Prop 8 overturned

[2minkey]

Which leaves what, exactly?

Environmental or man-made (biochemical)?

Please keep in mind that homosexuality has been around for a very long time, so current environmental factors should be discounted immediately.

The first recorded evidence of homosexuality is found in Mesopotamia, circa 3000 B.C. where artifacts have been discovered depicting same sex couples. Alexander the Great is also recorded as having had a same sex relationship.

no i'm sure he means that it is shaped by (deviant) social forces. cultural degradation. plooking in the streets!

 

[ResearchMonkey]

Sometimes in nature you can observe homosexuality in over populated critter colonies. Could it be a natural occurring process/switch to reduce the flaws in the gene pool and/or population?

Nature would also indicate that offspring/children are not a natural occurrence in this "family".

 

[spike]

The law suit was brought on by a republican group. The case was argued and won by a Republican lawyer, Ted Olsen.

The lawsuit was brought by two same sex couples.

So can you remind me what the democrats have done for the "equal rights' of homosexuals? (or blacks?)

Are you kidding? Republicans are the ones who primarily voted for Prop 8 in the first place while Democrats mostly voted against it.

 

[ResearchMonkey]

Oh I forgot, California is a red state.

 

[Gotholic]

Which leaves what, exactly?

Environmental or man-made (biochemical)?

Please keep in mind that homosexuality has been around for a very long time, so current environmental factors should be discounted immediately.

The first recorded evidence of homosexuality is found in Mesopotamia, circa 3000 B.C. where artifacts have been discovered depicting same sex couples. Alexander the Great is also recorded as having had a same sex relationship.

I would not be surprised if biochemical is a factor as well. Sure, that would make it recent, but still a factor.

Homosexual desires are acquired or strengthened through habituation and cognitive conditioning. E.g., an alcoholic did not choose to become an alcoholic but his condition was not inborn.

 

[spike]

Oh I forgot, California is a red state.

Why the fuck would that matter? It's still clearly Republicans who mostly voted for it while Democrats mostly voted against it.

Did you vote for it?

 

[jimpeel]

You're gonna hate hearing this. Prop 8 still in effect.

SOURCE

California’s Prop. 8 Still In Effect
August 5, 2010 - 12:39 PM | by: Claudia Cowan

Despite the landmark ruling striking down California's ban on same sex marriage, nothing has really changed. Gay and lesbian couples still can't get married, because Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker issued a temporary stay on his decision.

Prop. 8 is still in effect while he considers whether his order should be suspended pending an appeal. Lawyers on both sides are presenting arguments either in favor of, or opposed to, allowing gay weddings to resume. Tomorrow, Walker is expected to to rule on this very critical question of if, and when, the state will stop enforcing the 2008 voter-approved ban on gay marriage.

In the meantime, gay activists are celebrating yesterday's landmark ruling. Hundreds of people marched along Market Street, many of them carrying rainbow flags and American flags, as well as signs that read "we all deserve the freedom to marry."

Celebrities like Ellen DeGeneres are tweeting "Equality Won!" -- an opinion shared by Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, as well as President Obama. A White House spokesman says President Obama may not support gay marriage personally, but he believes Prop. 8 is "divisive and discriminatory."

But supporters of the ban say the ruling is "judicial activism" that defies the will of the 7-million Californians who voted to limit marriage to a man and a woman. The National Organization for Marriage says that, if it's allowed to stand, the ruling threatens not just Prop. 8 here in California, but the laws in 45 other states that define valid marriage the same way. The case now moves to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which has jurisdiction over 9 Western states. The outcome there could force the U.S. Supreme Court to decide whether gays and lesbians have a constitutional right to marry the person they love.

But that's years down down the road. The pending appeal to the 9th Circuit Court could prevent gay weddings from resuming in California anytime soon.

Read more: http://liveshots.blogs.foxnews.com/2010/08/05/californias-prop-8-still-in-effect/#ixzz0vleeCOXI

 

[ResearchMonkey]

In a liberal controlled state your trying to blame the conservatives.

Just like the dems didn't pass the 911 worker+others bill.

Yeah I voted with the moral majority in California only to be slapped in the face by a Judge who should have recused himself.

Seems mainly homosexual centered communitys voted for plooking unions.

 

[jimpeel]

Why the fuck would that matter? It's still clearly Republicans who mostly voted for it while Democrats mostly voted against it.

Did you vote for it?

Ummmmmm, you are forgetting the Black vote which was overwhelmingly against Gay marriage. They voted FOR Prop. 8 in vast numbers. They also vote primarily democrat.

 

[spike]

In a liberal controlled state your trying to blame the conservatives.

Yes, they are the ones who primarily voted for it.

Just like the dems didn't pass the 911 worker+others bill.

Yes, the vast majority of dems voted for that, while the vast majority of reps didn't.

Yeah I voted with the moral majority in California

Moral majority? LOL. So you dmit to trying to force your morals on others through legislation? That's definitely the anti-freedom agenda at work.

only to be slapped in the face by a Judge who should have recused himself.

Why should he have recused himself?

Seems mainly homosexual centered communitys voted for plooking unions.

Actually it went across demographics pretty well. I'd like to see any evidence you have about it being mainly homosexual centered communities (whatever that is). Otherwise it looks like you made that up.

 

[spike]

Ummmmmm, you are forgetting the Black vote which was overwhelmingly against Gay marriage. They voted FOR Prop. 8 in vast numbers. They also vote primarily democrat.

"WASHINGTON, Jan. 6 — An in-depth analysis of the Proposition 8 vote released today shows that party affiliation, political ideology, frequency of attending worship services and age were the driving forces behind the measure’s passage on Nov. 4. The study finds that after taking into account the effect of church attendance, support for Proposition 8 among African Americans and Latinos was not significantly different than other groups. Through a precinct-by-precinct analysis and review of multiple other sources of data, the study also puts African-American support for Proposition 8 at no more than 59 percent, nowhere close to the 70 percent reported the night of the election. Finally, the study shows how support for marriage equality has grown substantially across almost all California demographic groups — except Republicans.

The study was written by Patrick J. Egan, Ph.D., assistant professor of politics and public policy at New York University, and Kenneth Sherrill, Ph.D., professor of political science at Hunter College, CUNY. Egan and Sherrill reviewed pre- and post-election polls, and precinct-level voting data from five California counties with the highest number of African-American voters. The study was commissioned by the Evelyn & Walter Haas, Jr. Fund in San Francisco.

Party, ideology, church attendance and age drove “yes” vote

The study found that four factors — party identification, ideology, frequency of religious service attendance and age — drove the “yes” vote for Proposition 8. For example, more than 70 percent of voters who were Republican, identified themselves as conservative, or who attended religious services at least weekly supported Proposition 8. Conversely, 70 percent or more of voters who were Democrat, identified themselves as liberal, or who rarely attended religious services opposed the measure. More than two-thirds (67 percent) of voters 65 or older supported Proposition 8, while majorities under 65 opposed it.

“These figures point the way to winning marriage equality for same-sex couples sooner rather than later,” said Jaime Grant, Ph.D., director of the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force Policy Institute. “Convincing the Republican Party that continued gay bashing will cripple its future is one; another is accelerating the already strong surge in support among young voters.”

http://www.letcaliforniaring.org/si...891/k.35FC/Driving_Factors_of_Prop_8_Vote.htm

 

[ResearchMonkey]

There you go blind doggy

 

[ResearchMonkey]

TWICE.

I'm quite happy that your ilks antics are becoming more evident, expect a slaughter in November.

 

[Gonz]

Who the fuck did he take rights away from.

Seven million Californians

CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION
ARTICLE 2 VOTING, INITIATIVE AND REFERENDUM, AND RECALL


SECTION 1. All political power is inherent in the people.
Government is instituted for their protection, security, and benefit,
and they have the right to alter or reform it when the public good
may require.

 

[jimpeel]

Yes, they are the ones who primarily voted for it.

And the rest voted against it. THEY LOST.

Yes, the vast majority of dems voted for that, while the vast majority of reps didn't.

That's how the system works. The people who are for one side vote for that side and the people who are for the other side vote for the other side. Birds of a feather and all that.

Moral majority? LOL. So you dmit to trying to force your morals on others through legislation? That's definitely the anti-freedom agenda at work.

Just as you won't admit that the minority are trying to force their lack of morals on the majority through opposing legislation. It is telling how those who defend this are devoid of morals themselves. Why else would someone defend immorality?

Why should he have recused himself?

Here's a clue. An activist homosexual judge trying a case on homosexual law.

Actually it went across demographics pretty well. I'd like to see any evidence you have about it being mainly homosexual centered communities (whatever that is). Otherwise it looks like you made that up.

Try THIS

Note the concentration of "No" votes in the Bay Area. Try changing the filters. That is quite telling.

THIS may explain what happened to your satisfaction. Kinda puts that "birds of a feather" thing in perspective.

As shown in Table 1, conservatives and Republicans were the most likely to support Proposition 8: 82% of conservatives and 81% of Republicans voted in favor of the measure. People who attended religious services weekly (70%) and those over age 65 (67%) also approved Proposition 8 by substantial majorities. Men were slightly more likely to support Proposition 8 (by 54%) than women (49%). Majorities of those under age 65 opposed Proposition 8. African American and Latino voters supported Proposition 8 to a greater degree, 58% and 59% respectively, than did whites and Asians. According to this survey, blacks’ support for the ballot measure was much lower than reported by Election Day exit polls. (An extensive discussion about this issue appears later in this report.)

The vote on Proposition 8 was polarized to a remarkable degree along the lines of party identification, ideology, and religiosity. The largest divide—fully 60 percentage points—was between conservatives and liberals (82‐22). A similarly large gap (51 points) existed between Republicans and Democrats. By a commonly used measure of religiosity—frequency of attendance at religious services—the most religious (those attending services weekly) favored Proposition 8 by 40 percentage points more than the least religious (those who hardly ever attend services).

 

[2minkey]

but who will save us from the bullshit moralizing of a bunch of archaic dipshits?

 

[spike]

Wow, looks like there areas where all the intelligent people live voted against it. Nice!

 

[spike]

Seven million Californians

They still have the same rights. They never did have the right to arbitrarily trying to limit freedoms of other groups.

 

[spike]

And the rest voted against it. THEY LOST.

Doesn't matter. Unconstitutional.

That's how the system works. The people who are for one side vote for that side and the people who are for the other side vote for the other side. Birds of a feather and all that.

Yes, so we can primarily blame the Republicans for this bigotry.

Just as you won't admit that the minority are trying to force their lack of morals on the majority through opposing legislation.

There is nothing immoral about it. AND they aren't trying to force their morals on anyone. Don't like same sex marriage. DON'T GET ONE. Simple.

Here's a clue. An activist homosexual judge trying a case on homosexual law.

By that logic someone who was heterosexual would have to recuse themselves too. Bias towards one side and all that.

Note the concentration of "No" votes in the Bay Area. Try changing the filters. That is quite telling.

The Bay area is one of many that primarily voted no. They aren't "homosexual centered". A lot of them support freedom apparently though.

THIS may explain what happened to your satisfaction. Kinda puts that "birds of a feather" thing in perspective.

That pretty much says what my earlier link said. Not sure what your point was.

 

[MrBishop]

I would not be surprised if biochemical is a factor as well. Sure, that would make it recent, but still a factor.

Homosexual desires are acquired or strengthened through habituation and cognitive conditioning. E.g., an alcoholic did not choose to become an alcoholic but his condition was not inborn.

Societal factors such as habituation and cognitive conditioning do nothing to explain homosexuality where no sexual peers exist in the person's social/familial circles. In addition, in the cases where same-sex couples adopted or gave birth to children, the statistical occurrence of homosexuality in the child is so small as to be easily discountable.