Gays blaming blacks for gay marriage ban in California

[Father Time]

I think that's crap, to be honest. The Mormon Church gave around 5K or so, and half, if not most of that, were in-kind donations. Mormons gave to the cause, though I don't think they deserve vitriol either.

Where are you getting 5k from? I've heard the number was much greater.

 

[Mad Scientist]

Man, 91 pages and still flaming! (pun intended )

Is this the longest thread in USMB history?

 

[KittenKoder]

At least they slowed down on making a hundred of these same threads like they normally do.

 

[Truthspeaker]

The Mormon Church did themselves no favors by putting so much money into the prop 8 campaign.

The criticism they get is their own doing.

We are proud of it and not ashamed. Finally somebody willing to say that not everthing goes. Eat drink and be merry for tomorrow we die. There is no god, no punishment and no responsibility for our actions, so just leave us alone you religious wacko's, in fact, let's eliminate the wackos because they are wacko.
You will see it soon.

 

[Truthspeaker]

I'll say that Gavin Newsom served far more effectively for the Yes on Prop. 8 crowd than the "No" crowd. This ad grew so atrociously irritating by November 4th that I voted "No" on 8 just out of spite.

[youtube]<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/4kKn5LNhNto&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/4kKn5LNhNto&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>[/youtube]

So effective that you voted for Gavin Newsom's stance huh?

 

[Shogun]

We are proud of it and not ashamed. Finally somebody willing to say that not everthing goes. Eat drink and be merry for tomorrow we die. There is no god, no punishment and no responsibility for our actions, so just leave us alone you religious wacko's, in fact, let's eliminate the wackos because they are wacko.
You will see it soon.

indeed, your input on the restricting of rights of non-mormon Americans pretty much validates the treatment you will get. I guess it's too bad that your dogma junkie end of days myth won't save you from the reactions of your actions, eh?

 

[Truthspeaker]

indeed, your input on the restricting of rights of non-mormon Americans pretty much validates the treatment you will get. I guess it's too bad that your dogma junkie end of days myth won't save you from the reactions of your actions, eh?

Save me from reactions? What are those reactions going to do to me?!

 

[Truthspeaker]

This isn't about rights at all is it? This about acceptance. Gay couples have the same rights as married people. they want the word "Marriage" because they think it will make their acts accepted. Well it doesn't and it wouldn't. this is about seeing it their way and if you don't see it their way, you are a bigot and should have your vote taken away and your marriage too.
Am I wrong on this... I don't think so. All they want to do is have their ideals shoved down our throat. All we say is do what you want in private and stop obsessing over making us like it. Stop trying to dictate how we live our lives and teach our children.
You say it doesn't affect us? Baloney, it DIRECTLY affects all of us because you want us to validate it, you want us to vote for it and you want to teach it to MY kids that it is normal and ok when I don't think it is. Yes it does directly affect me and the rest of society. why do you think it has been such a bruising battle. Because it is important.

 

[Shogun]

Save me from reactions? What are those reactions going to do to me?!

They are the reactions that you mormons are complaining about these days when *gasp* gays react to the fact that your church worked so hard to promote the second American segregation.


How do you think your early church founders thought of my Missouri ancestors before deciding to get the **** out of dodge and move farther west?

 

[Shogun]

This isn't about rights at all is it? This about acceptance. Gay couples have the same rights as married people. they want the word "Marriage" because they think it will make their acts accepted. Well it doesn't and it wouldn't. this is about seeing it their way and if you don't see it their way, you are a bigot and should have your vote taken away and your marriage too.
Am I wrong on this... I don't think so. All they want to do is have their ideals shoved down our throat. All we say is do what you want in private and stop obsessing over making us like it. Stop trying to dictate how we live our lives and teach our children.
You say it doesn't affect us? Baloney, it DIRECTLY affects all of us because you want us to validate it, you want us to vote for it and you want to teach it to MY kids that it is normal and ok when I don't think it is. Yes it does directly affect me and the rest of society. why do you think it has been such a bruising battle. Because it is important.

No, it's about rights. No one gives a damn if you, personally, do not accept homosexuality as a societal fact. Interracial couples didn't give a **** about Archie Bunkers of the 70s and 80s when choosing to look beyond the jungle fever bullshit. No one is asking you to go suck some dick in order to show your acceptance of homosexuality. If you feel that homosexuality is WRING then, by all means, dont go suck any dicks. But, your opinion applied to create a second class citizenship status regarding a government-vested right to get hitched shouldn't shock you when it results in people labeling you as the new wave of American hatred. The ONLY difference between your church and the westborough baptist church is that mormons have more money, collectively, and a state that they think is all their own.


Fact, if your god is petty enough that he'd have you crusade against the word MARRIAGE applying to gays then you should put another quarter in the diety gumball machine. Absolutely nothing is being shoved "down your throat" besides the concept behind the first amendment and national equality.

 

[Father Time]

We are proud of it and not ashamed. Finally somebody willing to say that not everthing goes. Eat drink and be merry for tomorrow we die. There is no god, no punishment and no responsibility for our actions, so just leave us alone you religious wacko's, in fact, let's eliminate the wackos because they are wacko.
You will see it soon.

How the hell did you manage to go from gay marriage to no rules, and no God?

 

[Father Time]

This isn't about rights at all is it? This about acceptance. Gay couples have the same rights as married people.

Except the right to get married.

they want the word "Marriage" because they think it will make their acts accepted.

Straight couples get it so why not gays?

Well it doesn't and it wouldn't.

Then why are you making such a big deal over it?

this is about seeing it their way and if you don't see it their way, you are a bigot and should have your vote taken away and your marriage too.

Nobody but the most rabid lefties actually think that.

Am I wrong on this... I don't think so. All they want to do is have their ideals shoved down our throat. All we say is do what you want in private and stop obsessing over making us like it. Stop trying to dictate how we live our lives and teach our children.

How YOU live YOUR lives? You're not gay so how the bloody hell is this affecting your life?

You say it doesn't affect us? Baloney, it DIRECTLY affects all of us because you want us to validate it, you want us to vote for it and you want to teach it to MY kids that it is normal and ok when I don't think it is.

It wasn't going to be taught to kids, that was just some of the lies of the prop 8 campaign.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CIL7PUl24hE]YouTube - Prop 8 has nothing to do with schools[/ame]

And again it's asking the government to validate it. Not you personally.

Yes it does directly affect me and the rest of society. why do you think it has been such a bruising battle. Because it is important.

Because people THOUGHT it was really important that gays not be allowed to marry. People can make big deals out of anything.

 

[Cecilie1200]

he can not see the apples for his wall of oranges....

arent most necros...hetro anyways?

Given that 95-97% of the population are heterosexual, it's not only safe but utterly meaningless to say, "Aren't most [fill in the blank] heterosexual?" Most left-handed people are heterosexual, too, but I don't think that means there's any causal connection there. It's just mathematics.

 

[chrismac]

One thing re: the "lie" that it would be taught in school.

First of all, if this was such a lie, perhaps it would've been a good idea to cut a commercial saying it's a lie and showing how it's a lie. Second, IT WASN'T A LIE.

California Code 51933 says that marriage has to be taught in any school which receives funding for sex ed, which around 96% of all CA schools do. The Yes on 8 campaign explained that it was a possibility BASED ON this statute in the Constitution, and on the fact that the same thing happens in Massachusetts. Parents sued the school for teaching their kids about same-sex marriage, and the school said not only is it the law that they teach both types of marriage, but parents had no say in the matter.

It does say in the CA Constitution that ultimately the parents have control over what their children learn, but that's too ambiguous to definitively say it's completely false that gay marriage will be taught in schools.

Not only that, but at the same time they said the No on 8 campaign was talking about how big of a lie this is, the SF Gate published a story about a group of 2nd graders going to their lesbian teachers wedding. Great campaigning, No on 8ers.

 

[Father Time]

One thing re: the "lie" that it would be taught in school.

First of all, if this was such a lie, perhaps it would've been a good idea to cut a commercial saying it's a lie and showing how it's a lie. Second, IT WASN'T A LIE.

California Code 51933 says that marriage has to be taught in any school which receives funding for sex ed, which around 96% of all CA schools do. The Yes on 8 campaign explained that it was a possibility BASED ON this statute in the Constitution, and on the fact that the same thing happens in Massachusetts. Parents sued the school for teaching their kids about same-sex marriage, and the school said not only is it the law that they teach both types of marriage, but parents had no say in the matter.

It does say in the CA Constitution that ultimately the parents have control over what their children learn, but that's too ambiguous to definitively say it's completely false that gay marriage will be taught in schools.

Not only that, but at the same time they said the No on 8 campaign was talking about how big of a lie this is, the SF Gate published a story about a group of 2nd graders going to their lesbian teachers wedding. Great campaigning, No on 8ers.

Last I heard on the matter they oked it with the parents, I'm not sure. Oh and I checked and it only says to teach respect for marriage and I think that's supposed to be for middle schoolers, and it also says in no uncertain terms that parents can opt out. Sorry but MA law has no bearing on CA law.

But yeah let's ignore the superintendent of schools saying it wouldn't be taught.

 

[chrismac]

Where did they say it was "oked" by the parents? Which parents? Where? Teaching respect for marriage could be in elementary schools, since yes, sex ed is taught in elementary school some of the time. And where does it say "in no uncertain terms" that parents could opt out?

And where's the official statement that the "superintendent of schools" assured parents that gay marriage wouldn't be taught in schools?

I guess you can see you left some things out.

 

[ABikerSailor]

Where did they say it was "oked" by the parents? Which parents? Where? Teaching respect for marriage could be in elementary schools, since yes, sex ed is taught in elementary school some of the time. And where does it say "in no uncertain terms" that parents could opt out?

And where's the official statement that the "superintendent of schools" assured parents that gay marriage wouldn't be taught in schools?

I guess you can see you left some things out.

Question, Shit Sac, can you please explain again to all of us EXACTLY how much respect there is for marriage in the hetero community? Larry Craig, Ted Haggard, Jerry Falwell and all his people, Fred Phelps, et al?

If you can't teach respect for marriage in your own home, how in the **** are you going to expect it to be taught in schools? What? Are you too much of a lazy assed person to teach your own children correctly? Chances are, you're none too good in the relationship department, what with your narrow assed views of marriage and all.

How about leaving marriage out of schools altogether? I mean, the kids are there to learn, not start families in 6th grade.

 

[chrismac]

Question, Shit Sac, can you please explain again to all of us EXACTLY how much respect there is for marriage in the hetero community? Larry Craig, Ted Haggard, Jerry Falwell and all his people, Fred Phelps, et al?

If you can't teach respect for marriage in your own home, how in the **** are you going to expect it to be taught in schools? What? Are you too much of a lazy assed person to teach your own children correctly? Chances are, you're none too good in the relationship department, what with your narrow assed views of marriage and all.

How about leaving marriage out of schools altogether? I mean, the kids are there to learn, not start families in 6th grade.

Answer, *****-ass, not enough. Adulterers (especially those of questionable orientation) aren't doing marriage any favors.

However, the fact that a lot of people don't respect the institution of marriage, doesn't mean all heterosexuals don't, so I'm not sure what your examples are supposed to mean.

And apparently you're the lazy-assed person to do some reading. Teaching respect for marriage in the education of the California constitution, and has been there a lot longer than Prop 8 has been on the table. People who supported Prop 8 just used that fact to illustrate what could happen if gay marriage is allowed. Whether or not marriage should be taught in schools is a different issue.

 

[Father Time]

Where did they say it was "oked" by the parents? Which parents? Where? Teaching respect for marriage could be in elementary schools, since yes, sex ed is taught in elementary school some of the time. And where does it say "in no uncertain terms" that parents could opt out?

And where's the official statement that the "superintendent of schools" assured parents that gay marriage wouldn't be taught in schools?

I guess you can see you left some things out.

I linked to the superintendent of schools earlier but here it is again

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CIL7PUl24hE]YouTube - Prop 8 has nothing to do with schools[/ame]

Here's where it says in no uncertain terms that parents can opt out (sorry for leaving that out).

15."Do parents and/or guardians need to be informed if their child is to receive sex education or HIV/STD instruction?

Yes. The law recognizes that while parents and guardians support the teaching of medically accurate, comprehensive sex education in schools, they have the ultimate responsibility for teaching their children about human sexuality; they may choose to withdraw their children from this instruction.

EC sections 51937 and 51938 explain that parents or guardians must be notified (passive consent) by the school at the beginning of the school year about planned comprehensive sexual health education and HIV/AIDS prevention education, be given an opportunity to review materials, and be given the opportunity to request in writing that their child not participate in the instruction."

...

Parents must be notified of any planned assessments, be given the opportunity to review the assessments and, in grades seven through twelve, and be given the opportunity to request in writing that their children not participate. Prior to seventh grade, parents must give their active consent in order for their child to participate.


Frequently Asked Questions - Comprehensive Sexual Health & HIV/AIDS Instruction (CA Dept of Education)

I misread the part about it being only for middle schoolers, but it does say age appropriate and it only mentions respect for marriage will be taught.

Although I guess the burden of proof is on your side that it will be taught to elementary schoolers or kindergarteners. I haven't read anything official that would suggest this.

 

[ABikerSailor]

Answer, *****-ass, not enough. Adulterers (especially those of questionable orientation) aren't doing marriage any favors.

However, the fact that a lot of people don't respect the institution of marriage, doesn't mean all heterosexuals don't, so I'm not sure what your examples are supposed to mean.

And apparently you're the lazy-assed person to do some reading. Teaching respect for marriage in the education of the California constitution, and has been there a lot longer than Prop 8 has been on the table. People who supported Prop 8 just used that fact to illustrate what could happen if gay marriage is allowed. Whether or not marriage should be taught in schools is a different issue.

Well, shit sac, there are more adulterers (that are hetero) than there are people who actually respect marriage. I gave you those examples to show that there are quite a few of your hetero heros that even though they say they respect it, they really don't.

Nope......not lazy assed at all......my FAMILY (not the school), taught me what marriage was supposed to be about by watching my grandparents, as my mother died when I was 8.

You apparently want the government to do all your thinking for you.

Good luck with the career as a sheep.