if needed.

Don't like the laws? Move!

I could not live in California (my family is from Merced) because I do not believe in the absurd gun laws of California. So, I left.

Do the same, preserve your rights.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

It shouldn't be too long. If Schwarzenegger manages to boot half a million families out of state-funded welfare programs, which means you'd have homelessness and hunger rising by the millions, then California is going up in flames.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I have lived in Europe for 20 years now and did not live in California when I lived in the States (I'm a Chicago boy), but there's one thing about this issue which puzzles me. The California Supreme Court has now ruled that the right to marry applies to some same-gendered couples but not to all same-gendered couples. Am I the only one who sees a problem with this in the sense that the US Constitution really does guarantee EQUAL protection under the law? Of course, America is a country in which EQUAL once meant rich, white and male, and it has been a long slog in canceling that bit of chauvinism (not done yet), but still -- doesn't the Constitution say that?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The GOP figured out how to stack the courts. Only the voters can fix the problem by not allowing any Repubs to get elected and working the Dem primaries to get Liberal Dems in office. Want equal rights for all? Volunteer your time to get people in office that support equal right for all. Alternately, run for office.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Oh, you can bash Ms. California to feel better too. She was so callous as to have her own opinion. She deserves your scorn.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

What do you do? Very simple: do anything you want and put your own label on it. You already accepted being called "gay" as opposed to "straight" and you did not have to fight for it. In other words, do not re-write Webster's Dictionary. Since "homosexual" does not equal "heterosexual", "same sex marriage" does not equal "marriage". Otherwise, design and practice your own rituals, get equal rights with those who live as "married" couples and enjoy your relationship until divorce does you part.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Know your enemy. Expose their hypocrisy. I strongly encourage any of us who haven't yet, to peruse the old testament the next time you take a dump. Those few minutes are plenty to expose you to bat shit loony dogma these miscreants are guided by. Check out Exodus through Deuteronomy. Take note of the many "laws" which these fascists somehow overlook, and begin calling them on it. Enough with perpetually playing defense. These bastards are not going to stop. If you have room for another sticker on your bike (or car) and feel like donating a buck to the ACLU, please check out my page at braceforimpact.org
GOD CREATED DIVORCE FOR A MAN AND A WOMAN is one of 10 available stickers. Let's stick it to 'em!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Since California is a state loaded with "can't-hack-its," "loopy-daydreamers," "pie-in-the-sky'ers," "rugged-individualists-on-welfare,"and various and sundry losers on either side the great political mud puddle, it comes as no surprise that the California Supreme Court hands down a decision guaranteed to please no one and solve nothing.

All Californians are to blame for the state of their state since they too often participate in that great miasmatic, quagmire of democratic demagoguery and political quackery, initiative and referendum.

One living in a more intelligent part of the country wonders how many heterosexual, serial monogamist Christians voted in favor of Prop 8 to prevent queers from the joys of divorce court? Then again, how many of California's minority citizens, victims of past and on-going racial discrimination, voted for Prop 8 because homosexuality is taboo in "their" community (RuPaul, ain't gay, he just dresses that way!)

Oh, well, California's going to be broke, thanks in large measure to another resent referendum vote, any day now so why should the rest of us care. If the rest of us are lucky, the big San Andreas earthquake will hit soon and Stupidity-On-the-Sea will drop into the Pacific.

As a wag has noted elsewhere on this site: "California: Some day we will catch up to Iowa."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Legal state marriage itself is discriminatory...same sex or not.

After having a long and thought-provoking discussion about same-sex (gay) marriage with a gay friend of mine, we both started to question if legal marriage (legal unions) itself is a form of discrimination and/or if marriage should be a legal right to begin with. Think about this for a moment, if someone is single or in a legally unrecognized relationship (which more and more couples and parents are in), they are not given the same legal rights and financial benefits as a married couple, so how is this not some form of discrimination toward people who are somehow unable to marry or choose not to be married?

Ultimately, the legal institution of marriage itself should be under scrutiny, as far as equal rights and discrimination are concerned. Marriage itself is not even mentioned in the U.S. Constitution or the Bill of Rights. So, is legal marriage itself a constitutional right, as others have asked? Let me restate, is legal marriage itself a constitutional right for anyone - gay, straight, black, white, purple, and so on? I do not think so.

Why do married individuals receive certain rights and benefits that their unmarried counterparts do not receive in this day and age?

What makes married individuals special or important enough in our present society to receive special rights and benefits that others do not receive?

Do marriage rights and privileges truly benefit the whole of society in this day and age, especially when we take into account divorce rates, the amount of single and divorced parents, and the amount of couples that have remarried?

Is the state(s) over-stepping their authority by giving special rights* and rights not afforded by the constitution to individuals who are married?

* special rights : "laws granting rights to one or more groups which are not extended to other groups"

I think it is important to look at all the angles. This angle is not a question about gay marriage though, but about marriage itself.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Ultimately, the U.S. Supreme Court (and it may be that the appointment of Sonia Sotomayor will prove to be a step in this direction) must decide that it's unconstitutional to create second class citizens -- based on sexual orientation or gender identity or anything else. Separate but not equal is not just unconstitutional -- it's wrong.

Rev. Debra W. Haffner

http://debrahaffner.blogspot.com

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Hey, look at it this way: the CA supremes have opened a door. You should be thanking them for the opportunity.

Start with Proposition 9, to outlaw marriage between Mormons. Wait a couple generations, then try again. If necessary, repeat with the Baptists or some other rabidly homophobic group.

Problem solved - along with several others.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

YO! HOMOPHOBES!

I've asked this question over & over again. I have yet to get an answer.

Two gay people get married:

HOW DOES THAT HURT YOU?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Finally, finally the court has recognized the will of the people, instead of dictating to them. My choice would be that the government gets out of the marriage business altogether. Give equal civil union rights to everyone: same sex, opposite sex, multiples of all. Let an individual's religion, including the atheist's religion of environmentalism, to confer the state of marriage. "Give on to Caesar what is Caesar’s, Give on to God what is God's"

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

So, the majority of Californians have spoken, huh? What does that say about the majority there? So, the California "supreme" court has decided in favor of hateful, fearful, stupid ignoramuses, huh? What does that say for that august body? We have a bad case of STUPID here in the USA. It's curable only through a first-rate education for ALL citizens. This is being opposed in one way or another. Think about this: What's one of the first things to suffer during a budget crunch? Education, that's what, but not pay raises for our fearless leaders. What a crock.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The support for California's Proposition 8 is often called 'religious'. But America today counts roughly 2500 (!) distinct Christian denominations and many other large and small religions.
Where do all of them stand on the subject of same sex marriage?

Do they celebrate it, condemn it, or remain neutral?
All of the above.
Even churches worshipping the same Prophet or Holy Book are all over the map.
There is no consensus what so ever, and never was.

In a sermon on belief, Peter Morales, my Unitarian Universalist minister (who may soon become the UU Association's next president), recently preached how within Christianity the same teaching was deemed 'eternal truth' in one century but deadly heresy in another.

Because religious "truths" are volatile and individualistic, we must not allow that some arbitrary theology dictates the law of the land.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The United States set itself on a permanent course toward theocracy when it added the phrase "under God" to the "Pledge of Allegiance" -- the capital G forcing us to declare allegiance to the infinitely oppressive deity of Abraham any time we declare allegiance to the United States.

Thus 55 years later the U.S. is already a de facto theocracy, a condition that cannot be ameliorated by any democratic process simply because the minds of theocrats (whether Bible-pounder, Qu'ran-brandisher or Talmud-thumper) are forever sealed by the impenetrable cement of fundamentalism and the inviolable code of fundamentalist savagery. Hence Proposition 8.

Hence too the true significance -- tragically ignored -- of the California Supreme Court ruling: that constitutional rights can be overturned by majority vote. When the California decision is upheld at the federal level by the Bush Court, as it surely will be (not the least because it fulfills a long-sought ruling-class goal), it will have nullified the Bill of Rights and the 14th Amendment and thereby removed the final obstacle in the way of national electoral imposition of fully declared theocracy: the “Christian Nation” already implicit in the revised "Pledge of Allegiance" -- a nation in which the electorate could even vote to re-legalize slavery. The Proposition 8 decision is literally the death-knell of U.S. liberty -- no doubt the reason its meaning is so thoroughly censored.

As I said yesterday, public support for Proposition 8 reveals the magnitude of the theocratic threat. The Mormons and the Roman Catholic Church joined forces to organize the California initiative to outlaw gay marriage, invoking the biblical principle that homosexuality is a mortal sin and that a homosexual is therefore an “abomination” -- an affront to the ever-vengeful god of Abraham: that is, the deity of Judaism, Christianity and Islam. The Christian effort garnered a decisive majority vote -- 52 percent -- with polls indicating that actual public support ran as high as 57 percent.

Meanwhile truthful analysts -- those who point out the California results were predictable given earlier findings that 63 percent of the U.S. population believes the Bible is the infallible word of god -- are methodically silenced by Big Business Media. Never mind that additional data -- the breathtaking misogyny evident in popular opposition to reproductive choice (51 percent); the hatred of science proven by wholesale rejection of evolution (60 percent); the implacable hostility to gays evidenced by three-fourths of the African-American population and two-thirds of the Hispanic population -- portrays a Christian population already so willfully ignorant and bigoted, its only present-day doctrinal counterparts are products of the harshest Islamic despotisms.

Why is this happening? Because theocracy with its vicious sexual oppression and omnipresent death-squad paranoia is deemed essential to maximize profits: the example of the U.S. South long ago proved a workforce so terrorized is the most profitable workforce on earth. And as Obama is teaching us by his wholesale betrayal of campaign promises, the propagation of capitalism -- absolute protection of the ruling class, total subjugation of all the rest of us -- is the sole purpose of government and governance at all levels of the United States.

Therefore forget squandering money in definitively futile attempts to change the minds of theocratic bigots. The only sensible response is for those of us on the Christian list of “heretics and abominations” is to follow the example set by the Jews in the early years of Hitler’s Third Reich: leave the country while we still can, before the Christian hate list becomes the U.S. death list

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

MY Bible is the Torah and it works for ME.
Other people are free to do what works for them as long as they don't commit felony crimes of violence against others and that includes GAYBASHING!

I have a pistol for my own DEFENSE and it is kept LOCKED UP in my home!

I AM SICK AND TIRED OF THESE PSEUDO RELIGIOUS PEOPLE TRYING TO DIVERT FROM THE MAIN EVENTS WITH LOUD AND NOISY SIDESHOWS ABOUT ABORTION AND GAYS.

Because I THINK THAT WHAT PEOPLE DO IN THEIR PRIVATE LIFE IS THEIR OWNED DAMNED BUSINESS!

A woman's choice to have a kid should be between HER and HER PHYSICIAN and NOBODY ELSE!
IT IS A MEDICAL DECISION. PERIOD. ALL OF YOU IGNORANT,LOUDMOUTH RELIGIOUS FANATICS, BUTT OUR!

WE NEED FEWER PEOPLE IN THE WORLD --NOT MORE!

If GAY PEOPLE want to MARRY -- IT SHOULD BE NOBODY ELSE'S BUSINESS but THEIRS...It should be a joyful occasion for them and their invited guests.

It's NONE of my business and it is NO MONEY out of my pocket and they have done nothing to harm me.

NOT LIKE THE POLITICAL OPERATIVES WHO THREATEN PEOPLE WITH ABORTION, GUN CONTROL,GAY MARRIAGE AND TAKING SOCIAL SECURITY AWAY FROM THE OLD PEOPLE!
This is done to divert attention from their STEALING and LYING --- to whip the sheeple to a frenzy so that the crooks in public office can hide their dirty dealings behind this HUGE SMOKESCREEN of NON-ISSUES I have named here.

I AM SORRY THAT PROPOSITION 8 WAS UPHELD.

I also think if I was a gay or a lesbian person, I would LEAVE California and go somewhere I was allowed to marry...

And as many gay and lesbians who are involved in the film and allied industries, the California economy would COLLAPSE!

ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS AND THE OCTOMOM --- they want it all and they want it now and they can have it.

Do you think that Mexico would take California back? Please?????

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Just asking.

Has AlterNet given up on the subject? I see Andrew Sullivan is posting almost every day on pot. Why not AlterNet?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Put that on your signs...!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Hold on here and put your money on the table... don't be so quick to claim that what happened in California has somehow submerged our state below the basis of being a future element in the outcome of this issue.

The decision that occurred here has left the door wide open to advance the case to the U.S. Supreme court based on the fact that those 18,000+ marriages that were left untouched by this decision are the basis to bring a much more strengthened and clearly viable discrimination challenge before the national supreme court, based on the fact that one group of gay people retains the right to their marriage status while the remainder of that group that has been denied the same status.

In this instance, the discrimination that has occurred as a result of the initiative process can't be more clearly and obviously defined.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Methinks it's time for a little theatrics.

How many Christians know that Jesus equated second (and third, and fourth) marriages with adultery?

2 Mark 10 When they were in the house again, the disciples asked Jesus about this. He answered, "Anyone who divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery against her. And if she divorces her husband and marries another man, she commits adultery."

How many Christians are walking around, thinking they're married in the eyes of the Lord, unaware that they are defiling the sanctity of marriage? They may not be defying the sanctity of marriage laws, but this does call into question how consistent the "traditional values" camp is when it comes to doing what God said is right. Who knew how many shameless adulterers and adulteresses belonged to the churches currently demanding that gays get their dirty little feet off the traditional marriage carpet? I'm shocked, personally.

So, tireless gay warriors: Time to do your Bible research, make up some outraged signs, and stomp on over to your nearest conservative church demanding to know how many adulterous marriages are recognized there, and why. Demand that laws be passed banning second and later marriages on the same grounds used to demand a ban on gay marriage. Take the stand that if your relationship can't have the seal of human government approval because of traditional, religious dogma, neither should theirs. They get the tax advantages that come with married-filing-jointly status. Gays do not. And God isn't on their side, if they aren't on their first marriage!

Either a lot of Christians will leave the church in disgust as their pastors are forced to admit what Jesus said about divorce, or a lot of gay couples will get their wish, when those Christians are forced to think about how literally they want to take traditional wisdom on marriage.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I personally think that homosexual behavior is gross, even between two girls. But I don't see why people are making such a big deal about them wanting to get married. Who cares? I have more important things in my life to worry about.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

منتديات نوكيا الشرق الاوسط
نوكيا الشرق الاوسط

دليل المواقع
العاب فلاشيه
دردشة
طب الاعشاب
Site Map

احدث اجهزة نوكيا
برامج نوكيا

برامج نوكيا الجيل الثالث
برامج الجوال العربية

برامج نوكيا الجيل الخامس
شاشات التوقف - خطوط الجوال
تعريب البرامج , كسر البرامج

العاب جوال
العاب نوكيا الجيل الثالث

العاب الانجيج الجيل الثالث
العاب نوكيا الجيل الخامس
ثيمات الجوال
ثيمات نوكيا الجيل الثالث
ثيمات نوكيا الجيل الخامس
مسجات
فديو
اناشيد
نغمات, تحميل نغمات
اي فون
سوني اريكسون
برامج كمبيوتر
برامج الحماية و الصيانة
برامج المالتيميديا, برامج الصوتيات, برامج الفيديو
شرح استخدام البرامج
العاب الكترونية, العاب الكمبيوتر, العاب بلاي ستيشن
افلام سينما
تحميل افلام عربية
تحميل افلام اجنبية
منتدى السيارات
صور
نكات, صرقعه
اعشاب طبية
عالم حواء
الديكور و الأثاث المنزلي - The Design and Decor Section
تحديث سوفت وير نوكيا
خيمة رمضان

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]