I missed the results of this vote in the midst of all the presidential results.

California voted to have a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage??? California?

What happened there, Californians?

California supreme court tries to usurp power in the constitutional process and essentially right law approving gay marriage, so the citizens of the state take it out of their hands by putting it in the constitution?

Fill me in. I am stunned.

Ummm dewd... it's like California dewd.

cool.

Not really sure what happened but, I heard San Francisco was trying to secede from the Union.
So far, no one cares enough to stop them.


Ron

it is the HUGE outpouring of blacks which really threw off alot of expected results. like here in Michigan - it got Prop 1 passed - medical Marijuana !YAY!

that failed many times before - badly - but this time - it was a LANDSLIDE

Now it is credited activist judges? But not when rulings on other things? I'm sure some eople who said there is no such thing ac activist judges before, will now say thats what this is.

It was due to our Hispanic population. They are mostly Catholic.

quote Originally posted by frontal lobe: I missed the results of this vote in the midst of all the presidential results. California voted to have a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage??? California? What happened there, Californians? California supreme court tries to usurp power in the constitutional process and essentially right write ( not intended as a critique, just for clarity) law approving gay marriage, so the citizens of the state take it out of their hands by putting it in the constitution? Fill me in. I am stunned.

This came as a result of the SC declaring previous election results unconstitutional (state). I have no doubt that the same court will issue a similar ruling here.

[This message has been edited by texasfiero (edited 11-07-2008).]

Many were worried that churches would loose their nonprofit status if they refused to marry gays.

Talk about separation of church and state. THAT is what it is for, to keep the governments hands off the churches. In the past years the meaning has been twisted.

quote Originally posted by 2.5: Talk about separation of church and state. THAT is what it is for, to keep the governments hands off the churches. In the past years the meaning has been twisted.

The unfortunate lie in this mess is that 'separation of church and state' NEVER did exist. It is a lie of those who would take religious freedom out of the constitution and ALL religious influence out of government. It is NOT in the constitution and flies in the face of the intent of our founding fathers.

What ever happened to equal protection under the law? I bet all these anti gay laws eventually get declared unconstitutional and discriminatory.

[This message has been edited by avengador1 (edited 11-07-2008).]

quote Originally posted by texasfiero: Hmmm. Results I heard was that it was blacks, even though they voted for O, they supported this legislation. Hispanics, according to what I heard, were much more agreeable to accepting gay marriage.

California's Black population is not that large relative to the Hispanic and Asian populations. The margin of victory was too large for the black turn out alone to make a difference without widespread support from the other groups.

Latest Census:
White: 59.8%
Black: 6.2%
Asian: 12.3%
Hispanic: 35.9%

quote Originally posted by avengador1: What ever happened to equal protection under the law? I bet all these anti gay laws eventually get declared unconstitutional and discriminatory.

Well ya, eventually we will probably have freedom to screw anything we want , even Marry it. (sorry)

quote Originally posted by avengador1: What ever happened to equal protection under the law? I bet all these anti gay laws eventually get declared unconstitutional and discriminatory.

Well, firstly I disagree that they are disciminatory. Marriage is like a country club, you don't have to admit everyone. It is a religious union.

Gays in California are already afforded the same rights as married couples. They can have joint property rights, hospital visitation and care instructions, everything my wife and I can do, they can do.

so what was this bill about anyway? Well, it is about acknowledgement. And using the government to FORCE people to acknowledge you is wrong. This country affords you the right to like or dislike whomever you want. And whether you agree that liking or disliking a group is right or wrong is irrelevant. The Best Man at my wedding was a Lesbian. And BELIEVE ME we have had talks about this issue. I love her like a sister and wish her and her partner of 22 years all the happiness in the world. And I don't view them as anything other than married. BUT, that is my choice. I can't force that choice on everyone. The reality in our society is that we must allow people thier prejudices.

There is more to it too. This bill would have mandated public schools to teach about gay marriage to kids with the parents having NO say into whether they could be exempted from such teachings, for example.

I really love how we Americans pride ourselves as being a nation of equality and equal opportunity....
We are so full of bullshit and hollow meaningless words that it disgusts me. We should be ashamed of ourselves... Nothing but a bunch of two faced dipwads is what we really are.

quote Originally posted by Toddster: California's Black population is not that large relative to the Hispanic and Asian populations. The margin of victory was too large for the black turn out alone to make a difference without widespread support from the other groups. Latest Census: White: 59.8% Black: 6.2% Asian: 12.3% Hispanic: 35.9%

I'm no statatician, but why does that total 114%

quote Originally posted by WhiteDevil88: I'm no statatician, but why does that total 114%

I was wondering myself but I think it has to do with cross classifications.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wik...aphics_of_California

There is a lot more to this than just equal rights. What legalizing gay marriage would do is open the door to brothers/sisters, man/boy, and a host of other oddball combinations. I just returned from California and got a pretty good view of what people feel about this whole thing. It also lessen's the importance of marriage to future generations, where they may never see the need for it, further deteriorating a family atmosphere. It also placed churchs in jeporday of being sued if they refused to perform gay marriages. This in itself was adequate reason to kill such a bill.

quote Originally posted by WhiteDevil88: I'm no statatician, but why does that total 114%

It's that new Math I tell ya, it screwed me up way back in the 6th grade and I still can't figure it out. Barely got thorugh statistics in college, if it hadn't been for a very smart girlfriend, wouldn't have made it at all.

Ron

quote Originally posted by Toddster: California's Black population is not that large relative to the Hispanic and Asian populations. The margin of victory was too large for the black turn out alone to make a difference without widespread support from the other groups. Latest Census: White: 59.8% Black: 6.2% Asian: 12.3% Hispanic: 35.9%

Those numbers are population distribution rather than election results, correct? Blacks in Kalifornia were something like 70% for this amendment while hispanics were more evenly balanced.

http://www.efluxmedia.com/n...osition_8_28299.html

"Although the fact that the black and Latino demographic contributed heavily to the success of Democrat Barack Obama’s election as President, they also showed more conservative views, as a large number of them in California helped the passing of Proposition 8, a ballot measure titled “Eliminates right of same-sex couples to marry.”

Electoral exit polls indicated that 70% of black voters and a large majority of Latino voters had said yes to Proposition 8. Thus, they contributed in no small measure to the measure’s victory by a narrow margin in Los Angeles County, where pre-election polls suggested it would lose. The proposition lost badly in the Bay Area. Overall the preliminary reports from all the precincts show a result of 52.5% in favor of the proposition and 47.5% against. It takes about a month for poll results to be made final but some counties have already stopped issuing marriage certificates to same-sex couples."
---

These are 'exit poll' numbers and probably don't reflect actuality and no number was given for hispanics.

quote Originally posted by 84Bill: I really love how we Americans pride ourselves as being a nation of equality and equal opportunity.... We are so full of bullshit and hollow meaningless words that it disgusts me. We should be ashamed of ourselves... Nothing but a bunch of two faced dipwads is what we really are.

Bill, for once I am not going to just slam you for my own amusement but try to reason with you.

I FEEL much the same way you feel about this. But I voted for Prop 8 and I want to explain why. I already explained in the post above but let me add this thought, I don't want my government telling me what I should feel. Period. I think that people who choose not to live in a particular neighborhood becuase they don't want Black neighbors (for example) is offensive and ignorant. BUT, I would never advocate legislation that would FORCE them to live in a particular neighborhood against their will, or make it a crime to choose one neighborhood over another for reasons of bigotry. That, to me, is the bigger sin. Because it opens the door to the thought police.

I hope your buddies at the California LCR don't hear about this. You'll never be allowed to sneak in an odd photo op with the Governator again!

quote Originally posted by Toddster: Well, firstly I disagree that they are disciminatory. Marriage is like a country club, you don't have to admit everyone. It is a religious union. Gays in California are already afforded the same rights as married couples. They can have joint property rights, hospital visitation and care instructions, everything my wife and I can do, they can do. so what was this bill about anyway? Well, it is about acknowledgement. And using the government to FORCE people to acknowledge you is wrong. This country affords you the right to like or dislike whomever you want. And whether you agree that liking or disliking a group is right or wrong is irrelevant. The Best Man at my wedding was a Lesbian. And BELIEVE ME we have had talks about this issue. I love her like a sister and wish her and her partner of 22 years all the happiness in the world. And I don't view them as anything other than married. BUT, that is my choice. I can't force that choice on everyone. The reality in our society is that we must allow people thier prejudices. There is more to it too. This bill would have mandated public schools to teach about gay marriage to kids with the parents having NO say into whether they could be exempted from such teachings, for example.

[This message has been edited by Jeremiah (edited 11-07-2008).]

quote Originally posted by avengador1: What ever happened to equal protection under the law? I bet all these anti gay laws eventually get declared unconstitutional and discriminatory.

Unfortunately, it doesn't exist everywhere.

quote Originally posted by 84Bill: I really love how we Americans pride ourselves as being a nation of equality and equal opportunity.... We are so full of bullshit and hollow meaningless words that it disgusts me. We should be ashamed of ourselves... Nothing but a bunch of two faced dipwads is what we really are.

Well, we are dipwads with many many faces that make up the country. There are many many viewpoints to be seen.

Another reason why Prop 8 passed, according to what I've read, is voter backlash. There was an earlier proposition that was supposed to do the same thing, and judges threw it out. There have been several occasions where we voted for one of these propositions and they got shelved or killed by the courts. The voters don't like that. When they vote for something to become law, they expect it to become law.

quote Originally posted by avengador1: What ever happened to equal protection under the law? I bet all these anti gay laws eventually get declared unconstitutional and discriminatory.

But I thought this one wasn't a law, it was a constitutional amendment.

If it is voted into the constitution, how can it be unconstitutional? It is in the constititution.

THAT is what citizens have had to DO in order to protect their decisions from activist, manipulative judges who subvert the process. They had to take it out of the hands of the judges and put it in the constitution.

quote Originally posted by Toddster: But

There are not buts.. Either it is or it aint.

Equality or not equal... You say NOT equal therefor you will be lying if you say this country has equal rights

Also it would mean that the words "all men are created equal" is a lie as well.

It is anyway if the definition of a man is to be with another man.

quote Originally posted by 84Bill: Also it would mean that the words "all men are created equal" is a lie as well.

Not so, being created equal is not the same as equality. Any well paid lawyer can prove that.

Ron

Just wait until they use "all men are created equal" to mean they all deserve a piece of the pie, spread the wealth baby!

Sick puppies man.

quote Originally posted by frontal lobe: But I thought this one wasn't a law, it was a constitutional amendment. If it is voted into the constitution, how can it be unconstitutional? It is in the constititution. THAT is what citizens have had to DO in order to protect their decisions from activist, manipulative judges who subvert the process. They had to take it out of the hands of the judges and put it in the constitution.

That's one that really pisses me off - legislating from the bench. Certain interests, such as environmentalists, like to file lawsuits which have an outcome that becomes the same as a law being passed. So a special interest group can file a lawsuit and the judge's decision becomes, effectively, a new law. And we don't get to vote on it, we have no say, we can't write to our representation...we have no recourse, because a judge said so. This s*** has to stop.

quote Originally posted by fierobear: we have no recourse, because a judge said so. This s*** has to stop.

Kudos to you Californians. You DID stop it. You wrote it into the constitution and took it out of their hands.

Next up, someone write a constitutional amendment against the activist judges NEXT usurpation of power.

Great job.


BTW, on this SPECIFIC issue, the DEFINITION of marriage is a man and a woman.

The only gay marriage would be a lesbian woman marrying a homosexual man. Which IS constitutionally allowed.

A man and a man can have a civil union. So can two woman. I'm not standing up against that, personally. But you don't get to make a new definition of a word. Make your OWN word. Marriage is already taken.

quote Originally posted by 84Bill: There are not buts.. Either it is or it aint.

We are talking about a proposition in Calif. Buts is very much an important part of gay marriage discussion.
Continue please.

quote Originally posted by frontal lobe: BTW, on this SPECIFIC issue, the DEFINITION of marriage is a man and a woman. The only gay marriage would be a lesbian woman marrying a homosexual man. Which IS constitutionally allowed. A man and a man can have a civil union. So can two woman. I'm not standing up against that, personally. But you don't get to make a new definition of a word. Make your OWN word. Marriage is already taken.

Pretty much hit the bullseye with that one Doc.

Ron

quote Originally posted by frontal lobe: BTW, on this SPECIFIC issue, the DEFINITION of marriage is a man and a woman. The only gay marriage would be a lesbian woman marrying a homosexual man. Which IS constitutionally allowed. A man and a man can have a civil union. So can two woman. I'm not standing up against that, personally. But you don't get to make a new definition of a word. Make your OWN word. Marriage is already taken.

That IS the issue. They can still have domestic partnerships, with all the rights that go with it. People just didn't want *marriage* to be anything but man + woman. That is viewed as a *religious* thing, not something for the government to define for churches.

quote Originally posted by frontal lobe: I missed the results of this vote in the midst of all the presidential results. California voted to have a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage??? California? What happened there, Californians? California supreme court tries to usurp power in the constitutional process and essentially right law approving gay marriage, so the citizens of the state take it out of their hands by putting it in the constitution? Fill me in. I am stunned.

I haven't bothered to read the rest of the responses, but one thing that the Democrat party forgot to consider (at least the California left of the party) when they backed Barack Obama is that... the vast majority of black Americans are typically very religions.

Prior to this election, most black Americans (at least the majority of them) never bothered to vote prior to this. To them, it didn't seem like there was anything worth voting for. It really is / was a double-edged sword for the Democrats. Many of the FAR left leaning Democrats (the ones who want to eliminate the word God from every part of the constitution, money, etc...), seperation of church & state, homosexual rights, etc... they never considered in a million years the aspect of the black vote. As I said, black Americans are typically VERY religious, and this is now the result. Landslide passing of anti-liberal left legislation as it relates to religion and gay rights.

It's a bitter-sweet victory for most of them. If you look at the stats, it was something like an overwhelming majority of black Americans, 78%, voted to ban gay marriage, as apposed to the majority of whites 52%. And the overwhelming majority of whites that voted against it were / are Repbulican.

It really changes the dynamics of the Democrat party... seriously... since the Nanci Pelosi crowd is at odds...

------------------
Todd,
2006 Pontiac Solstice
2004 Volkswagen Beetle Convt. (Wife's)
2002 Ford Crown Victoria LX
1987 Pontiac Fiero SE / V6
1981 EZ-GO Xi875-A "Miami Dolphins" Medical Cart
1973 Volkswagen Type-2 Transporter
1973 Oldsmobile Cutlass Supreme 350