What's wrong with single parenting? What's wrong with same-sex marriages? I have seen both instances where they're better than 'traditional' families that have both a mother and father. I was in one of those terrible families where my biological father was like Hitler.
@WiggidyWhackable This was an assignment for an English class I took over a year ago. We were supposed to pick something that we felt strongly about and make a video of it. Mine was supposed to be showing that all these people trying to prove that gay marriage is cheapening marriage, yet turning a blind eye to divorce. Both of which tarnish the sanctity of marriage.
How is voting still backing this marriage being only between a man and woman? I really don't think that the majority of the population is this shallow. God I hope its not really that bad. Its just I never encounter these people. How is that narrow of a way of thinking really the majority. Its clear in EVERY direction that the ppl against this have no ligitament arguement. I would be willing to debate someone like that anytime. I know I would win. This shouldn't be an issue at all.
hmm I think we should protect marriage by what really harms it: divorce. I say manditory 3 months counceling before marriage and before divorce, parents/ gaurdians must sign binding contracts of support, financial plans and current standings have to be submitted in writing and lie detector tests should be administer sometime during the counceling processes just to give the marriage good foundations.
Those arguments sounds like they're for homosexual marriage since increasing the pool of couples children can get adopted into will definitely prevent them from falling into the pitfall of single parent hell.
Religion didn't invent marriage, and no single religion can claim ownership over it, being as how it was around in human history before any religion was invented. The people who made up religion threw it in there as just another form of control to care for the uneducated, people who needed something to turn to and some power hungry person gave them what they wanted.
but i thought traditional marriage was already destroyed in 1967 when it was legalized that two people of diffrent races could marry.
at least that is the argument people tried to use against interracial marriage. that it would destroy "traditional marriage" and "it will effect the children"
@AceofDiamonds0 That is true. I believe that marriage is the union of two concentign adults regardless of gender, race, religion or anything else. It is their life, their choices. As long as both agree to it, and want it, more power to them for it.
Love, support, unity...these are all things ANY family can experience. Abandonment, impoverished, struggle, alone...these are all things ANY family can face. How does heterosexual marriage protect children? Are gay people as a whole against children's safety? Is this what this video is trying to tell me? I don't understand the connection between homosexual marriage and the statistics about one-parent families shown in this video. The video looks great, but I do not agree with the opinion.
I gave this 5 stars because it's one of the funniest things I've ever seen! You guys rocked this spoof off the charts! Who could have thought of anything so ridiculous yet silly! It really makes those fundamentalist gay-haters look ridiculous when you post something so serious-looking yet obviously off-the-wall like this.
Great video but I myself do not agree. There are many situations where a person should be able to leave a marriage. For example, should a woman be stuck in a marriage where her husband has become an abusive alcoholic and it is affecting their children? Or, how about the case where a husband comes out and says he's gay like in the case of Gov. James McGreevey. Should his wife be forced to stay with him?
People argue against gay marriage saying that protecting the traditional biblical definition is more important than fairness and equality. Of course it would be unfair not to let people divorce, but at least it would protect the sanctity of marriage. BTW, don't fear... this will never pass, this is a satire on the Yes on 8... it will never pass, it's not meant to pass....
Speaking of James McGreevey... one argument for the ban is that "no one is denied marriage rights, as long as it's with the opposite sex"... well Frm. Gov McGreevey had the right to be with the opposite sex, but he was living a lie, and it really hurt his wife and led to divorce. If gay marriage is allowed, less people will live a lie, and therefore there will be less divorces. BTW, gay people actually respect marriage more because it's such a challenge, so they're less likely to divorce.
The topic was interesting to me, although I disagree on it. I do not even understand why there would be a problem with gays marrying. How does that hurt or harm anybody. Now, divorce does hurt. Yet, I am not sure making it impossible to get is the answer. That could lead to the same problems that happened when abortion was illegal. I think both marriage AND divorce need to be harder to GET to begin with! And having children. Knowledge, understanding, and maybe wisdom should be involved.
Jimminy Christmas! Think of the economic toll on California if they banned divorce!
It costs $50 for a marriage license and maybe $100 extra to actually get things all ratified (if you do it on the cheap) divorce costs minimum ten times that.
Our economy would be in even worse shape if we banned divorce.
My solution: legalize everything... Drugs, prostitution, etc and tax it! That'll set us straight
Unless you are poor, and then the government pays those bills for you. No filing charges, no paying for lawyers (we have public defenders, and the such) no paying the judge for his time, or the balif, or the court officials. The government does that for you if you are poor.
"Protecting" marriage is ridiculous. Marriage is a bond between people, what we need to do as a culture is get our heads out of our asses and get out of this protestant/conservative mode. We have way bigger issues to deal with than preventing two people that both happen to have the same parts from marrying. Let homosexuals do whatever they want - why do these freaks care at all?
Thanks! We spent a lot of time figuring out what we wanted it to look like. But what do you think about banning divorce? The government has already stated their stand on banning gay marriage, now they are wanting to go one step further... what says you?
I agree. I also think it's stupid that the definition of marriage was changed. It used to just mean the joining of two as one.
Those people who say that homosexuality is against nature have never seen other mammals; I've seen dogs and cats perform homosexual actions.
We're in another "separate but equal" mode with marriage for straight people and "domestic partnerships" for gays. They're not equal, and perpetuating discrimination.
To elaborate on the homosexuality in other animals, I know Mallard Ducks have a very high homosexuality rate. There's homosexual penguins, too. Homosexuality is incredibly natural. If it's between two consenting adults, there's absolutely nothing wrong with it in my book.
And i've also heard the argument that God created animals and they do not know what is right and what is wrong, they only do what is "natural" so if it is natural for them, why is it unnatural for humans?
What if everyone collectively decided to stop getting married and invented a new word for it. A bond that had no rules and regulations(or biblical laws) where any two people were allowed to share or end a relationship. Would that become the new "marriage"? And would it inevitably be destroyed because its our nature to try to control things and tell people what they can and can not do?
Good question, as i said a lil bit ago, the pagans have already done that. Only time will tell if the government tries to control that. Or have they already?
Don't agree on protecting marriage. People make mistakes. They shouldn't have to work on staying together when they hate each other. I think this will resort to more domestic violence, and greater harm to children they have. I do believe people really need to know each other before they jump into a big commitment.
What if getting married were as hard as getting a divorce? Do you think as many people would get married?
But, if people felt that banning gay marriage was the correct path to take to protect traditional marriage, isn't banning divorce the next logical step?
collieman72, I see your point regarding domestic violence but don't you think that if you knew your marriage was really FOREVER that you would select your partner more carefully or even chose not to marry but commit to a long term relationship without the meaningless title of marriage. If people are so concerned about having an escape from marriage why would they want to do it in the first place. You don't HAVE TO get married.
The pagans have a wonderful custom, it is called a "hand fasting" it is in affect a marriage that lasts a year and a day. At the end of that time period you can agree to another hand fasting, or a marriage. But it gives a new couple a year of trying marriage before committing to it completely.
That doesn't necessarily work because it's a trial period... there are people who are together for double digit years and then someone cheats or does something "marriage ending crazy"
In effect nothing would guarantee that a marriage wouldn't end in divorce
Not to sound like I'm making light of the situation, but there are a lot of crazy people out there who think they know what they want. Also there are a lot of other unforeseen factors as well. A partner becoming an alcoholic or drug attic. People can also become mentally ill and shut their partner out despite doing everything to help. If they don't want any help, I don't want to raise a child with that person.
The Wanda stand up really caught my attention. She has a good point about divorce being more of a threat to marriage than gay marriage. Including her was a great addition since she is married to a woman.
We choose to put her in the middle as kind of a transition between the prop8 and the CMPA information. Both to make the point, and to give some comic relief.
After seeing this video some thousand times (it feels) it still makes me laugh.
it's a good argument but I still dont agree with it. but i am for gay marriage so i guess this sort of argument wouldnt work on me. i think anyone should be able to get married and get divorced.
We didn't pick something we agreed with necessarily, we picked something that would get conversation, and strike an emotion either way. We wanted something that would get people conversing
I do too but I think if traditional marriage is what people fought for than they should also have to ban divorce. They shouldn't be allowed to ban gay marriage without banning divorce as well.
That is kind of the reason we choose this topic. To show the hypercriticalness of it all. People fought so hard to ban gay marriage to uphold traditional marriage, yet they are going to turn a blind eye to banning divorce. When they both do teh same thing.
Explain to me how anyone can say they are trying to protect traditional marriage by banning gay marriage but allowing divorce. Hippocratic don't you think? Wanda was right!
That is a very interesting point, it seems to reason that if you voted to ban gay marriage then you would also vote to ban divorce. We will have to just wait and see what happens.
The video was fun to make, it took some 12-14 hours, but that was mainly learning how to use the software. This is not a joke, it is real. As long as John gets the votes he needs it could happen.
I think it is real yeah. If he gets the signatures he needs it will most likely be on the ballot in 2010. And if it fails, we may see a revisit of Prop 8.
In many ways I agree with you, but if California says Gay Marriage shouldn't be allowed, it serves to follow this will pass too. I hope my divorce is final before then.
That's sorta the point. It shouldn't matter who you marry, as long as it's a legal, consenting adult. Of course, I think that plural marriage of all stripes should be allowed as well... again, as long as all parties are LEGAL, CONSENTING ADULTS. No government should tell people they can or cannot marry.
That is a really good point. But, Prop 8 passing shows us that the government can tell people who they can marry, and who they can't. This Act is the government going one step further, and telling us once we marry, we are stuck there.
But it's not the government telling us who we can marry... not really. It's the ultra-conservative religious right and their sycophants who believe that we should live by the bible, and science classes should teach creationism/intelligent design instead of evolution.
Unfortunately those "ultra-conservative religious" who get elected and heard and chose to apply "live by the bible" doctrines to issues like same sex marriage but look over the fact the according to their bible divorce is just as much a sin.
Unfortunately the "majority's right" is what this country was founded on (supposedly) but honestly would you rather live in another country? where you get stoned to death or just wind up missing if you disagree with the government?
Same with the clip where Hillary Clinton showed what, a half inch of cleavage in one of her debates... First she was criticized for being too masculine, then slandered by showing her femininity.
The REAL issue no one talks about is that "gay marriage" means they can adopt children. So you gotta think about the next generation too, not just making people feel good.
Funny thing; WE ARE NOT A FSKING DEMOCRACY!!!!!!!!
We're a DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC.
I know a gay couple who adopted a little girl back in the early 90s, so your argument holds no sway, MrPisster.
So, by your comment, you're saying you're fine with lesbian women getting pregnant and raising a child, but not with gay men adopting to raise a child?
But, the argument's about outlawing divorce, not correcting the injustice which Prop 8 affirmed.
the majority's right should not extend into the private dealings one has within there home or in there lives as long as there dealings are not infringing on the rights of others.gay marriage in no way infringes on anyone else's rights. the concept that here in the US, we could make discrimination a legal policy sickens me to the bone.
I love it... within the first 58 seconds I was screaming at the video - then I calmed down and finished watching it (are any of those stats at the end true?).
Honestly if the point is that divorce is destroying the sanctity marriage more than legalizing marriage between homosexual couples I say: hear hear!
Then again you have to think: the murder rate would probably go up if people couldn't divorce people they weren't compatible with
Of course, if they knew it would be a lifetime sentence, they would probably spend more time to ensure they are compatible with their prospective spouse.
well if you have to stay with the person you married until "death do us part" then I think it should be legal to kill your spouse - I'm just saying if you have to stick together until the end :)) makes as much sense as legislating divorce in that way
What's wrong with single parenting? What's wrong with same-sex marriages? I have seen both instances where they're better than 'traditional' families that have both a mother and father. I was in one of those terrible families where my biological father was like Hitler.
threetailedfox1 2 months ago
so... is this video anti-gay marriage or anti-divorce? i would like to do a video response if it is the former, please enlighten me
WiggidyWhackable 8 months ago
@WiggidyWhackable This was an assignment for an English class I took over a year ago. We were supposed to pick something that we felt strongly about and make a video of it. Mine was supposed to be showing that all these people trying to prove that gay marriage is cheapening marriage, yet turning a blind eye to divorce. Both of which tarnish the sanctity of marriage.
karamkramer 7 months ago
How is voting still backing this marriage being only between a man and woman? I really don't think that the majority of the population is this shallow. God I hope its not really that bad. Its just I never encounter these people. How is that narrow of a way of thinking really the majority. Its clear in EVERY direction that the ppl against this have no ligitament arguement. I would be willing to debate someone like that anytime. I know I would win. This shouldn't be an issue at all.
CriesCyanide 10 months ago
VOMIT!!!
TheMhunky 1 year ago
you have my support!!!
arivas713 1 year ago
hmm I think we should protect marriage by what really harms it: divorce. I say manditory 3 months counceling before marriage and before divorce, parents/ gaurdians must sign binding contracts of support, financial plans and current standings have to be submitted in writing and lie detector tests should be administer sometime during the counceling processes just to give the marriage good foundations.
RavenBlaze 1 year ago
Those arguments sounds like they're for homosexual marriage since increasing the pool of couples children can get adopted into will definitely prevent them from falling into the pitfall of single parent hell.
catch22af 1 year ago
gives new meaning to the old ball and chain.
ptsmmrs 1 year ago
Separation of church and state
xstephennxxo 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Religion didn't invent marriage, and no single religion can claim ownership over it, being as how it was around in human history before any religion was invented. The people who made up religion threw it in there as just another form of control to care for the uneducated, people who needed something to turn to and some power hungry person gave them what they wanted.
charmander4533 1 year ago
but i thought traditional marriage was already destroyed in 1967 when it was legalized that two people of diffrent races could marry.
at least that is the argument people tried to use against interracial marriage. that it would destroy "traditional marriage" and "it will effect the children"
AceofDiamonds0 1 year ago 2
@AceofDiamonds0 That is true. I believe that marriage is the union of two concentign adults regardless of gender, race, religion or anything else. It is their life, their choices. As long as both agree to it, and want it, more power to them for it.
karamkramer 7 months ago
Love, support, unity...these are all things ANY family can experience. Abandonment, impoverished, struggle, alone...these are all things ANY family can face. How does heterosexual marriage protect children? Are gay people as a whole against children's safety? Is this what this video is trying to tell me? I don't understand the connection between homosexual marriage and the statistics about one-parent families shown in this video. The video looks great, but I do not agree with the opinion.
NotNadiaK 1 year ago
great vid....it has its good points...
billyjack82 2 years ago
Excellent!!
interferencemusic 2 years ago
I gave this 5 stars because it's one of the funniest things I've ever seen! You guys rocked this spoof off the charts! Who could have thought of anything so ridiculous yet silly! It really makes those fundamentalist gay-haters look ridiculous when you post something so serious-looking yet obviously off-the-wall like this.
Bravo!
pbarnes333 2 years ago
@pbarnes333 Thank you very much!!
karamkramer 7 months ago
@pbarnes333 though with every spoof there is truth behind it
karamkramer 7 months ago
prohibiting divorce! hahahaha! that's extremely hilarious! : ) hahahahaha! ubelievable! hahaha!
bigsteakjoe 2 years ago
Good video, even if I don't agree.
I wonder what would happen to those desperate to get a divorce but can't.....murder perhaps?
AbanAngel 2 years ago
Great video but I myself do not agree. There are many situations where a person should be able to leave a marriage. For example, should a woman be stuck in a marriage where her husband has become an abusive alcoholic and it is affecting their children? Or, how about the case where a husband comes out and says he's gay like in the case of Gov. James McGreevey. Should his wife be forced to stay with him?
9Rock1Nasty6 2 years ago
People argue against gay marriage saying that protecting the traditional biblical definition is more important than fairness and equality. Of course it would be unfair not to let people divorce, but at least it would protect the sanctity of marriage. BTW, don't fear... this will never pass, this is a satire on the Yes on 8... it will never pass, it's not meant to pass....
dbente 2 years ago
Speaking of James McGreevey... one argument for the ban is that "no one is denied marriage rights, as long as it's with the opposite sex"... well Frm. Gov McGreevey had the right to be with the opposite sex, but he was living a lie, and it really hurt his wife and led to divorce. If gay marriage is allowed, less people will live a lie, and therefore there will be less divorces. BTW, gay people actually respect marriage more because it's such a challenge, so they're less likely to divorce.
dbente 2 years ago 2
The topic was interesting to me, although I disagree on it. I do not even understand why there would be a problem with gays marrying. How does that hurt or harm anybody. Now, divorce does hurt. Yet, I am not sure making it impossible to get is the answer. That could lead to the same problems that happened when abortion was illegal. I think both marriage AND divorce need to be harder to GET to begin with! And having children. Knowledge, understanding, and maybe wisdom should be involved.
sierraflowr 2 years ago 2
I have had that very thought myself. If marriage was harder to get less people would get married. I know i probably wouldn't have.
That would be interesting, how do you suppose they would make it harder to have children? That is one thing I've thought about.
karamkramer 2 years ago
Dont agree with topic but regardless, you guys did a great job on the video.
Jason the man with no last name
xspower21 2 years ago
Thanks, it took quite a few hours, but I think we did ok.
karamkramer 2 years ago
Jimminy Christmas! Think of the economic toll on California if they banned divorce!
It costs $50 for a marriage license and maybe $100 extra to actually get things all ratified (if you do it on the cheap) divorce costs minimum ten times that.
Our economy would be in even worse shape if we banned divorce.
My solution: legalize everything... Drugs, prostitution, etc and tax it! That'll set us straight
LEGobel 2 years ago
Unless you are poor, and then the government pays those bills for you. No filing charges, no paying for lawyers (we have public defenders, and the such) no paying the judge for his time, or the balif, or the court officials. The government does that for you if you are poor.
karamkramer 2 years ago
interesting that for sure but very well done
apm4400144 2 years ago
Thank you very much!
karamkramer 2 years ago
"Protecting" marriage is ridiculous. Marriage is a bond between people, what we need to do as a culture is get our heads out of our asses and get out of this protestant/conservative mode. We have way bigger issues to deal with than preventing two people that both happen to have the same parts from marrying. Let homosexuals do whatever they want - why do these freaks care at all?
This is why I lose faith in the human race.
Nice video :)
ChaosChronicle 2 years ago
Thanks! We spent a lot of time figuring out what we wanted it to look like. But what do you think about banning divorce? The government has already stated their stand on banning gay marriage, now they are wanting to go one step further... what says you?
karamkramer 2 years ago
I agree. I also think it's stupid that the definition of marriage was changed. It used to just mean the joining of two as one.
Those people who say that homosexuality is against nature have never seen other mammals; I've seen dogs and cats perform homosexual actions.
We're in another "separate but equal" mode with marriage for straight people and "domestic partnerships" for gays. They're not equal, and perpetuating discrimination.
skata2180 2 years ago
To elaborate on the homosexuality in other animals, I know Mallard Ducks have a very high homosexuality rate. There's homosexual penguins, too. Homosexuality is incredibly natural. If it's between two consenting adults, there's absolutely nothing wrong with it in my book.
ChaosChronicle 2 years ago
And i've also heard the argument that God created animals and they do not know what is right and what is wrong, they only do what is "natural" so if it is natural for them, why is it unnatural for humans?
karamkramer 2 years ago
What if everyone collectively decided to stop getting married and invented a new word for it. A bond that had no rules and regulations(or biblical laws) where any two people were allowed to share or end a relationship. Would that become the new "marriage"? And would it inevitably be destroyed because its our nature to try to control things and tell people what they can and can not do?
Jdmartz8 2 years ago
Good question, as i said a lil bit ago, the pagans have already done that. Only time will tell if the government tries to control that. Or have they already?
karamkramer 2 years ago
Don't agree on protecting marriage. People make mistakes. They shouldn't have to work on staying together when they hate each other. I think this will resort to more domestic violence, and greater harm to children they have. I do believe people really need to know each other before they jump into a big commitment.
collieman72 2 years ago
What if getting married were as hard as getting a divorce? Do you think as many people would get married?
But, if people felt that banning gay marriage was the correct path to take to protect traditional marriage, isn't banning divorce the next logical step?
karamkramer 2 years ago
collieman72, I see your point regarding domestic violence but don't you think that if you knew your marriage was really FOREVER that you would select your partner more carefully or even chose not to marry but commit to a long term relationship without the meaningless title of marriage. If people are so concerned about having an escape from marriage why would they want to do it in the first place. You don't HAVE TO get married.
Jdmartz8 2 years ago
The pagans have a wonderful custom, it is called a "hand fasting" it is in affect a marriage that lasts a year and a day. At the end of that time period you can agree to another hand fasting, or a marriage. But it gives a new couple a year of trying marriage before committing to it completely.
karamkramer 2 years ago
That doesn't necessarily work because it's a trial period... there are people who are together for double digit years and then someone cheats or does something "marriage ending crazy"
In effect nothing would guarantee that a marriage wouldn't end in divorce
LEGobel 2 years ago
Not to sound like I'm making light of the situation, but there are a lot of crazy people out there who think they know what they want. Also there are a lot of other unforeseen factors as well. A partner becoming an alcoholic or drug attic. People can also become mentally ill and shut their partner out despite doing everything to help. If they don't want any help, I don't want to raise a child with that person.
collieman72 2 years ago
If getting married were as hard as getting divorced then I think our divorce rate would be way lower
LEGobel 2 years ago
Isn't that the truth...
karamkramer 2 years ago
The Wanda stand up really caught my attention. She has a good point about divorce being more of a threat to marriage than gay marriage. Including her was a great addition since she is married to a woman.
jbsac30 2 years ago
We choose to put her in the middle as kind of a transition between the prop8 and the CMPA information. Both to make the point, and to give some comic relief.
After seeing this video some thousand times (it feels) it still makes me laugh.
karamkramer 2 years ago
it's a good argument but I still dont agree with it. but i am for gay marriage so i guess this sort of argument wouldnt work on me. i think anyone should be able to get married and get divorced.
miamortis 2 years ago
I agree... but it goes to show the hypocrisy of the people who voted for prop 8
skata2180 2 years ago
We didn't pick something we agreed with necessarily, we picked something that would get conversation, and strike an emotion either way. We wanted something that would get people conversing
karamkramer 2 years ago
I do too but I think if traditional marriage is what people fought for than they should also have to ban divorce. They shouldn't be allowed to ban gay marriage without banning divorce as well.
Jdmartz8 2 years ago
That is kind of the reason we choose this topic. To show the hypercriticalness of it all. People fought so hard to ban gay marriage to uphold traditional marriage, yet they are going to turn a blind eye to banning divorce. When they both do teh same thing.
karamkramer 2 years ago
Explain to me how anyone can say they are trying to protect traditional marriage by banning gay marriage but allowing divorce. Hippocratic don't you think? Wanda was right!
Jdmartz8 2 years ago
That is a very interesting point, it seems to reason that if you voted to ban gay marriage then you would also vote to ban divorce. We will have to just wait and see what happens.
karamkramer 2 years ago
I thought the presentation was very good - toward the end I was unable to read the scrolling text before it disappeared
StrikerDs 2 years ago
That is a good point, I know what it says, so it was easy for me to read it. I will see if I can slow it down a little bit. Thanks for the advice.
karamkramer 2 years ago
gread work :)
rootbeerlord 2 years ago
Thanks!
karamkramer 2 years ago
Awesome video! I could never make something like that, it must have been hard. This has to be a joke though, ban divorce, who are they kidding?
MsSittinTall 2 years ago
The video was fun to make, it took some 12-14 hours, but that was mainly learning how to use the software. This is not a joke, it is real. As long as John gets the votes he needs it could happen.
karamkramer 2 years ago
This was pretty cool, made me think. Is this real though? I mean, will I really see this on the ballot next year?
sandlewood3 2 years ago
I think it is real yeah. If he gets the signatures he needs it will most likely be on the ballot in 2010. And if it fails, we may see a revisit of Prop 8.
karamkramer 2 years ago
My primary problem is that such legislation should not exist. it is not the majorities right to tell me how to live
coolkelly42 2 years ago
In many ways I agree with you, but if California says Gay Marriage shouldn't be allowed, it serves to follow this will pass too. I hope my divorce is final before then.
karamkramer 2 years ago
me too! :) I love the state of California but that'd be the tipping point for me moving - my ex and I are each other's kryptonite
LEGobel 2 years ago
same here hun
coolkelly42 2 years ago
That's sorta the point. It shouldn't matter who you marry, as long as it's a legal, consenting adult. Of course, I think that plural marriage of all stripes should be allowed as well... again, as long as all parties are LEGAL, CONSENTING ADULTS. No government should tell people they can or cannot marry.
skata2180 2 years ago
That is a really good point. But, Prop 8 passing shows us that the government can tell people who they can marry, and who they can't. This Act is the government going one step further, and telling us once we marry, we are stuck there.
karamkramer 2 years ago
But it's not the government telling us who we can marry... not really. It's the ultra-conservative religious right and their sycophants who believe that we should live by the bible, and science classes should teach creationism/intelligent design instead of evolution.
skata2180 2 years ago
Unfortunately those "ultra-conservative religious" who get elected and heard and chose to apply "live by the bible" doctrines to issues like same sex marriage but look over the fact the according to their bible divorce is just as much a sin.
Jdmartz8 2 years ago
Unfortunately the "majority's right" is what this country was founded on (supposedly) but honestly would you rather live in another country? where you get stoned to death or just wind up missing if you disagree with the government?
LEGobel 2 years ago
That's partially true. Can't say that it's "majority's right"; more like "majority rules"... but that's definitely better than "mob rule".
And really, we were founded on the Puritan principles... which is why Janet Jackson's teat drew such an uproar.
skata2180 2 years ago
I know. That was completely retarded.
I've seen dog tits which are more appealing than hers.
avagdumortesin 2 years ago
Same with the clip where Hillary Clinton showed what, a half inch of cleavage in one of her debates... First she was criticized for being too masculine, then slandered by showing her femininity.
karamkramer 2 years ago
I agree, she cant win. Can women ever? or is this country doomed to patriarchy?
Jdmartz8 2 years ago
sadly, we are under a system of mob rule
coolkelly42 2 years ago
But I thought you all wanted a democracy.
The REAL issue no one talks about is that "gay marriage" means they can adopt children. So you gotta think about the next generation too, not just making people feel good.
MrPisster 2 years ago
Funny thing; WE ARE NOT A FSKING DEMOCRACY!!!!!!!!
We're a DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC.
I know a gay couple who adopted a little girl back in the early 90s, so your argument holds no sway, MrPisster.
So, by your comment, you're saying you're fine with lesbian women getting pregnant and raising a child, but not with gay men adopting to raise a child?
But, the argument's about outlawing divorce, not correcting the injustice which Prop 8 affirmed.
avagdumortesin 2 years ago
Good point, many children in other states have been adopted by homosexual couples.
karamkramer 2 years ago
the majority's right should not extend into the private dealings one has within there home or in there lives as long as there dealings are not infringing on the rights of others.gay marriage in no way infringes on anyone else's rights. the concept that here in the US, we could make discrimination a legal policy sickens me to the bone.
coolkelly42 2 years ago
I love it... within the first 58 seconds I was screaming at the video - then I calmed down and finished watching it (are any of those stats at the end true?).
Honestly if the point is that divorce is destroying the sanctity marriage more than legalizing marriage between homosexual couples I say: hear hear!
Then again you have to think: the murder rate would probably go up if people couldn't divorce people they weren't compatible with
LEGobel 2 years ago
Of course, if they knew it would be a lifetime sentence, they would probably spend more time to ensure they are compatible with their prospective spouse.
Almost makes me wish it were a law.
Go go 2010 California Marriage Protection Act!!
skata2180 2 years ago
well if you have to stay with the person you married until "death do us part" then I think it should be legal to kill your spouse - I'm just saying if you have to stick together until the end :)) makes as much sense as legislating divorce in that way
LEGobel 2 years ago
No, we can't do that, nor can we allow separations and adultery... because that's all against the Bible as well!
You just have to turn into the frigid old maid and sleep alone at that point and pretty much ignore your spouse.
avagdumortesin 2 years ago
Yeah, all of the stats are true. It is amazing isn't it. I am technically a single parent, and it is scarey.
karamkramer 2 years ago
This is a good idea; maybe the text could be rewritten to say that if the Act of 2010 fails, then it's an automatic repeal of Prop 8.
avagdumortesin 2 years ago
You never know, try messaging John, and see what you get. It is on his site. He will respond, he did to me within 20 minutes.
karamkramer 2 years ago
Good idea. What's his site? I'll be able to look him up that way.
avagdumortesin 2 years ago
Check out the site listed at the end of the video. It is listed at the bottom of the page, in the contact info section.
karamkramer 2 years ago