[ms] · Est. May 2002
One durable person. One social graph. Many communities—and every way people speak, share, listen, write, gather and remember.
speechless. even though I kinda hang my hat on the opposite ideological aisle, I love him for stuff like this. Hate him if you want, but this is...for lack of better words....[I]perfect[/I]. :shock:
[YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hnHyy8gkNEE[/YOUTUBE]
Re: Keith Olbermann's best Special Comment ever (on Prop 8)
Ya, I just don't understand the whole 'sanctity' of marriage. Ridiculous if you ask me. Then you have the retards who compare this to allowing people to bang animals, yet those people have not looked at the genetic components into why people become gay. Such dichotomies in our society.
Re: Keith Olbermann's best Special Comment ever (on Prop 8)
Churches should have their tax-exempt status taken away. This is legislation from the pulpit.
Another great special comment from Keith, btw. He has a gift of arguing points in eloquent and common-sense ways.
Re: Keith Olbermann's best Special Comment ever (on Prop 8)
[quote=Localizer;675010]Ya, I just don't understand the whole 'sanctity' of marriage. Ridiculous if you ask me. Then you have the retards who compare this to allowing people to bang animals, yet those people have not looked at the genetic components into why people become gay. Such dichotomies in our society.[/quote]
marriage is a religious ordinance. it was first and foremost religious, then the state got involved. so while i am all for the gays and lesbians getting the same rights, i am very opposed to them calling that a marriage. it's not a marriage, a marriage is between a man and a woman. call it a union, get the same rights, you are good that is why it failed.
Re: Keith Olbermann's best Special Comment ever (on Prop 8)
[quote=shosh;675020]marriage is a religious ordinance. it was first and foremost religious, then the state got involved. so while i am all for the gays and lesbians getting the same rights, i am very opposed to them calling that a marriage. it's not a marriage, a marriage is between a man and a woman. call it a union, get the same rights, you are good that is why it failed.[/quote]
I agree with that. Government should separate itself from religion. I don't think it's so much about the word "marriage" itself for those who oppose prop 8 as it's about the rights. And rights like these (that previously existed in CA) should not be taken away.
Tax the churches, dammit.
Re: Keith Olbermann's best Special Comment ever (on Prop 8)
nah brah. you got it backwards in context: the government is not forcing churches to marry gays, just the same rights as married people. right now they have civil unions which, as far as I can tell, don't have the same protections as marriage does; and the difference between 'civil union' and 'marriage' is merely semantics, but the legal differences are still large and wide. the churches themselves decide whether they want to allow gays to marry within thier religious doctrines, but the government isn't forcing churches to marry.
The government should not be involved in the religious institution of marriage; civil unions should be allowed for everyone. However, since the government decided to poke thier nose in religion, they should afford the same rights to homosexuals as well.
How can you, as a conservative, tell me, that you aren't using the government to oppress others? How can you be anti-government and in the same breath, use government for personal means that really have no affect on you?
Re: Keith Olbermann's best Special Comment ever (on Prop 8)
[quote=MJDub;675025]I agree with that. Government should separate itself from religion. I don't think it's so much about the word "marriage" itself for those who oppose prop 8 as it's about the rights. And rights like these (that previously existed in CA) should not be taken away.[/quote]
every person i have talked to, who supported prop 8, was against the fact that it was still being called a marriage. most had no issue with the gays having rights. i think both sides need to give in a bit: the gays should accept their unions cant be called marriages, and the gay haters should take the word marriage and let them have their rights. but both sides are too stubborn
Re: Keith Olbermann's best Special Comment ever (on Prop 8)
^ i'm with MJ, churches should not be tax exempt. our financial troubles would be over if we started doing it. I don't think churches should exist if they cannot be viable in the marketplace; just like businesses, the right to exist only maintains so long as they can attract parishoners willing to part with thier hard earned money.
Re: Keith Olbermann's best Special Comment ever (on Prop 8)
[quote=88Mariner;675027]nah brah. you got it backwards in context: the government is not forcing churches to marry gays, just the same rights as married people. right now they have civil unions which, as far as I can tell, don't have the same protections as marriage does; and the difference between 'civil union' and 'marriage' is merely semantics, but the legal differences are still large and wide. the churches themselves decide whether they want to allow gays to marry within thier religious doctrines, but the government isn't forcing churches to marry.
The government should not be involved in the religious institution of marriage; civil unions should be allowed for everyone. However, since the government decided to poke thier nose in religion, they should afford the same rights to homosexuals as well.
How can you, as a conservative, tell me, that you aren't using the government to oppress others? How can you be anti-government and in the same breath, use government for personal means that really have no affect on you?[/quote]
i dont know what you are accusing me of, but if you read my post i said i am 100% for them having the same rights without it being called a marriage. allow them their civil unions, and extend the same rights to the civil unions as to marriages.
just dont call it a marriage.
Re: Keith Olbermann's best Special Comment ever (on Prop 8)
If history has taught us anything, it is that "separate but equal" doesn't work so well. Seems like pretty much the same thing to me.
Re: Keith Olbermann's best Special Comment ever (on Prop 8)
^ what's your beef with semantics then? i mean, ffs, several religions, including jewish and christian sects actually marry gay couples.
what are you still protecting? again, semantics.
Re: Keith Olbermann's best Special Comment ever (on Prop 8)
[quote=88Mariner;675037]^ what's your beef with semantics then? i mean, ffs, several religions, including jewish and christian sects actually marry gay couples.
what are you still protecting? again, semantics.[/quote]
the sanctity of marriage, a God given ordinance. that's what im protecting
in b4 religious ridicule
Re: Keith Olbermann's best Special Comment ever (on Prop 8)
well, which 'god' are you using to define marriage? because like i said, several jewish and christian sects do marry gay couples.
edit: and how could you possibly now what god wants? it is self-serving circular nonsense.
Re: Keith Olbermann's best Special Comment ever (on Prop 8)
[quote=88Mariner;675040]well, which 'god' are you using to define marriage? because like i said, several jewish and christian sects do marry gay couples.
edit: and how could you possibly now what god wants? it is self-serving circular nonsense.[/quote]
these are my beliefs, if you want to get into a discussion about how i know what God wants or what God wants, we can do that. It starts with the Bible, but it goes deeper than that.
Re: Keith Olbermann's best Special Comment ever (on Prop 8)
so basically you can't substantiate your beliefs with anything. You just don't want gays to use the word 'marriage'.
srsly? they're 99.9999% at marriage, and you deprive them of a few re-arranged letters. Absurd.
Re: Keith Olbermann's best Special Comment ever (on Prop 8)
[QUOTE=88Mariner;675040]well, which 'god' are you using to define marriage? because like i said, several jewish and christian sects do marry gay couples. [/QUOTE]
also, people have been getting married since well before Christianity even came into being. Ancient Romans and Greeks got married, so I guess we need to consult Zeus and/or Jupiter on this as well? Matter of fact, I reject this whole idea that marriage is fundamentally a religious sacrament, because IIRC, marriage started out as being as much about property rights as anything, and then the various religions took the concept and ran with it. FFS, when you get married by a judge, you're just as "married" as if a priest did the ceremony.
Re: Keith Olbermann's best Special Comment ever (on Prop 8)
^ just got off a tele-conference with Zeus, Mithras, Wotan, and Thor. They said it's cool.
Re: Keith Olbermann's best Special Comment ever (on Prop 8)
i couldnt agree with keith olberman more. well said all aorund. there could not be a better expression of the right to marry for gays than what he said and how he said it.
i want to go around to churches aorund the US and lock the doors and force thier churchgoers to listen to this on repeat.
Re: Keith Olbermann's best Special Comment ever (on Prop 8)
Prop 8 - brought to you by the Republican Party, the party of "smaller government." What a crock. :what
You go Keith!!
Re: Keith Olbermann's best Special Comment ever (on Prop 8)
^ nah, not just republicans. tons of people who voted for Obama didn't vote no on the proposition. you'd be effing spurised m8. sick.
Re: Keith Olbermann's best Special Comment ever (on Prop 8)
Re: Keith Olbermann's best Special Comment ever (on Prop 8)
^^ All of Mariner's & Sightless' posts - I understand all of that. I was referring to some of the folks who introduced & wrote the legislation and did most of the campaigning for it. FWIW, whites as a group rejected Prop 8.
This amendment will be a black eye on CA's constitution ad infinitum. Somewhere down the line will be another amendment recinding (sp) this institutionalized homophobia/bigotry. It will be just like the way prohibition was appealed - with another constitutional amendment. In every state where one of these has passed, there is now also a group working for it to be repealed.
[quote=thesightless;675218] 5. it was the democrats that put this bill to vote boss, not the republicans (jerry brown cali AG)[/quote]
I find this somewhat surprising since 3 years ago, the CA assembly and senate (on their third try) passed a bill [I]legalizing gay marriage[/I], which Arnold originally said he would sign, only to change his mind and veto it. Yes, it passed both houses of CA's legislature. But of course the members of the legislature do change. Perhaps this was the so-called "referendum" that Arnold called for since he claimed that if he signed gay-marriage into law, "it might not represent a majority of Californians."
Re: Keith Olbermann's best Special Comment ever (on Prop 8)
[URL]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Proposition_8_(2008[/URL])
[URL]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jerry_Brown[/URL]
[URL]http://www.latimes.com/news/local/politics/cal/la-me-protest10-2008nov10,0,4429002.story[/URL]
whats really gonna set this off is when obama denies marriage but gives unions. everyone is gonna get what they want, but hate getting it and how they get it.
this even above pro choice, is a no win situation.
my opinion is that of olbermans. what he said couldnt have been said better. why are we denying thier right to love. especially considering that 50% of male/female marriages fail anyway.
this one is for toasty
is there a country, that is an ally of the US ,where marriage status is conferred upon citizenship into the US and where gay marriage is legal?
i.e. if gays can marry in france, and move here, is their right as a couple conferred to the US?