A question for "NO on PROP 8" people.

***The below description of the comment policy was an experiment on my part and I've abandoned the experiment. Feel free to engage in comments here.
NOTE: Comment policy, and the reason for it, are explained at the end of this video.

Here's the video series

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4HblO9hDb2s

where, at the end of it, you can comment and engage in dialog on this question. This question was taken from many that are found in my more exhaustive response to the issue in that series.

I'm exhausted from work and life in general but regardless I was having difficulty getting to sleep as I was having difficulty getting my mind to stop racing on a variety of things going on in my life as well as the interactions I've had with some over the past week on this issue.

My other videos were an attempt to give what I felt I could, substance and comprehensively thought out perspective. I lack the resources (time, computer programs, etc.) though not the capacity in terms of talent to produce a well polished and substantive response. Seeing my limit in resources I initially tried for substance and comprehensiveness (the two often need to go together because if you have merely a substantive point it's still often child's play for those in opposition to take it out of context. That's why I've often favored being comprehensive in dialog because it demonstrates that you've seen, and can answer, arguments that people may quickly use in their minds to dismiss a mere substantive comment. But it seems very very few souls indeed care for that.

I figured that I could at least post parts of my comprehensive response in the form of a quick question. I'm to the point now where I'm worth risking people doing what is easily done to the quick and isolated points. At this point I'm much more concerned with people thinking at all as opposed to my initial (and still very present) concern about correct reasoning and thinking processes.

So here's a short and to the point question to the opposition. And here's to hopping it inspires thought, and that such thought to some degree displaces blind emotive partisan tendencies in favor of analytical thinking and true dialog.

Category:

Nonprofits & Activism

Tags:

• proposition
• california
• marriage
• gay
• lesbian
• bisexual
• transgender
• gender
• society
• history
• love
• hate
• tolerance
• vote
• 08

[obama4sure]

If you haven't ever talked to a gay person, don't give your judgement on them. They are born that way. Do the research.

[HiveRadical]

I've talked to a great many gay people o4s, I give judgement on the merits their relationship has with regard to the perpetuation of our culture, the fact that they seek marriage means they want a statement from our society on their relationship, if they want such a statement then society should have a say one whether or not they receive such.

And them being born one way or another is to miss the point. Being born a certain way doesn't inherently obligate society to anything.

[Slight22]

I'm waiting for a response :)

[HiveRadical]

Just noticed your sizable response. Will have to answer it latter as it's pretty late for me and I'm exhausted and have plenty that I need to get done tomorrow.

[evilchibi4reel]

I think I sort of understand what you're getting at here and in historical reality, marriage was between opposite genders for two things:

1- the acquiring of the wife as property

2- procreation

As you can see, the rights of children don't fall into the historical history of marriage, rights of children are actually a fairly recent concept.

Most people these days don't use either of those reasons to get married. Therefore, the old institution of marriage holds little value to modern culture.

[CBGB42]

1) Video quality is terrible.

2) I can't make heads or tails of what you're saying.

[Richy15251]

argument from tradition --> fallacy

my big problem is why the hell do you care what other people do if they're not bothering you?

[futurelibralgamer93]

by his reasoning we shouldn't have inter-racial marriage either because it wasn't in the bible. Or what about between classes? Read the bible.

[plankboi]

your ? cant be answered since you already have a view that will not be altered in any way which was made clear by your statement that the opposition to prop 8 is an ill founded view. clearly you just want to stir up the pot and watch the prop 8 opposers go off.

BUT I do have to say that history, morals, values, humanity, ideas, etc evolve. nothing stays the same. if it did this world would be boring. even christian beliefs evolve. and this has nothing to do with equal rights for children.

[LittleMissAmbiguous]

OMG I so agree. Why nowadays do we set up anything as being irrelevant? I mean, a good example would be those pesky negros. Why is it less important now that they are separated from us than it was through all of history? Those goddam blacks impeding on my religious freedom. /sarcasm

please grow a brain. Then make a logical video. So many things we have done all the way throughout history we have now found were in fact ridiculous. Discrimination against women, for example.

[kafcin]

Greece

[showertile]

Because in the eyes of the law there should be no gender. That simple, buddy.

[shitTiT7777777]

okay, seriously, our society needs to propagate like i need a hole in my head. the worlds population is well over 6 billion and counting. WE DONT NEED ANY MORE FUKCING PEOPLE THAN WE ALREADY HAVE. thers going to come a time when the earth wont be able to sustain the amout of people living here. its not like straight coouples are dissapperaing, there will always be people out their to make babies. but if thier are a few people out their who want to not have children let em we dont need extra kids

[MiraxTerrik1]

Have you resorted to name-calling? I did not realize I was talking to a teenager ...

This "hole" is actually a very popular position amongst legal philosophers. The purpose of the law is for order and upholding the fundamental principles of justice. It is not about holding people up to a higher standard of morality.

I honestly don't believe you know much about natural law theory. I suggest you read Fuller, because he's good. He might give you some ammo for future arguments.

[lovealwaysemily]

I watched the first 20 seconds of this video and then my eyes started hurting, so I'll answer the first question I heard.

Gender doesn't matter because love is love.

If people want to get married, they can. It doesn't make straight marriages any less legitamite.