California State Measure Results

[akdiver 3]

I don't understand why so many people are so hell-bent on voting against something that doesn't impact them in the slightest.

Actually, that's not true. If more people have access to employer-based insurance as a gay spouse, that affects the insurance pool, claims rates, prices, etc. Among other things.

Nothing happens in a vacuum. Butterfly Effect, and all that.

[akdiver 3]

Now that Obama and the fellow Dems are in complete power, I am sure there will be some sort of Constitutional amendment to recognize them.

Um, guess again. First, to have "complete power" in the Senate, you need 60 votes. Second, amendments have to be ratified by states - many of which are not controlled by democrats.

So, claiming the democrats are in "complete power" - esp. with respect to passing constitutional amendments, is woefully inaccurate.

Secondly, why the hell would they want to get married in a place that's bigoted to them?

Same reason why people want to eat food in restaurants that don't want to serve them...

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I don't understand why so many people are so hell-bent on voting against something that doesn't impact them in the slightest.

Actually, that's not true. If more people have access to employer-based insurance as a gay spouse, that affects the insurance pool, claims rates, prices, etc. Among other things.

Nothing happens in a vacuum. Butterfly Effect, and all that.

That may well be true - but that doesn't seem to be the main focus of the objections that have been raised in regard to it, and it seems to be a largely ideological issue for the most part.

[Heracles 417]

SVRT the people of California have spoken.

[akdiver 3]

That may well be true - but that doesn't seem to be the main focus of the objections that have been raised in regard to it, and it seems to be a largely ideological issue for the most part.

That may be. But it refutes the notion that the issue does not affect them in the slightest.

But please remember not to confuse me with the people you claim are bigots. I don't care who people marry. They can marry an office chair for all I care. (:

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

SVRT the people of California have spoken.

They have - but is it an issue that the people really have a right to adjudicate on?

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

That may well be true - but that doesn't seem to be the main focus of the objections that have been raised in regard to it, and it seems to be a largely ideological issue for the most part.

That may be. But it refutes the notion that the issue does not affect them in the slightest.

Again - perhaps. But that isn't the character of the debate. All the political advertising I've seen for Prop 8 is centered around protecting traditional versions of marriage (i.e. it was pushed by the religious establishment). The insurance issue may be one that impacts people - but it isn't one that has framed the debate on the issue.

But please remember not to confuse me with the people you claim are bigots. I don't care who people marry. They can marry an office chair for all I care. (:

Well if you don't care about who marries who or what, then you're not opposed to gay marriage - and I'm not confusing you with someone who is.

Edited November 5, 2008 by Paul Daniels

[akdiver 3]

Again - perhaps. But that isn't the character of the debate. All the political advertising I've seen for Prop 8 is centered around protecting traditional versions of marriage (i.e. it was pushed by the religious establishment). The insurance issue may be one that impacts people - but it isn't one that has framed the debate on the issue.

Gee, are you suggesting that there may be a difference between what people think and what people say they think? I'm....shocked!!

Well if you don't care about who marries who or what, then you're not opposed to gay marriage - and I'm not confusing you with someone who is.

Excellent!!

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Again - perhaps. But that isn't the character of the debate. All the political advertising I've seen for Prop 8 is centered around protecting traditional versions of marriage (i.e. it was pushed by the religious establishment). The insurance issue may be one that impacts people - but it isn't one that has framed the debate on the issue.

Gee, are you suggesting that there may be a difference between what people think and what people say they think? I'm....shocked!!

When I mentioned bigoted people earlier in the thread who use semantic distinctions to disguise the fact that they oppose legal recognition for gay couples (and the rights that go along with them) what did you think I was talking about?

[akdiver 3]

When I mentioned bigoted people earlier in the thread who use semantic distinctions to disguise the fact that they oppose legal recognition for gay couples (and the rights that go along with them) what did you think I was talking about?

Oranges?

[NickD 203]

Again - perhaps. But that isn't the character of the debate. All the political advertising I've seen for Prop 8 is centered around protecting traditional versions of marriage (i.e. it was pushed by the religious establishment). The insurance issue may be one that impacts people - but it isn't one that has framed the debate on the issue.

Gee, are you suggesting that there may be a difference between what people think and what people say they think? I'm....shocked!!

Well if you don't care about who marries who or what, then you're not opposed to gay marriage - and I'm not confusing you with someone who is.

Excellent!!

Did hear a woman on TV that was against gay marriages because she feels children should have a mother and a father, she didn't say anything against single mothers. Got me to wondering, can gay couples have children?

Well this was on the Jon Stewart show.

Our state also voted down gay marriages by a 60% margin, hell if they want all the liabilities of a marriage contract that will save the tax payer money, it's fine with me. Of course, the religious spoke out against it, quite strongly.

[akdiver 3]

..yeah, religion is the source of most of the evil in the world. Kinda sucks, but we're stuck with it.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Which goes back to whether or not rights for women, racial minorities or gays is really something that should be determined by a popular vote.

I'd like to think that discrimination and repression of minority groups doesn't suddenly become unjust when a referendum decides that it is no longer acceptable.

[akdiver 3]

Which goes back to whether or not rights for women, racial minorities or gays is really something that should be determined by a popular vote.I'd like to think that discrimination and repression of minority groups doesn't suddenly become unjust when a referendum decides that it is no longer acceptable.

So, you would prefer it be decided by government??

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

What's wrong with the courts?