Prop 8 heads to Calif. Supreme Court

[Father Time]

It is also how a reasonable person can view homosexuality and homosexual marriage as morally wrong, yet support the idea of freedom by allowing them to make that choice themselves rather than dictating what is allowed based upon the arrogant assumption that their moral values are absolute and absolutely correct.

Oh please, this is BS. You're just trying to create a false catch-22 where people either let you do whatever you want, or you accuse them of trying to run your life and impress their morals on you. What's arrogant is your entitlement.

A catch 22 would be damned if you do, damned if you don't. Although you yourself are creating a false dichotomy by saying 'either let us dictate marriage or we'll descend into anarchy'

 

[KittenKoder]

It is also how a reasonable person can view homosexuality and homosexual marriage as morally wrong, yet support the idea of freedom by allowing them to make that choice themselves rather than dictating what is allowed based upon the arrogant assumption that their moral values are absolute and absolutely correct.

Oh please, this is BS. You're just trying to create a false catch-22 where people either let you do whatever you want, or you accuse them of trying to run your life and impress their morals on you. What's arrogant is your entitlement.

A catch 22 would be damned if you do, damned if you don't. Although you yourself are creating a false dichotomy by saying 'either let us dictate marriage or we'll descend into anarchy'

However that is hypocrisy, saying it's wrong for others to follow their own morals by crying that if they do they are forcing them on you.

 

[N4mddissent]

It is also how a reasonable person can view homosexuality and homosexual marriage as morally wrong, yet support the idea of freedom by allowing them to make that choice themselves rather than dictating what is allowed based upon the arrogant assumption that their moral values are absolute and absolutely correct.

Oh please, this is BS. You're just trying to create a false catch-22 where people either let you do whatever you want, or you accuse them of trying to run your life and impress their morals on you. What's arrogant is your entitlement.

You call it B.S. and a false catch-22 but do not even address the point it makes. Whether you choose to acknowledge it or not, there are issues where personal moral choices are necessary and it is these situations to which I was referring. The fact that you use hyperbolic arguments claiming I want to do what I want or will claim someone is trying to impress their arguments on me demonstrates that you are either unable to understand the actual argument or intentionally blind to it.

First, it does not even apply to me directly, since I am a heterosexual male. But I can recognize the fact that whatever I personally think is moral in regards to homosexuality may not be universal, and those with different views have as much right to their view as I do to mine. It is obvious that the only arrogance involved is on the side of those who believe their personal moral perspective on this issue should be absolute and universal. Anyone who believes homosexuality is morally acceptable is wrong in their view. This is just a uncompromising bully attitude and using the latest ideological buzzwords like "entitlement" does not change this fact.

If your neighbor is gay and married, it will not directly affect your life in any way. The only argument you can put forth is that you think it is morally wrong, and for that reason alone, you want to restrict his/her actions. Many people believe that alcohol is morally wrong. Some believe that interracial relationships are morally wrong. Catholicism says that birth control is morally wrong. All of these were restricted on the basis of being immoral at one time.

I hope that eventually, the more backwards elements of our society will realize that a society that restricts personal choices and governed by a particular theological or ideological view to the exclusion of all others, cannot be considered a free nation.

When Thomas Jefferson said,

"Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legislative powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between church and State."​

I believe that it was this sort of situation that he felt was a threat to liberty. For it is opinion that is the basis of opposition to homosexual marriage. And this opinion having a particular theology as its source, would be no surprise either. Jefferson understood that religious and moral views differ and those views cannot be reconciled with freedom unless they be kept serparate from civil law except in cases directly affecting others who do not share the view. Jefferson's words still ring true,

"In every country and in every age, the priest has been hostile to liberty."
Thomas Jefferson, March 17, 1814

"History, I believe, furnishes no example of a priest-ridden people maintaining a free civil government."
Thomas Jefferson, Dec. 6, 1813.


When freedom trumps dogma- liberty reigns. When dogma trumps freedom- liberty dies.

 

[dj defkawn]

Honestly in these economic hard times, don't our elected officials have anything better to do with their paid time, then preventing gay people from marrying eachother lol, seriously? I mean a same-sex relationship isn't against the law, so who cares if same-sex couples want the same rights that heterosexual couples can get! I mean honestly if a gay person gets married it in no way affects my life, so why is it so important to deny them that right??? I mean what's important to me is how our elected officials are going to make it still possible so that I can receive a good college education. Or how it is my job position isn't going to be next on the chopping block, because the organiziation I work for started laying people off today due to budget constraints. So again if a gay or lesbian person is a tax-paying American just like myself, who cares if they want to get married.