100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: Supreme Court to uphold a ban on same-sex marriage | |
|---|---|
|
|
 "sponsored by budget signs"
What's the joke, I missed it as usual. 
just the free advertising. corporate bastards just struck me as funny I did notice it and thought it strange, but didn't strike me as funny, But the old guy's message was cute.... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Funny sign.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
all the outrage in the gay community is a bunch of bs..for 2 reasons...1.its a word.. marrige = man and woman, civil union= man+man or woman+woman all that needs to be done is assure that civil unionised couples have the same rights as married couples in every way..and 2.its not discrimination the people have spoken prop 8 was voted on just like the presidency was..and here is an extra : every continent in the world defines marrige between a man and a woman!!!! so thats every nationality/ethnicity in agreement!!(any 1 thats against gay marrige just because they don't like homosexuals are wrong too just for the record) If you're going to make statements try getting your facts straight many European have full gay marriage rights. We are behind them. And since civil unions do not and cannot carry the same rights, remember civil marriage was here before gay marriage became an issue and there are reasons for it's existence. If you give it full rights they we'd need yet another form of union and it just gets ridicules, when there is simply no need. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
all the outrage in the gay community is a bunch of bs..for 2 reasons...1.its a word.. marrige = man and woman, civil union= man+man or woman+woman all that needs to be done is assure that civil unionised couples have the same rights as married couples in every way..and 2.its not discrimination the people have spoken prop 8 was voted on just like the presidency was..and here is an extra : every continent in the world defines marrige between a man and a woman!!!! so thats every nationality/ethnicity in agreement!!(any 1 thats against gay marrige just because they don't like homosexuals are wrong too just for the record) If you're going to make statements try getting your facts straight many European have full gay marriage rights. We are behind them. And since civil unions do not and cannot carry the same rights, remember civil marriage was here before gay marriage became an issue and there are reasons for it's existence. If you give it full rights they we'd need yet another form of union and it just gets ridicules, when there is simply no need. Just make it illegal for everyone. Wanna see a marriage comeback?? Make it illegal...they will come....Seems Americans can't seem to wait to get on the illegal bandwagon. Kat |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
the California Supreme Court was kinda handcuffed on this one. They weren't asked if gay marriage was good or bad or right or wrong they were asked if it was legal for the California voters to amend the state constitution while effectively excluding a portion of the state's population aparently it was naturally it'll get appealed to the Federal Supreme Court to determine if it is in violation of the U.S. Constitution. and I imagine it'll get reversed there I agree with most of your post. While the gay rights movement will appeal it remains to be seen whether or not the Supreme Court will hear the case. They decide which cases they hear, it they have been avoiding the gay marriage issue. As I was reading through all of these posts I was surprised at the fabulous use of the U.S. Constitution. I think it's great that so many have recognized what the GLBT have known for many years. BUT, there is one thing that was not mention. There was a time when the GLBT activists, legal representatives, and supporters were gearing up to take the issue to the Federal Supreme Court. They did so in many small ways, because to get the Fed S.C. to admit to even one small infraction was to win the entire case. But the Fed S.C. refused, year after year, to call up any case that dealt with GLBT equality. THEY ARE NOT STUPID - they did not want to face a country full of Religious hate-filled people. But then Clinton did a foolish thing. He entered into law a new code, not meant to be specifically bad for GLBT but as I said it was a foolish mistake. The law was the protection of marriage act, in which the words marriage between one man and one woman made their way into history, those words did not exist in any legal way in our Federal code before that. Bush brought it back from the near dead and held it out to every fundamental religionist in every state. In other words, he was presenting his personal solicitation for a solution on a silver platter - put the words that exist in the DOMA law into your own state constitution. Since the Federal Supreme Court refuses, to this day, to call up any same-sex legality, the only option and the most dyer was for the GLBT to take their fight state by state - to STOP each state from entering a DOMA type amendment into their own constitution OR to fight for laws which would accept same-sex marriage as legal in each state. California is not over yet, unfortunately neither are the battles in other states that we have temporarily won. But if enough states accept same-sex marriage, then there will be a premise the Supreme Court of this land will not be able to take lightly. That of the full faith and credit act - as posted very early in this thread. Just thought I'd add some more information. Good thread! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
That's my girl. Love to read you Di.
Kat |
|
|
|
|
