California high court upholds gay marriage ban - Page 2 - The Unofficial Opie and Anthony Message Board

THE FEZ MAN · 05-27-2009, 01:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MrBogey

They have equal protection under the law.

Shouldn't you be for this ruling? Don't you hate people doing things that the gov't or society deems bad?

Quote:

Originally Posted by AtlantaHardcore

Where are you going with this?

he's trying to compare a light bulb and a seat belt to your right to pound another man in the ass and collect his benefits if he dies from aids, or to get a tax break for being married

AtlantaHardcore · 05-27-2009, 01:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thelateshowkid

I'm opposed to gay marriage,

Why?

DonTheTrucker · 05-27-2009, 01:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by VMS

Translation: Now that Democrats don't need the GLBT lobby to be their shock troops any more, they're going to straight-up abandon them.

Just another group that will vote for them anyway. What we need is more conservative fags.

Thelateshowkid · 05-27-2009, 01:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AtlantaHardcore

Why?

Mainly for religious reasons, which I'm sure I'll get no respect for on this site. I just think the institution of marriage has served our society pretty well for thousands of years as a basis for a family, and I don't think it should be fucked with just because some people believe it should be more inclusive.

People joke about the whole "what's next? Someone marrying a moose?" But if you think about it, if marriage rights are extended to same sex couples, what's stopping them from being extended to groups of more than 2 or yes, even someone and an animal. I mean they all love each other, and these couples have rights too. I'm sure some people don't have a problem with that either, but I just see that as eroding away the institution of marriage.

MrBogey · 05-27-2009, 01:18 AM

I'm an originalist. When the Constitution and all relevant laws were written we know what they meant by it. Recent laws to clarify what is meant by the term "marriage" just seal it.

If you want gay marriage, the legislature or the public (via legal state approved means) has to do so. The executive can direct actions to treat same sex couples as married per their right as the executive but the judiciary is in a corner here. There's just not the body of law to support their argument unless they "evolve" the written meaning of the relevant laws.

AtlantaHardcore · 05-27-2009, 01:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thelateshowkid

Mainly for religious reasons, which I'm sure I'll get no respect for on this site.

I wonder why.

Quote:

I just think the institution of marriage has served our society pretty well for thousands of years as a basis for a family, and I don't think it should be fucked with just because some people believe it should be more inclusive.

People joke about the whole "what's next? Someone marrying a moose?" But if you think about it, if marriage rights are extended to same sex couples, what's stopping them from being extended to groups of more than 2 or yes, even someone and an animal. I mean they all love each other, and these couples have rights too. I'm sure some people don't have a problem with that either, but I just see that as eroding away the institution of marriage.

Really? This is your argument? You just took the usual cliched arguments against gay marriage and added the phrase "but if you think about it".

Since we're talking about gay marriage...

Louis CK on Gay Marriage

Close

You need to upgrade your Flash Player

THE FEZ MAN · 05-27-2009, 01:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thelateshowkid

Mainly for religious reasons, which I'm sure I'll get no respect for on this site. I just think the institution of marriage has served our society pretty well for thousands of years as a basis for a family, and I don't think it should be fucked with just because some people believe it should be more inclusive.

People joke about the whole "what's next? Someone marrying a moose?" But if you think about it, if marriage rights are extended to same sex couples, what's stopping them from being extended to groups of more than 2 or yes, even someone and an animal. I mean they all love each other, and these couples have rights too. I'm sure some people don't have a problem with that either, but I just see that as eroding away the institution of marriage.

when my institution fails me over 50% of the time i think i would look some ware else for an answer

BravoSierra · 05-27-2009, 01:43 AM

I used to be pro marriage for moral reasons. I thought everyone should be able to be married.

Now? It's like.... just legalize it so everyone SHUTS THE FUCK UP ABOUT IT! I'm so sick of hearing the arguements OVER.... and OVER.... and OVER again. We get it, god will strike his hammer down on thee and destroy the universe if we let two dudes butt fuck. Know what? I've had anal sex myself, and it aint so bad. With a woman, my wife at that, but it's still sodomy. So go fuck yerself. Marriage has no sacred meaning anymore. It's 2 people that don't know any better.

Thelateshowkid · 05-27-2009, 01:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AtlantaHardcore

Really? This is your argument? You just took the usual cliched arguments against gay marriage and added the phrase "but if you think about it".

So you'll only respect my argument if I come up with something new and innovative? It's "cliched" because the argument is cited just every time the case comes up in the news, which is very often. I added "but if you think about it" because the slippery slope argument has been stated enough that it has become a kind of cliche like "Adam and Eve, Adam and Steve", but unlike that, it actually makes a lot of sense if you do think about it.

BravoSierra · 05-27-2009, 01:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thelateshowkid

So you'll only respect my argument if I come up with something new and innovative? It's "cliched" because the argument is cited just every time the case comes up in the news, which is very often. I added "but if you think about it" because the slippery slope argument has been stated enough that it has become a kind of cliche like "Adam and Eve, Adam and Steve", but unlike that, it actually makes a lot of sense if you do think about it.

We legalize guns. What's next? Everyone will be driving tanks down the street.

We legalize abortions. What's next? We can kill EVERYONE!

Do you, Thelateshowkid, believe that once gay marriage is approved people will HONESTLY want to marry a different species? How about this. How about we legalize gay marriage as long as it's the same species. Maybe we can reword it so that it doesn't say "A man and a woman" but "a human and a human." THEN will you be happy?

That said, how many gay people do you know?

FloppyDonutHole · 05-27-2009, 01:58 AM

funny shit

MayrMeninoCrash · 05-27-2009, 02:03 AM

I still haven't heard one reasonable argument against allowing homosexuals to marry that does not invoke the word of someone's mystical sky deity in some way.

CousinDave · 05-27-2009, 02:06 AM

okay here is the solution.

the word marriage is stricken from all levels of govt and replaced with civil union, existing marriages are now civil unions.

then if a civil union couple wants to get married in the eyes of whatever imaginary deity that they want, they are free to do so, but the govt only recognizes civil unions.

civil union - govt recognized, official, legal
marriage - religious recognition, not official, ceremonial only, can not be recognized in court

do this and problem solved

of course the politicians don't really want to actually solve social problems

AtlantaHardcore · 05-27-2009, 02:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thelateshowkid

it actually makes a lot of sense if you do think about it.

No, it doesn't. That's why I called you out on it. Common sense will keep things like polygamy from becoming legal.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thelateshowkid

if marriage rights are extended to same sex couples, what's stopping them from being extended to groups of more than 2 or yes, even someone and an animal. I mean they all love each other, and these couples have rights too.

99.99999% of the time polygamy has almost nothing to do with love. If you think about it, since wives used to be considered property, polygamy was originally conceived as way for man express his dominance over woman.

Thelateshowkid · 05-27-2009, 02:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BravoSierra

Do you, Thelateshowkid, believe that once gay marriage is approved people will HONESTLY want to marry a different species? How about this. How about we legalize gay marriage as long as it's the same species. Maybe we can reword it so that it doesn't say "A man and a woman" but "a human and a human." THEN will you be happy?

That said, how many gay people do you know?

Yes, I do think people will want to. The chances of that happening in the near future are slim, but I honestly think that within the next 20 years groups of people will be allowed to marry, especially if gay marriage is legalized by a court because they'll be able to cite the rulings in their favor. The difference is these people have special interest groups working in their favor, and once they see an opening, they attack it.

And I know 2 from my high school class, one of whom is still my good friend, and we argue about this a lot.

thekidslepthere · 05-27-2009, 02:17 AM

I should of went and taken some pictures, the gay rights march went all the way from "boys town" (I didn't give it that name) all the way past the end of my street at least a mile and a half to two miles away. Me and my girlfriend went and checked it out around an hour ago. There were thousands of people marching down the middle of Santa Monica BLVD (maybe tens of thousands?). It took a good ten to fifteen minutes for the march to pass us. Everyone seemed to be on their best behavior except for a handful of people acting like assholes, screaming curses and stuff which wasn't called for since there were families marching and watching. Unfortunately I'm watching TV at twice the normal volume since every cop and tv news chopper is flying over head right now, I feel like I'm in a fucking war zone.

BravoSierra · 05-27-2009, 02:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thelateshowkid

And I know 2 from my high school class, one of whom is still my good friend, and we argue about this a lot.

Annnnnnnd, stop right there. You don't exactly have life figured out yet. All you are doing is thinking what you've been told to think.

Nobody in high school is gay... they just have a cock fetish.

Thelateshowkid · 05-27-2009, 02:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AtlantaHardcore

No, it doesn't. That's why I called you out on it. Common sense will keep things like polygamy from becoming legal.

99.99999% of the time polygamy has almost nothing to do with love. If you think about it, since wives used to be considered property, polygamy was originally conceived as way for man express his dominance over woman.

Really? Why's that? Because only 30 or 40 years ago someone would've said the same thing about gay marriage. If all the wives are consenting then what's to stop it? There's definetly a good amount of people who have more than 1 consenting girlfriend, Hef comes to mind. What about 1 girl and 2 guys? Polygamy seems to be becoming more socially acceptable, except more in the free love as opposed to fundamentalist religious type of way.

Thelateshowkid · 05-27-2009, 02:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BravoSierra

Annnnnnnd, stop right there. You don't exactly have life figured out yet. All you are doing is thinking what you've been told to think.

Nobody in high school is gay... they just have a cock fetish.

Wait what? I'm not still in high school, and my parents are more liberal than me. I go to a catholic college and I've become more religious, sorry.

BravoSierra · 05-27-2009, 02:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thelateshowkid

Wait what? I'm not still in high school, and my parents are more liberal than me. I go to a catholic college and I've become more religious, sorry.

Well then.... there you have it. Catholic College. Even if you thought gays should be married, you'd fear of becoming an outcast. So it seems to me that the easiest position for you is to go along with the crowd.

And you made it sound like you were still in high school. Sorry.

AtlantaHardcore · 05-27-2009, 02:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thelateshowkid

Wait what? I'm not still in high school, and my parents are more liberal than me. I go to a catholic college and I've become more religious, sorry.

Catholicism is bad, mmm kay?

VMS · 05-27-2009, 02:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CousinDave

do this and problem solved

of course the politicians don't really want to actually solve social problems

Ok, first I don't think it's much of a "social problem". It's a lot of people bitching, and that's about it. In 2000 I went to a "commitment ceremony" between a couple of lesbians in friggin' Virginia, held in a church, with the pastor present for fuck's sake. All the romantic bullshit that goes on around a marriage was present for that commitment ceremony: the only thing lacking was the legal bullshit involved in a marriage. It's a legal problem, not a social one.

The solution to the legal bullshit, in the end, is what Dave talked about above: civil unions.

AND FUCKING CIVIL UNIONS WERE ON THE FUCKING TABLE SIX FUCKING YEARS AGO, YOU STUPID FUCKING HOMOS AND YOUR STUPID FUCKING LOBBYING GROUPS!!!!! BUT DID YOU TAKE IT WHEN IT WAS OFFERED???? BY GEORGE FUCKING W. BUSH OF ALL FUCKING PEOPLE?????? NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!! YOU TURNED IT DOWN BECAUSE YOU WANTED TO REACH FOR "MARRIAGE", DIDN'T YOU? NOW EVEN HOMOS WHO ARE USED TO GETTING THIS ASSES POUNDED ARE FUCKING SORE IN THE ASS FROM HOW BADLY THEIR OWN LOBBY FUCKED THEM TRYING TO GET KERRY ELECTED, AREN'T THEY?

Stupid fucking GLBT idealist assholes, and how badly they've managed to fuck up this issue. You realize that gay marriage is less "available" now than it was when this issue was first brought up in a major national way seven years ago? You realize its federal chances are less now, even with the Democrats controlling the federal government?

I have very good friends who are gay. I'd love for them to be able to get married, openly serve in the military, etc. But the GLBT lobby has been the most incompetent anti-realpolitik assholes this country has seen in decades, and I'm including the Christian Right, gun lobby, and PETA in that evaluation.

Stupid fucking fudge packers.

AtlantaHardcore · 05-27-2009, 02:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by VMS

AND FUCKING CIVIL UNIONS WERE ON THE FUCKING TABLE SIX FUCKING YEARS AGO, YOU STUPID FUCKING HOMOS AND YOUR STUPID FUCKING LOBBYING GROUPS!!!!! BUT DID YOU TAKE IT WHEN IT WAS OFFERED???? BY GEORGE FUCKING W. BUSH OF ALL FUCKING PEOPLE?????? NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!! YOU TURNED IT DOWN BECAUSE YOU WANTED TO REACH FOR "MARRIAGE", DIDN'T YOU? NOW EVEN HOMOS WHO ARE USED TO GETTING THIS ASSES POUNDED ARE FUCKING SORE IN THE ASS FROM HOW BADLY THEIR OWN LOBBY FUCKED THEM TRYING TO GET KERRY ELECTED, AREN'T THEY?

When it comes to civil rights, compromises will not be accepted.

Quote:

Stupid fucking GLBT idealist assholes, and how badly they've managed to fuck up this issue. You realize that gay marriage is less "available" now than it was when this issue was first brought up in a major national way seven years ago? You realize its federal chances are less now, even with the Democrats controlling the federal government?

That's what happens when you ally yourself with politicians. They'll only stick with you for as long as they need you.

VMS · 05-27-2009, 02:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MayrMeninoCrash

I still haven't heard one reasonable argument against allowing homosexuals to marry that does not invoke the word of someone's mystical sky deity in some way.

Because, at the end of the day, the best way to raise children is with a mother and a father, married, under the same roof, taking care of the kids.

Now, that doesn't happen often enough in the hetero world either, but there's an argument to be made that a 47% "success" rate in the hetero world (when marriage is even attempted, rather than just single baby's mamas) is better than a 0% chance of having that in the homo world.

Are there homo couples that are better parents than many hetero couples? Absolutely. Are there single moms who are better than a hetero couple? Absolutely. There are also strippers with hearts of gold who really love you and are just working their way through law school. You still don't go around dating strippers, for fuck's sake, unless you're deliberately entering a "fuck around with a crazy chick for a while" phase with your eyes wide open.

There. There's a logical argument against gay marriage from a guy who isn't against gay marriage. You really don't work very hard at trying to understand the other side of the argument, do you?

Surprising, since liberals are supposed to be the open minded ones.

Thelateshowkid · 05-27-2009, 02:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BravoSierra

Well then.... there you have it. Catholic College. Even if you thought gays should be married, you'd fear of becoming an outcast. So it seems to me that the easiest position for you is to go along with the crowd.

Yeah, because everyone I'm afraid of being an outcast from is furiously checking wackbag.com to make sure I agree with them. If I liked going along with the crowd then why wouldn't I be agreeing with all of you?