Online Now 3345

The Water Cooler

BOL message board for off-topic posts

On this Board 515
Record: 1195 (12/24/2012)

Online now 3296
Record: 9097 (3/2/2012)

Boards ▾

BOL Round Table

The No. 1 'Bama fan community on the Internet

The Water Cooler

BOL message board for off-topic posts

Ticket Exchange

Buy, sell or swap tickets

Reply

Prop 8 ruled unConstitutional

  • Good day for America.

    signature image signature image signature image

    sf2k4

  • sf2k4 said...

    Good day for America.

    ruled unconstitutional? was this to remove the rights of CA residence? just want to be sure know what is going on. ty

    notreace

  • sf2k4 said...

    Good day for America.

    You have a wedding day planned already?

    signature image

    coffee150467

  • notreace said...

    ruled unconstitutional? was this to remove the rights of CA residence? just want to be sure know what is going on. ty

    Prop 8 was passed in 2008 to combat the legalization of gay marriage in California that had happened a few months before. Today it was ruled unConstitutional in a California Circuit Court by a vote of 2-1.

    signature image signature image signature image

    sf2k4

  • coffee said...

    You have a wedding day planned already?

    I have to be gay to support civil rights?

    signature image signature image signature image

    sf2k4

  • sf2k4 said...

    I have to be gay to support civil rights?

    Agree. Good day for america and civil rights. Hate the governments attempts to legislate morality.

    tidedem451

  • sf2k4 said...

    I have to be gay to support civil rights?

    I didn't say anything about you being gay.

    signature image

    coffee150467

  • coffee said...

    I didn't say anything about you being gay.

    You're trying too hard. Do less.

    signature image signature image signature image

    sf2k4

  • tidedem451 said...

    Agree. Good day for america and civil rights. Hate the governments attempts to legislate morality.

    It wasn't the government - it was the people of California. The 9th circuit is notorious for circumventing the will of the people. This will be restored on appeal to the Supreme Court.

    signature image signature image
    signature image

    Ronald Reagan: Man is not free unless government is limited.

    rdekonen

  • rdekonen said...

    It wasn't the government - it was the people of California. The 9th circuit is notorious for circumventing the will of the people. This will be restored on appeal to the Supreme Court.

    The will of the people is to sh!t all over civil rights? Good to know.

    signature image signature image signature image

    sf2k4

  • This post is for members of BamaOnLine or All Access VIP members only. Start Free Trial
    signature image signature image
    signature image

    Ronald Reagan: Man is not free unless government is limited.

    rdekonen

  • This post is for members of BamaOnLine or All Access VIP members only. Start Free Trial

    ROLL TIDE!

    rollingtide2004

  • This post is for members of BamaOnLine or All Access VIP members only. Start Free Trial

    "Touch that thang four" - Courtney Upshaw Roll Tide!!!

    hvacigar

  • This post is for members of BamaOnLine or All Access VIP members only. Start Free Trial
    signature image signature image signature image

    sf2k4

  • rdekonen said...

    It wasn't the government - it was the people of California. The 9th circuit is notorious for circumventing the will of the people. This will be restored on appeal to the Supreme Court.

    This. The 9th Circuit, thankfully, is the most overturned federal appeals court.

    UA2009

  • I believe the government already has a precedent for defining what a marriage is. This was done when they outlawed plural marriage and polygamy. Where was all of the outcry about that? If the government or the people do not have the right to define what a marriage is, then the 9th circuit should go ahead and overturn laws that outlaw other definitions of marriage as well. Marry anything or as many people as you want. Hell, let them marry their cousins now too. Its two consenting adults after all.

    reevewhite

  • This post is for members of BamaOnLine or All Access VIP members only. Start Free Trial

    ROLL TIDE!

    rollingtide2004

  • reevewhite said...

    I believe the government already has a precedent for defining what a marriage is. This was done when they outlawed plural marriage and polygamy. Where was all of the outcry about that? If the government or the people do not have the right to define what a marriage is, then the 9th circuit should go ahead and overturn laws that outlaw other definitions of marriage as well. Marry anything or as many people as you want. Hell, let them marry their cousins now too. Its two consenting adults after all.

    It is about equal rights for everyone. The problem with your argument is that no one is allowed to do those things, so no civil rights are violated.

    "Touch that thang four" - Courtney Upshaw Roll Tide!!!

    hvacigar

  • This post is for members of BamaOnLine or All Access VIP members only. Start Free Trial
    signature image signature image signature image

    sf2k4

  • Thats not true, men and women everywhere are allowed to get married, but two cousins are not, even though they are consenting and are not hurting anyone.

    reevewhite

  • reevewhite said...

    Thats not true, men and women everywhere are allowed to get married, but two cousins are not, even though they are consenting and are not hurting anyone.

    Again, it is illegal for anyone to marry a first cousin, so no one is unfairly treated. Like abortion, this is one of those issues where if you don't see it, you probably can't be talked out of it.

    "Touch that thang four" - Courtney Upshaw Roll Tide!!!

    hvacigar

  • All I am saying is that the government and the people have been defining what marriage means for centuries. Its not something that just came up to persecute gays and lesbians. You don't want two cousins to marry because of reproduction, and with religion removed from the argument, thats what marriage is about. Reproduction and the family. Nature intended men and women to reproduce and thats what people are defining a marriage to be to foster a reproductive family. You do not allow cousins to marry because you do not want inbreds running around, just look at lee county.

    reevewhite

  • and right now its illegal for two men to get married, so no two men are being treated unfairly.

    reevewhite

  • reevewhite said...

    All I am saying is that the government and the people have been defining what marriage means for centuries. Its not something that just came up to persecute gays and lesbians. You don't want two cousins to marry because of reproduction, and with religion removed from the argument, thats what marriage is about. Reproduction and the family. Nature intended men and women to reproduce and thats what people are defining a marriage to be to foster a reproductive family. You do not allow cousins to marry because you do not want inbreds running around, just look at lee county.

    I understand what you're saying, however, there have been studies that show that families raised with homosexual parents do just fine. Also, there are plenty of heterosexual families that have serious problems. Maybe it's time to reevaluate a centuries old system at some point, no?

    signature image signature image signature image

    sf2k4

  • reevewhite said...

    and right now its illegal for two men to get married, so no two men are being treated unfairly.

    Again, you have legal holes in your argument. Precedence means nothing in the case of civil rights violations (see previously cited example of slavery). Unfortunately for your second argument concerning two men being married, the courts must also be blind to sex in matters of civil rights, so it is only a matter of time before civil rights of all GLB people are restored. Just get ready for it.

    "Touch that thang four" - Courtney Upshaw Roll Tide!!!

    hvacigar