California to De-Legalize Gay Marriage

Thank you :)

Finally, something that makes complete and utter sense in this befuddling controversy. I thank you too.

Sheepy:

^Leviticus 20:13 is generally the most-used quote for this that I've seen.

"If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They must be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads."

But I've seen people on here say that quote has been taken out of context/was only meant to apply to a certain people/something else I've forgotten. And from this site I found a place saying that "To the Jews an abomination was not a law, not something evil like rape or murder forbidden by the Ten Commandments. It was a common behavior by non-Jews that Jews thought was displeasing to God. Jesus and Paul both said the holiness code in Leviticus does not pertain to Christian believers."

Same site also pointing out that the Bible mentions homosexuality a grand total of about seven times? Within the thousands upon thousands of verses, and the large portions of verses that we now pretty much ignore completely (Like the remainder of Lev. 20)...and yet some people still use it as an excuse to be intolerant.

---

Also, the lovely lovely people of the Westboro Baptist Church, in response to the question "Doesn't it say God loves everyone?", say that it never says that in the Bible, and when it does it means to say that 'God loves his people', and not that 'God loves every single person in the universe'. Of course, it's the WBC, so take with as much salt as you like, but it's just a view that some infinitesimally small amount of people have in regards to that idea I felt like pointing out.

Thank you for this. :)

For some odd reason, people base political views on religion, which are two things that I think shouldn't mix. If two homosexuals love each other, then what's wrong with that? I have two aunts that are lesbians, and they're good, Christian people (although I myself am an athiest). There is no logical reason for any kind of marriage to be illegal.

I think people need to understand that there is a seperation of church and state and since marriage isn't purely a religious practice anymore, and also a goverment practice, then homosexuals should be allowed the right to marry. It is infringing on their constitutional rights. With that said, if church or religious institutions wish not to marry gay couples, that is also their right.

We're looking for the debate topic for the next issue of the Mibba Magazine (the first one will be launched today). Since June is Gay Rights Month we're thinking of focusing the magazine around that, which means our Mibba Debate could formulate around Gay Marriage/Gay Rights. If you're interested, PM me with which side you'd like to argue.

if they are making gay couples divorce by force then there really is something wrong with this world. splitting apart people who love eachother is a crime, wether they are gay or not! If christians are fore the de-legalization of gay marriage then they are not christian at all. christians are supposed to hate no one, not be racist or prejudice because jesus was a loving kind man who hated noone.

Prop. 8 was just declared unconstitutional.

“… Proposition 8 was premised on the belief that same-sex couples simply are not as good as opposite-sex couples. Whether that belief is based on moral disapproval of homosexuality, animus towards gays and lesbians or simply a belief that a relationship between a man and a woman is inherently better than a relationship between two men or two women, this belief is not a proper basis on which to legislate. The arguments surrounding Proposition 8 raise a question similar to that addressed in Lawrence v. Texas, when the Court asked whether a majority of citizens could use the power of the state to enforce profound and deep convictions accepted as ethical and moral principles through the criminal code. The question here is whether California voters can enforce those same principles through regulation of marriage licenses. They cannot. California’s obligation is to treat its citizens equally, not to mandate its own moral code. Moral disapproval, without any other asserted state interest, has never been a rational basis for legislation. Tradition alone cannot support legislation.” - Judge Vaughn Walker.

^Woo hoo!

I'm so happy about this. That's an amazing quote, by the way.

DaPrincipessa:

Please, don't talk about things you know nothing about. Yes, in Bible it says God loves everyone. But it also says, that homosexuals should be killed. Do you understand it now?

I am Christian, and I thing gay-marriage and adoption should be legalized.
But some Christians don't.

We all know, that Bible we have now isn't the same, as it was written two thousand years ago. Some things changed, some writers added their own thoughts etc. As for me, I believe that part of killing gays was added, since God loves everybody through all Bible, and wants to kill gays in one part only.
But some Christians don't think so.

And one more thing. Don't generalize. In the same way, that you said: "All Christians hate gays." I could say: "All Americans are obese." Which isn't true, of course.

All of the discrimination comes from prejudice and all of the prejudice comes form generalizing.

So.. Just get your facts straight.

Do keep in mind that the Church remains 100 years behind everything. That's why it has survived as long as it has. I'm sure in the next 100 years the Church will accept same sex marriage. It's just the Church doesn't rush into things, especially when there is an insane amount of outside influence. They don't make decisions in a day.

On a more political standpoint however, gay marriage should be legalized ;P

solitary poetryan:

Do keep in mind that the Church remains 100 years behind everything. That's why it has survived as long as it has. I'm sure in the next 100 years the Church will accept same sex marriage. It's just the Church doesn't rush into things, especially when there is an insane amount of outside influence. They don't make decisions in a day.

That can be taken pretty offensively. Some decisions do come with time, but did you ever think that it's not because they're behind, but that it's just their beliefs about things?

Just saying. Personally I don't see why gay marriage shouldn't be legalized. To put it bluntly, it's no skin off your ass whether or not they're married, so why insist on trying to stop it? And de-legalizing it is just stupid, that's like telling a kid he can jump on the bed one day, then smacking him for it the next (lame example, but it seemed to have the same general idea). You can't say something is fine then immediately take it back.

I don't ever want to get married. Not because I think the idea of people getting married is bad. Marriage is a beautiful thing. I just don't see myself getting married to anybody, for my own personal reasons. But that doesn't mean I think people should be denied these rights because of their sexual orientation. It's ridiculous and doesn't make sense to me at all.

So all of that being said, I'm overjoyed that Prop 8 has been overturned. It's about damn time. :3

pierrot the clown.:

Prop. 8 was just declared unconstitutional.

“… Proposition 8 was premised on the belief that same-sex couples simply are not as good as opposite-sex couples. Whether that belief is based on moral disapproval of homosexuality, animus towards gays and lesbians or simply a belief that a relationship between a man and a woman is inherently better than a relationship between two men or two women, this belief is not a proper basis on which to legislate. The arguments surrounding Proposition 8 raise a question similar to that addressed in Lawrence v. Texas, when the Court asked whether a majority of citizens could use the power of the state to enforce profound and deep convictions accepted as ethical and moral principles through the criminal code. The question here is whether California voters can enforce those same principles through regulation of marriage licenses. They cannot. California’s obligation is to treat its citizens equally, not to mandate its own moral code. Moral disapproval, without any other asserted state interest, has never been a rational basis for legislation. Tradition alone cannot support legislation.” - Judge Vaughn Walker.

Oh yeah, I jumped for joy. Literally jumped for joy.

Too bad the ruling will be appealed and the case sent to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Filistata:

So all of that being said, I'm overjoyed that Prop 8 has been overturned. It's about damn time. :3

So what exactly happened about that? I heard from my girlfriend gays can get married now...that's true right? When did this happen?

^Too soon to tell, in my opinion. Like England's Dreaming said, it will probably be appealed and sent to court. Even if it doesn't, it could take a while before anything actually happens, as far as I can tell. I'm not going to pretend to be an expert or anything.

California's Prop 8 aside, gays can still get married in Connecticut, Iowa, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Vermont, and Washington D.C. Oh, and the Coquille Indian Tribe in Oregon, in case you are interested.

Even if the case does go to the U.S. Supreme Court I still think Prop 8 will be found unconstitutional. I mean, how could they not?

^ Exactly.

I'm not even from America, but I know that the judge in that case (Judge Walker, no?) ruled on the basis that the law is secular, and pretty much tore Counsel to bits for suggesting religious/moral justifications for banning gay marriage. Pair that with the fact that the Governor has already released policy statements endorsing the judicial decision, and I predict it will be upheld in the Supreme Court.

And for a few cents of my own, I wholly endorse the legalisation of gay marriage, both for legislative consistency and as a matter of socio-political rights. Not only is marriage a legal, and not a religious, institution in a secular country (although religious institutions of marriage -ie. 'marriage in the eyes of God' may exist alongside this), but access to the legal institution of marriage confers the availability of symbolic power for couples, as well as securing property and other rights that are not currently equal for defacto and/or civil union partners of any gender.

Bad news. An appeals court has put gay marriage on hold in California, indefinitely, while they decide the constitutionality of Prop 8. Had this ruling not been made same-sex marriages would have been allowed to resume tomorrow. However, Proposition 8 is still remaining intact throughout this time.

While the appeals court has said it is trying to be expeditious with this case, a decision is unlikely to come before the new year. Source

It disgusts me that anyone would take away someone's right to marry. It's just plain wrong to force those couples to divorce. I sincerely hope that this doesn't go through, and that gay marriage stays legal.