". Most were Republicans. Of course many people disagree with the result, but judges are in fact supposed to overturn laws that are in conflict with the constitution. That is their job. Have you actually read the ruling? If you have not, you are not in a position to condemn it just because you don't like the result.
PleaseThinkNow 3 years ago
Many activist judges are appointed by Republicans. The term doesn't mean "appointed by a republican," it means that the judge has used the constitution as an excuse to impose his particular views on votors.
I have read the ruling, and the dissent, and the dissent is correct.
LawyerForProp8 3 years ago
Shifty eyes, searching for words...Why can't someone more articulate explain this position to me? I did not hear any reasons explained for why "marriage" is reserved for heterosexual relationships. You just rephrased the same idea repeatedly.
rcfowler 3 years ago
wow... I guess old people, people who choose to not have children, and people who CAN'T have children shouldn't be able to get married. This is the worst argument for prop 8.
hypergraphia7 3 years ago
So you're saying only men and women can produce children so only men and women should be allowed to marry? So I guess that means that sterile people shouldn't be allowed to marry, because they can't produce children?
sicktoaster 3 years ago
lol
roger44 3 years ago
In this election season the people of this country are showing their true colors. Those who are racists attack Obama with all sorts of insults. Those who support prop 8 reveal their stance against human and civil rights. They in essence are saying they are discriminating against a group of people who are different then them. Those gay folks make a mutual aggrement to commit to one another in a marriage and for one to deprive them of it is a sign of bigotry. I thought people were beyond that.
EternalSSA 3 years ago
It should come as no surprise that the Mormon religion which used to forbid blacks from joining their cult are the main group behind the proposition that will eliminate the rights of yet another minority group. VOTE NO ON PROP 8!
lisztnut3 3 years ago
what about children out of wedlock?
what about children to same sex parents?
what about children to divorced couples?
don't they all deserve the same rights?
why don't you ban divorce while you are at it?
JonasVonA 3 years ago