DVD Talk
Texans approve gay marriage ban [Archive] - DVD Talk Forum

PDA

View Full Version : Texans approve gay marriage ban


Michael T Hudson
11-08-05, 07:53 PM
AUSTIN A state constitutional ban on same-sex marriage championed by Republican Gov. Rick Perry and social conservatives won overwhelming voter approval Tuesday as Texans decided nine proposed amendments.

With 472,553 votes counted, 74 percent favored the ban while 26 percent were against it.

Same-sex marriage already is prohibited under Texas law. Those who supported Proposition 2 said a constitutional ban was needed to ensure a judge doesn't decide to allow gays to marry.

Supporters and opponents the gay marriage ban battled aggressively for weeks, holding debates, dueling news conferences and sending out campaign messages through the Internet and airwaves.

Opponents argued a constitutional ban was unnecessary and merely a statement of discrimination against homosexuals. They also suggested that the proposed amendment was so poorly drafted it could endanger common-law or traditional male-female marriages, depending on how a judge interpreted it.


I guess the flyer on my door worked for most of the people. :(

Red Dog
11-08-05, 08:27 PM
Shocking.

mikehunt
11-08-05, 08:42 PM
Holy dog shit! Texas? Only steers and queers come from Texas, Private Cowboy. And you don't look much like a steer to me so that kinda narrows it down.

wildcatlh
11-08-05, 09:12 PM
I do like the google ads that showed up for this thread...


Stay Gay in Kauai
Private North Shore Estate. Fun Experience. 4 min to beaches & more
www.GardenIsleRanch.com

Same Sex Family Law
Toronto Area Family Lawyers Including same sex couple issues.
www.ontariodivorces.com

Bronkster
11-08-05, 10:19 PM
The gays can still date though, right?

Eh, seems a shame that people feel the need to take such drastic action over something so relatively harmless. What's the divorce rate in Texas anyway?

kvrdave
11-08-05, 10:35 PM
I tend to think most states are doing this as a message rather than protection of "their values" because they think that if most states do this, the SCOTUS will be swayed. Who knows if they are correct. But if the SCOTUS does say that it is discrimination, none of these state constitutional ammendments mean anything, anyway.

But the SCOTUS does need to step in and decide something, mainly because we will end up with some states that don't allow it, and some that do, and that can't be a good trend in crossing state lines and not having things recognized by all states.

DVD Polizei
11-08-05, 11:07 PM
The War On <s>Terror</s> Homosexuals. Stay the course.

digitalfreaknyc
11-09-05, 08:17 AM
And people wonder why Canada looks so great??

********************
Texas voters overwhelmingly approved a constitutional ban on same-sex marriage, making their state the 19th to take that step. In Maine, however, voters rejected a conservative-backed proposal to repeal the state's new gay-rights law.

The contest in Texas was lopsided; near-complete returns showed the gay-marriage ban supported by about 76 percent of voters. Like every other state except Massachusetts, Texas didn't permit same-sex marriages previously, but the constitutional amendment was touted as an extra guard against future court rulings.

"Texans know that marriage is between a man and a woman, and children deserve both a mom and a dad. They don't need a Ph.D. or a degree in anything else to teach them that," said Kelly Shackelford, a leader Texans For Marriage, which favored the ban.

Gay-rights leaders were dismayed by the outcome, but vowed to continue a state-by-state battle for recognition of same-sex unions.

"The fight for fairness isn't over, and we won't give up," said Joe Solmonese, president of the Human Rights Campaign. "These amendments are part of a long-standing effort by the extreme right to eliminate any legal recognition for gay people and our families."
***************

Tracer Bullet
11-09-05, 08:29 AM
I tend to think most states are doing this as a message rather than protection of "their values" because they think that if most states do this, the SCOTUS will be swayed. Who knows if they are correct. But if the SCOTUS does say that it is discrimination, none of these state constitutional ammendments mean anything, anyway.

But the SCOTUS does need to step in and decide something, mainly because we will end up with some states that don't allow it, and some that do, and that can't be a good trend in crossing state lines and not having things recognized by all states.

Eh, why is that a bad thing? Seems to be the most reasonable solution. I'd rather have the states' rights solution than another Roe v. Wade.

joeblow69
11-09-05, 08:34 AM
And people wonder why Canada looks so great??

I know what you mean... I was visiting Toronto Halloween weekend, and it's an incredible city. I could not believe how friendly everyone was. I'd move there in a heartbeat if I could. :(

digitalfreaknyc
11-09-05, 08:42 AM
I know what you mean... I was visiting Toronto Halloween weekend, and it's an incredible city. I could not believe how friendly everyone was. I'd move there in a heartbeat if I could. :(

Honestly, everyone I've ever met from Canada (that I knew of, anyway) was very nice and accepting. One of my closest co-workers is from there. I have heard nothing but good things from people that have visited including family members. They'd have no problems with my moving up there.
But one thing's for sure, if this country keeps going the way it's going, I will do what I can to make it a more viable option. I'm not going to spend half my life being denied rights and fighting with jackasses in white houses who wear 10 gallon hats and thing gays are more dangerous than terrorists.

Geofferson
11-09-05, 08:48 AM
Eh, why is that a bad thing? Seems to be the most reasonable solution. I'd rather have the states' rights solution than another Roe v. Wade.
Agreed. What states would favor it though? MA, VT, NY. Any others?

RayChuang
11-09-05, 08:57 AM
The big reason why people reject gay marriages is the fact the gay/lesbian crowd want the marriage ceremony to be a religious ceremony. That doesn't sit well with most Americans, to say the least.

Now, if the gay/lesbian crowd wanted a non-religious domestic partnership agreement, the political resistance would probably be much lower. :)

Tracer Bullet
11-09-05, 09:01 AM
Agreed. What states would favor it though? MA, VT, NY. Any others?

I think in the next few years you'll see more states legalize gay marriage or move in that direction- California, Washington, Hawaii. NJ currently has a civil union law on the books.

Tracer Bullet
11-09-05, 09:03 AM
The big reason why people reject gay marriages is the fact the gay/lesbian crowd want the marriage ceremony to be a religious ceremony. That doesn't sit well with most Americans, to say the least.

Now, if the gay/lesbian crowd wanted a non-religious domestic partnership agreement, the political resistance would probably be much lower. :)

Is the marriage license that heterosexuals get at city hall a domestic partnership agreement?

Duran
11-09-05, 09:06 AM
The big reason why people reject gay marriages is the fact the gay/lesbian crowd want the marriage ceremony to be a religious ceremony. That doesn't sit well with most Americans, to say the least.

Now, if the gay/lesbian crowd wanted a non-religious domestic partnership agreement, the political resistance would probably be much lower.

That's simply not true. They don't want some "separate but equal" classification. None of these court cases has been about the non-existent right to get married in a church. It's not even a question. Some people cannot separate marriage from religion, but it is not the homosexual couples.

Agreed. What states would favor it though? MA, VT, NY. Any others?

The problem with that is that the Full Faith and Credit clause of the Constitution could be interpreted to mean that if one state recognizes a marriage, they all have to, even if they don't permit those marriages themselves.

Groucho
11-09-05, 09:07 AM
The big reason why people reject gay marriages is the fact the gay/lesbian crowd want the marriage ceremony to be a religious ceremony. That doesn't sit well with most Americans, to say the least.You are aware that there are several churches out there that will cheerfully marry same-sex couples in a religious ceremony? I myself know of several couples that were married in their church, but aren't legally married because the state says they can't be.

Geofferson
11-09-05, 09:07 AM
I think in the next few years you'll see more states legalize gay marriage or move in that direction- California, Washington, Hawaii. NJ currently has a civil union law on the books.
NJ perhaps. In 2000, California was 61% opposed to it. Oregon voted against it in 2004, not sure why Washington would be any different. Don't know enough about Hawaii.

Geofferson
11-09-05, 09:10 AM
The problem with that is that the Full Faith and Credit clause of the Constitution could be interpreted to mean that if one state recognizes a marriage, they all have to, even if they don't permit those marriages themselves.
I know the problem it poses. ;) It will be interesting to see what eventually happens.

OldDude
11-09-05, 09:30 AM
NJ perhaps. In 2000, California was 61% opposed to it. Oregon voted against it in 2004, not sure why Washington would be any different. Don't know enough about Hawaii.

Hawaii was among the first four states to pass "a man and a woman" constitutional amendment. It might have been the first, but I'm not sure about that. But four states passed an amendment some years ago before the recent flurry and Hawaii was among them.

Xander
11-09-05, 09:35 AM
The big reason why people reject gay marriages is the fact the gay/lesbian crowd want the marriage ceremony to be a religious ceremony. That doesn't sit well with most Americans, to say the least.

Now, if the gay/lesbian crowd wanted a non-religious domestic partnership agreement, the political resistance would probably be much lower. :)

I'm sorry, but what planet do you live on? Here on planet earth, the fight for equal marriage rights for gays and lesbians has been primarily about the legal equality of marriage, not the religious value. The gay community wants equal treatment under the law, not the church.

RE: Texas - Thank god we've got so many straight white people voting to decide the rights of the minorities in this country. :rolleyes:

Geofferson
11-09-05, 09:39 AM
RE: Texas - Thank god we've got so many straight white people voting to decide the rights of the minorities in this country. :rolleyes:
Do you think the black and Latino population vote any differently?

Michael T Hudson
11-09-05, 09:48 AM
I'm sorry, but what planet do you live on? Here on planet earth, the fight for equal marriage rights for gays and lesbians has been primarily about the legal equality of marriage, not the religious value. The gay community wants equal treatment under the law, not the church.

RE: Texas - Thank god we've got so many straight white people voting to decide the rights of the minorities in this country. :rolleyes:


- In four out of the 50 U.S. states, white residents are in the minority.

Hawaii, New Mexico and California have been for years, and now Texas is also, according to new Census Bureau data.

The new figures show that the 11.3 million persons of color residing in Texas represent 50.2 percent of the state's total population, estimated at 22.5 million.

Of these, 35 percent are Hispanic. Blacks make up 11 percent.



White people are the minority in Texas.

Groucho
11-09-05, 09:57 AM
White people are the minority in Texas.That assumes that there are only two ethnic groups: White and Not-White. Considering that there are several ethnic groups, Whites are still the biggest one by a pretty good margin.

digitalfreaknyc
11-09-05, 10:00 AM
Do you think the black and Latino population vote any differently?

ok fine.

So the quote should be:

RE: The US - Thank god we've got so many ignorant, bigoted homophobic assholes voting to decide the rights of the minorities in this country.

cpgator
11-09-05, 10:20 AM
ok fine.

So the quote should be:

RE: The US - Thank god we've got so many ignorant, bigoted homophobic assholes voting to decide the rights of the minorities in this country.
Real nice - makes others really respect your views. Must make things a lot easier to just assume everyone who doesn't accept your views and ideas is an idiot.

Josh H
11-09-05, 10:30 AM
I'm sorry, but people who don't support full, equal rights for races, ethnic groups, religious groups or sexual preferences deserve harsh comments and NO respect.

Especially from people like digitalfreak that bear the brunt of the discrimination every day of their lives.

Artman
11-09-05, 10:45 AM
:up:

Mordred
11-09-05, 10:49 AM
That assumes that there are only two ethnic groups: White and Not-White. Considering that there are several ethnic groups, Whites are still the biggest one by a pretty good margin.Depends on what you define a pretty good margin. The gap is shrinking quickly. As of 2004 Whites were 49% of the population with a population of roughly 11 million. Hispanics had a population of close to 8 million. In at most 10 years, Hispanics will be the majority.

Goldblum
11-09-05, 10:51 AM
RE: Texas - Thank god we've got so many straight white people voting to decide the rights of the minorities in this country. :rolleyes:
rotfl

LiquidSky
11-09-05, 10:51 AM
The big reason why people reject gay marriages is the fact the gay/lesbian crowd want the marriage ceremony to be a religious ceremony. That doesn't sit well with most Americans, to say the least.

Now, if the gay/lesbian crowd wanted a non-religious domestic partnership agreement, the political resistance would probably be much lower. :)


Bullshit. I'm gay and would want a civil ceremony that is called a marriage. If I was straight, I would want the same thing.

adamblast
11-09-05, 10:52 AM
As quoted in newspaper story...

"Texans know that marriage is between a man and a woman, and children deserve both a mom and a dad. They don't need a Ph.D. or a degree in anything else to teach them that," said Kelly Shackelford, a leader Texans For Marriage, which favored the ban.Sounds like they're coming after anyone who went to college next.

TEXAS: Anti-intellectual for over 150 years, and proud of it!!

adamblast
11-09-05, 11:06 AM
The big reason why people reject gay marriages is the fact the gay/lesbian crowd want the marriage ceremony to be a religious ceremony. I'm really at a loss to explain how anyone can think such a thing. Who have you been listening to? Is this something your preacher was shouting from the pulpit? Is this something you *think* you heard on talk radio? What? It defies logic.

Straight people get non-religious but fully legal marriages every day. No one is trying to make any churches do anything.

It's hard to believe that in America you can have your rights voted away by people with opinions as ignorant as the one above.

digitalfreaknyc
11-09-05, 11:12 AM
I'm sorry, but people who don't support full, equal rights for races, ethnic groups, religious groups or sexual preferences deserve harsh comments and NO respect.

Especially from people like digitalfreak that bear the brunt of the discrimination every day of their lives.

Thank you.

Some people just don't get it...and I fear...will NEVER get it. But again, that's on them to stay ignorant, isn't it? Just have to remember that.

digitalfreaknyc
11-09-05, 11:16 AM
Real nice - makes others really respect your views. Must make things a lot easier to just assume everyone who doesn't accept your views and ideas is an idiot.

You're right.

I should look at the people that don't want me to get married and say "gee...maybe they have a point?" or the guy who calls me a faggot when I walk down the street holding my boyfriends hand and say "gee...maybe there IS something wrong with holding someone's hand" or when someone throws a rock at me for being queer, I should say "gee...maybe I DID need another rock in my collection" or when I get fired from my job because some homophobic asshole doesn't want me there and i have no rights to protect me or when I get kicked out of my apartment because i'm gay and i have no rights to protect me...or my "husband" dies and I have no control over anything because our living together for 30+ years means nothing legally or when he's in the hospital and I have no say in what happens to him....ETC....ETC...ETC. I should just look at the OTHER side of all that because...shit...maybe the bigots have a point.

You're absolutely right. Maybe I SHOULD listen to straight people a little more. After all, they really don't have a voice in society, now do they?

DVD Polizei
11-09-05, 11:34 AM
Maybe gays should start moving to Texas and start getting a voting presence.

In my experience, homophobic bigots are the most flaming little queens ever.

As an example I had a supervisor who was married to a woman, but was consistently mean and rude to me--at the time I couldn't figure it. This happened for months.

Then on my day off I walk into work with a tan, shorts, and muscle shirt to pick up my check, and my supervisor walks by and just about had his head taken off by a door. That was no typical look at another man. After that day he was like mush in my hands. And I won't elaborate about the following situation where he wanted me to go with him to the basement to "check on some boxed documents".

Breakfast with Girls
11-09-05, 11:39 AM
Of course, the reason all these laws are being passed is because at this point it's a waiting game, and politicians know that. The younger generation, by and large, is fine with gay marriage (2 out of 3 approve), so once the Baby Boomers pass on, this country will be much more accepting towards it. They want to get their amendments in now to prevent that.

digitalfreaknyc
11-09-05, 11:39 AM
Maybe gays should start moving to Texas and start getting a voting presence.

I value my life and the quality of it.


No.

DVD Polizei
11-09-05, 11:41 AM
1,000 gun-toting gays will make 1,000,000 redneck men pee their pants.

kvrdave
11-09-05, 11:43 AM
RE: Texas - Thank god we've got so many straight white people voting to decide the rights of the minorities in this country. :rolleyes:

Speaking of which, Washington now doesn't allow people to smoke in their own businesses.

Michael T Hudson
11-09-05, 11:47 AM
I value my life and the quality of it.


No.

I think you would like Austin.

Tracer Bullet
11-09-05, 11:51 AM
Speaking of which, Washington now doesn't allow people to smoke in their own businesses.

:lol:

:thumbsup:

joeblow69
11-09-05, 11:57 AM
Then on my day off I walk into work with a tan, shorts, and muscle shirt to pick up my check,
ahem.... pics? :D

JasonF
11-09-05, 11:59 AM
The big reason why people reject gay marriages is the fact the gay/lesbian crowd want the marriage ceremony to be a religious ceremony. That doesn't sit well with most Americans, to say the least.

Now, if the gay/lesbian crowd wanted a non-religious domestic partnership agreement, the political resistance would probably be much lower. :)

Now, don't panic or anything, but I have a secret to tell you:

Gay people are getting married in religious ceremonies every day across this country. In Reform Judaism Temples, Rabbis are joining men in holy matrimony. In Unitarian churches, lesbians are saying "I do" to one another. Lutherans, Episcopalians, Methodists ... all have performed same-sex wedding ceremonies.

In the United States, we use the word "marriage" to describe a union that is recognized by two completely separate authorities: a religious authority and a civil authority. Note that not all marriages are recognized by both authorities. The marriage of a couple who gets married at City Hall is not recognized by any religious authority. The marriage of a couple who gets married at their Catholic Church but does not obtain a marriage license is not recognized by any civil authority. My marriage -- performed in a Conservative Synagogue with a marriage license -- is recognized by all civil authorities and some religious authorities (my religion certainly recognizes it, but certain sects of Orthodox Judaism would not. I don't even know if the Roman Catholic church, to pick one example, recognizes my marriage as a valid marriage -- and I don't much care).

What the "gay/lesbian crowd" want is for people to stop telling them that they don't have the same rights to participate in a civil marriage as any other couple. To not be told that when a straight couple comes to City Hall, they get to drink from the "civil marriage" water fountain, but when a gay couple comes to City Hall, they have to drink from the "domestic partnership" water fountain.

Cameron
11-09-05, 12:00 PM
how many states voted against it in the last election? I remember the margins were really off in some cases. I think that it would be better as a state to state law...it seems like the majority of americans don't want it...a national law could outlaw it everywhere...where if it stayed state to state, there would be places for people to go and get married.

I don't really have the answers...I am a straight white male in my twenties from Texas (don't hate me for it) I don't understand how it must feel to love someone and be told I can't marry them. I just know that the only thing you can do is place your vote, and campaign. Get your issues out there, and don't be hostile. There has to be common ground somewhere.

Y2K Falcon
11-09-05, 12:01 PM
I do like the google ads that showed up for this thread...

I got this banner ad:
http://img47.imageshack.us/img47/4674/imgad1zb.gif (http://imageshack.us)

Grimfarrow
11-09-05, 12:10 PM
Honestly, everyone I've ever met from Canada (that I knew of, anyway) was very nice and accepting. One of my closest co-workers is from there. I have heard nothing but good things from people that have visited including family members. They'd have no problems with my moving up there.
But one thing's for sure, if this country keeps going the way it's going, I will do what I can to make it a more viable option. I'm not going to spend half my life being denied rights and fighting with jackasses in white houses who wear 10 gallon hats and thing gays are more dangerous than terrorists.

Hello! :wave: Toronto says hi!

Okay, it is true that in Toronto, gay life is very normal and standard - gay couples regularly kiss each other in the airport and other public places, and people don't seem to blink an eye. So it's much more accepted here than most of the cities in the US.

But Toronto isn't exactly that ideal either. People are friendly but very hard to get to know - they maintain a distance from you that takes a long time to bridge. Maybe it's the remnants of British culture, but it can be a very cold place to live in - even in the gay community.

You want a gay friendly place? Go to Montreal! Beautiful city, very multiculture, great transportation, people are very friendly & relaxed (none of the English Canada's aloofness), they dress well AND they are HOT. Seriously, Montreal has a ton of hotties - guys and girls :) Would love to move there myself, except it's so damn cold...

digitalfreaknyc
11-09-05, 12:14 PM
I don't really have the answers...I am a straight white male in my twenties from Texas (don't hate me for it) I don't understand how it must feel to love someone and be told I can't marry them. I just know that the only thing you can do is place your vote, and campaign. Get your issues out there, and don't be hostile. There has to be common ground somewhere.

Unfortunately, there isn't. This isn't something people can come to an agreement about. It's either marriage or it's nothing.
Throwing rights at us is cute but after a while, it's insulting to think that every couple of years a different state can throw us some different rights and think that it will appease us.
i think the time is coming where people are just fed up with that tactic.

digitalfreaknyc
11-09-05, 12:17 PM
But Toronto isn't exactly that ideal either. People are friendly but very hard to get to know - they maintain a distance from you that takes a long time to bridge. Maybe it's the remnants of British culture, but it can be a very cold place to live in - even in the gay community.


Ever been to NYC? It's that in a nutshell.

I'm not even looking for "hot" people where I live. There are tons of hot people in NYC but they're too self-involved to notice anyone else.

I'm looking for normal, nice, friendly, sweet, cute. That's the marrying type.

kvrdave
11-09-05, 12:32 PM
Ever been to NYC? It's that in a nutshell.

I'm not even looking for "hot" people where I live. There are tons of hot people in NYC but they're too self-involved to notice anyone else.

I'm looking for normal, nice, friendly, sweet, cute. That's the marrying type.

:eek: That's ME!!!!

Grimfarrow
11-09-05, 01:03 PM
Ever been to NYC? It's that in a nutshell.

I'm not even looking for "hot" people where I live. There are tons of hot people in NYC but they're too self-involved to notice anyone else.

I'm looking for normal, nice, friendly, sweet, cute. That's the marrying type.

Heck, I used to live in NYC! I met more new friends in my single week in NYC than 3 whole months in Toronto. Yes - it's that bad.

And your type is many people's types ;) In fact, my ex would fit into that category to a tee - and he's from Montreal. Thus the gravitational pull to that city for me...

Nick Danger
11-09-05, 01:48 PM
Grim is gay?

Nick Danger
11-09-05, 01:57 PM
Is anyone really surprised that Texas voted for the amendment? The place that kicked off all the legal battles when the police jailed two men for having gay sex in their bedroom?

I'm sure that some of the urban areas, like Austin, are pleasant. But Mrs Danger is from east Texas, and she's told me some hair-raising stories. People there are ignernt and proud of it. And they vote.

Chaos
11-09-05, 02:01 PM
Unfortunately, there isn't. This isn't something people can come to an agreement about. It's either marriage or it's nothing.
Throwing rights at us is cute but after a while, it's insulting to think that every couple of years a different state can throw us some different rights and think that it will appease us.
i think the time is coming where people are just fed up with that tactic.

this thread isn't controverial enogh, time to turn this into a real Politics Forum thread, time for the Devil's Advocate to stimulate some debate;)

you say you want full marriage or nothing; it don't work that way. You either accept baby steps or you get thrown back to the stone age.

Gays push and push, the people who agree with you are highly vocal, the people who disagree don't say anything; as the gay minority cry gets louder, it jsut fuels the opposition to get out and vote.

How often the minority forgets they aren't the majority; whatever they get is granted by the majority; it's not always fair, but it is the way things work.

and to the people who use ad hominems: c'mon, if that's all you got, your sides more pathetic than anyone's admitting; the purpose of debate is to use intelligence and logic to prove or disprove your theory, no need for childish name-calling

Grimfarrow
11-09-05, 02:17 PM
Grim is gay?

Ugh, hello! -wink-

DVD Polizei
11-09-05, 02:33 PM
I hope Texas becomes overrun with Gay Illegals.

I agree with Chaos somewhat. This is what happened back during the second Bush election, which is why so many anti-gay laws were enacted.

Nick Danger
11-09-05, 02:36 PM
Ugh, hello! -wink-

-wink- right back atcha! I wondered what you were doing outside of the movie forums.

Chaos, we've been over this a lot of times before in the Other forum. Basically, marriage is a civil contract which includes a whole pile of recognized benefits. You're proposing that we give those people a few of the benefits to shut them up. Over the last few years, I've been convinced that the government has no business restricting the rights of certain classes.

Baby steps means maintaining a legally recognized second-class citizen.

Being too vocal means that gays should be quiet and accept their second-class status.

The majority allowing or disallowing rights to the minority is a practice that this country has been resisting for 200 years. Sections of the Constitution were written specifically to safeguard against this tendency.

I know people who were gay activists in the early '80s, and I think it's pretty cool that they accomplished what they did.

joeblow69
11-09-05, 02:40 PM
Ugh, hello! -wink-
Hey, were you out at the bars Halloween weeend? Maybe I saw you! I was the guy who was pushed up in the corner at the Eagle getting his nipples chewed on. :D

digitalfreaknyc
11-09-05, 02:55 PM
and to the people who use ad hominems: c'mon, if that's all you got, your sides more pathetic than anyone's admitting; the purpose of debate is to use intelligence and logic to prove or disprove your theory, no need for childish name-calling

I'm assuming you're referring to me and if that's true and you're referring to the gay rights movement as "pathetic" then I thank you, sir, for proving my point so deliciously.

Chaos
11-09-05, 02:59 PM
Chaos, we've been over this a lot of times before in the Other forum. Basically, marriage is a civil contract which includes a whole pile of recognized benefits. You're proposing that we give those people a few of the benefits to shut them up. Over the last few years, I've been convinced that the government has no business restricting the rights of certain classes.

Baby steps means maintaining a legally recognized second-class citizen.

Being too vocal means that gays should be quiet and accept their second-class status.

The majority allowing or disallowing rights to the minority is a practice that this country has been resisting for 200 years. Sections of the Constitution were written specifically to safeguard against this tendency.


Never said give a few rights; I doubt many people would be against gay marriage if full rights were granted and called something else besides marriage; its the semantics that get people up in arms. Then you got people like joeblow talking about what they did at a bar (I do appreciate it was blacked out tho), and it truly disgusts people, thus fueling the opposition.

Gays may not like baby steps, but they sure aren't getting full rights anytime soon; so which is better, a few rights every now and then leading up to full, or waiting, not for years but for generations?

There are about 1million gays in the US; by themselves they are non-existent as a voting bloc, its the liberal sympathizers that give them any weight. Like it or not, gays are a minority, which means certain rights and privileges are denied (passing laws you favor and blocking disfavorable ones are chief among them) and that has disadvantages (just as the Democrats).

Edit: Gays say second-class citizens, I would hazard the guess that the people who passed the gay marriage ban would say gay marriage is not the same to a regular marriage. Gay marriages are single sex, regular marriages are opposite sex; whether they're equal is a morality point I'll not argue. What I will argue is that they're not the same; it is a civil contract, but the context and parties signing that contract are not the same as a normal couple; in that regard, one could make an argument for a separate ceremony for gay marriage with all the rights of a regular marriage (which, again, is a point I'll not argue)

Chaos
11-09-05, 03:00 PM
I'm assuming you're referring to me and if that's true and you're referring to the gay rights movement as "pathetic" then I thank you, sir, for proving my point so deliciously.

rotfl just because you use ad hominems doesn't mean others do; I don't need to stoop that low. I wasn't insulting your movement, I was insulting your use of emotion as an argument in place of logic.

Groucho
11-09-05, 03:05 PM
rotfl just because you use ad hominems doesn't mean others do; I don't need to stoop that low.<img src="http://images.amazon.com/images/P/B000068FH6.01.LZZZZZZZ.jpg" height="184" width="184"/>http://www.tampareads.com/phonics/singleletters/letter-e/graphics/small-e.gif

joeblow69
11-09-05, 03:06 PM
Never said give a few rights; I doubt many people would be against gay marriage if full rights were granted and called something else besides marriage; its the semantics that get people up in arms.
Actually, if you look at the anti gay amendments that got passed, most of them outlawed gay marriage and anything even closely resembling gay marraige. So yes, people obviously do have problems with us having basic rights, even if it's not called marriage.

Then you got people like joeblow talking about what they did at a bar (I do appreciate it was blacked out tho), and it truly disgusts people, thus fueling the opposition.

A little nipple play is disgusting? So be it!

Joeblow69 - Disgusting heteros since 1996!

Grimfarrow
11-09-05, 03:07 PM
Hey, were you out at the bars Halloween weeend? Maybe I saw you! I was the guy who was pushed up in the corner at the Eagle getting his nipples chewed on. :D

Haha - no, I was working all weekend :( My film fest is coming up, so no rest for the weary. But at least I'm catching good concerts this weekend - yay!

BTW, glad you like Raspberry Reich. Bruce is a friend of mine.

Grimfarrow
11-09-05, 03:11 PM
-wink- right back atcha! I wondered what you were doing outside of the movie forums.

Unfortunately, I do precious little outside of film lately *sigh*.

Ugh, as for the topic, I'm not surprised. Disappointed, but not surprised.

Chaos
11-09-05, 03:11 PM
<img src="http://images.amazon.com/images/P/B000068FH6.01.LZZZZZZZ.jpg" height="184" width="184"/>http://www.tampareads.com/phonics/singleletters/letter-e/graphics/small-e.gif


Guess I walked right into that one :P

LiquidSky
11-09-05, 03:17 PM
Then you got people like joeblow talking about what they did at a bar (I do appreciate it was blacked out tho), and it truly disgusts people, thus fueling the opposition.

I've seen plenty of heterosexual play at straight bars. I walked in on some drunk couple fucking in the bathroom.

Ever been to Spring Break? Drunk horny heterosexuals humping anything in site. :lol:

Chaos
11-09-05, 03:22 PM
I've seen plenty of heterosexual play at straight bars. I walked in on some drunk couple fucking in the bathroom.

Never said there was anything wrong with it, but you don't see them bragging about it on the politics forum

that's why we have an adult forum ;)

LiquidSky
11-09-05, 03:24 PM
Never said there was anything wrong with it, but you don't see them bragging about it on the politics forum

that's why we have an adult forum ;)

From my experience on the adult forum, gays aren't exactly welcome.

RoyalTea
11-09-05, 03:28 PM
<i>Mod note: The following is a quote from South Park...</i>

I believe that I might have come up with a compromise to this whole problem that will make everyone happy! People in the gay community want the same rights as married couples, but dissenters don't want the word "marriage" corrupted. So how about we let gay people get married, but call it something else? [everyone listens quietly] You homosexuals will have all the exact same rights as married couples, but instead of refering to you as "maarriied," you can be... butt buddies. [long silence] Instead of being "man and wife," you'll be... butt buddies. You won't be "betrothed," you'll be... butt buuuddies. Get it? Instead of a "bride and groom," you'd be... butt buddies.

We wanna be treated equally!

Y-you are equal. It's just that instead of getting "engaged," you would be... butt buuuddies. And everyone is happy!

al_bundy
11-09-05, 03:31 PM
it's not going to work because some groups will see it as baby steps to full marriage of homosexuals

DVD Polizei
11-09-05, 03:32 PM
Just thought I would mention more HETEROSEXUAL MEN like to be penetrated in the ass by dildos than homosexual men. In fact, you can Google it if you like.

digitalfreaknyc
11-09-05, 03:32 PM
From my experience on the adult forum, gays aren't exactly welcome.

Unless it's Art, in which case everything is just dandy.

Ever been to Spring Break? Drunk horny heterosexuals humping anything in site.

But that's not "gross" and doesn't make straight men squirm. For that matter, neither does two women going at it...so long as neither one wants to put on a wedding dress.

LiquidSky
11-09-05, 03:32 PM
...

You have been reported.

Groucho
11-09-05, 03:33 PM
RoyalTea was quoting "South Park."

digitalfreaknyc
11-09-05, 03:34 PM
I just reported you.

ha. Ditto. ;)

Great GAY minds.

Wanna suck my nipples?

Tracer Bullet
11-09-05, 03:34 PM
chaos, you're not saying anything on this topic that hasn't been raised numerous times. It all comes down to whether you believe a) gay relationships are the equal of straight ones, and b) whether marriage is a civil right. I'm sure there are a few people that are against gay marriage but support gay people, but they're not the people voting for these digusting initiatives.

In my opinion, people that do not think homosexuals should have the right of marriage are ignorant or bigoted. And I'm not going to apologize or made to feel marginalized because of this opinion.

RoyalTea
11-09-05, 03:34 PM
I just reported you.it's a direct quote from South Park. I fully support the rights of homosexuals to get married.

LiquidSky
11-09-05, 03:36 PM
it's a direct quote from South Park. I fully support the rights of homosexuals to get married.

I don't give a fuck where it's from. Ever hear of a wink if you are not serious?

RoyalTea
11-09-05, 03:37 PM
I don't give a fuck where it's from. Ever hear of a wink if you are not serious?christ. maybe I thought it was so over the top that it didn't require a wink.

report me again if it makes you feel better.

digitalfreaknyc
11-09-05, 03:45 PM
christ. maybe I thought it was so over the top that it didn't require a wink.

report me again if it makes you feel better.

Maybe this is your first time in the "gay rodeo" and if so, welcome.

Tension is ALWAYS high in these threads and joking, although permitted, is used sparingly.

In all seriousness, this issue affects some of your board members on a daily-hourly-minute to minute, second to second basis. So safe to say it means a lot to us. Personally, I would die for my sexuality. Its who i am. There's no taking it away from me. I'm not going to live and be someone that I'm not no matter what other people feel should be "right." Everyone else can honestly fuck off. And if that attitude bothers you, then maybe you should walk a week in our heels and then tell us how you feel. You have NO idea how much this affects everything in your life. Don't take your rights for granted because people around you may not have the same.

LiquidSky
11-09-05, 03:52 PM
christ. maybe I thought it was so over the top that it didn't require a wink.

report me again if it makes you feel better.

Frankly, it did not make me feel good. Don't turn it around on me! If you fully support homosexual marriage, why did you post something so stupid on this thread instead of showing your support?

Sadly, facing homophobia for so many years of my life, NOTHING of this sort is "over the top" to me. As a straight person, you may find it "over the top", but to those of us who have experienced the outright HATE from people simply for being gay, it definitely is not.

RoyalTea
11-09-05, 03:55 PM
Maybe this is your first time in the "gay rodeo" and if so, welcome.my point was not to offend. every time in the past three or four years that i've commented on gay marriage in this forum it has been supporting you.

I think that if two men or two women want to get married, that does not affect me at all, so i think it's stupid for me or anyone else to try to make it illegal.

i've also spent the past couple years quoting stupid tv shows and movies when the topic was relevant.

i'm sorry if i offended you by quoting a stupid tv show. my personal opinion on this topic is that the people of Texas who voted for this constitutional amendment are idiots. i quoted that show because i thought it portrayed people who are afraid of homosexual marriage as paranoid idiots.

LiquidSky
11-09-05, 04:02 PM
my point was not to offend. every time in the past three or four years that i've commented on gay marriage in this forum it has been supporting you.

I think that if two men or two women want to get married, that does not affect me at all, so i think it's stupid for me or anyone else to try to make it illegal.

i've also spent the past couple years quoting stupid tv shows and movies when the topic was relevant.

i'm sorry if i offended you by quoting a stupid tv show. my personal opinion on this topic is that the people of Texas who voted for this constitutional amendment are idiots. i quoted that show because i thought it portrayed people who are afraid of homosexual marriage as paranoid idiots.

Apology accepted!

Unfortunately, after some of the bullshit I have been through, it is hard to tell the difference between over the top humor and the sad fact that many people really feel this way.

WallyOPD
11-09-05, 04:35 PM
I'm assuming that the wording of the legislation would make this marriage illegal in Texas too?

http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/asiapcf/11/09/panda.wedding.ap/index.html

Too many people are getting too uptight over the definition of marriage. I'm straight and an atheist yet I don't suppose all the people standing up for the "defense" of marriage from a religious perspective would have any problem with me getting married.

LiquidSky
11-09-05, 04:42 PM
I'm assuming that the wording of the legislation would make this marriage illegal in Texas too?

http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/asiapcf/11/09/panda.wedding.ap/index.html

Too many people are getting too uptight over the definition of marriage. I'm straight and an atheist yet I don't suppose all the people standing up for the "defense" of marriage from a religious perspective would have any problem with me getting married.

:lol: man, you just beat me to it....I was about to post the link.

DVD Polizei
11-09-05, 04:49 PM
Isn't it funny a ban on gay marriage was written into Texas' constitution, yet they have one of the worst illegal immigrant problems in the nation.

This reflects the current administration, come to think of it. Morality is 1st, and national safety is second.

riley_dude
11-09-05, 05:42 PM
Idiots!!!

There goes my Vacation plans. :)

Just thought I would mention more HETEROSEXUAL MEN like to be penetrated in the ass by dildos than homosexual men. In fact, you can Google it if you like.

Now this I want to see. What words did you google?

DVD Polizei
11-09-05, 05:49 PM
P-r-i-s-o-n

Chaos
11-09-05, 06:06 PM
Just thought I would mention more HETEROSEXUAL MEN like to be penetrated in the ass by dildos than homosexual men. In fact, you can Google it if you like.

. . . do you ever think about what you type before submitting it or does it just roll out?

if a guy likes to "be penetrated in the ass by dildos" (as you so eloquently put it), one would think that makes him a homosexual.

joeblow69
11-09-05, 06:21 PM
if a guy likes to "be penetrated in the ass by dildos" (as you so eloquently put it), one would think that makes him a homosexual.
One might think that.... but one would be WRONG.

The prostate feels great when it's massaged for ALL men, not just the gay ones. There are plenty of straight men who have been able to get over their insecurites enough to experience the pleasures of getting your prostate slammed. That in itself does not make someone gay. Being gay has more to do with who you fall in love with, who you want to live the rest of your life with, and mushy stuff like that. Though I know the right wing ditto heads would have you believe being gay is all about EXTREME and ANONYMOUS ANAL PENETRATIONS!!!

Cygnet74
11-09-05, 06:25 PM
. . . do you ever think about what you type before submitting it or does it just roll out?

if a guy likes to "be penetrated in the ass by dildos" (as you so eloquently put it), one would think that makes him a homosexual.
what, do you live in a box? getting down and dirty in the manner to which you are accustomed does not make one homosexual. an attraction to one's own gender does.

riley_dude
11-09-05, 06:26 PM
You would think, but most Men who like that type of stuff wouldn't say that or admit it. There are also some men ( I believe they made fun of this on a Sex and the city episode) that if you touch their ass they are gay which isnt necessarily true either. They say a Man's "G" spot is there ya know.

LiquidSky
11-09-05, 07:23 PM
If a guy likes to "be penetrated in the ass by dildos" (as you so eloquently put it), one would think that makes him a homosexual.

Wrong. I'm gay and do not participate in anything anal. Does that make me straight? :)

digitalfreaknyc
11-09-05, 08:35 PM
Wrong. I'm gay and do not participate in anything anal. Does that make me straight? :)

Another reason we're not right for each other ;)

Mark_vdH
11-10-05, 03:43 AM
Wrong. I'm gay and do not participate in anything anal. Does that make me straight? :)You argument is logically incorrect.

As is Chaos' BTW.... :)

LiquidSky
11-10-05, 08:15 AM
You argument is logically incorrect.

As is Chaos' BTW.... :)

I know....I was just being goofy. :)

LiquidSky
11-10-05, 08:16 AM
Another reason we're not right for each other ;)

:( ;)

cdollaz
11-10-05, 08:24 AM
Regarding this:


RE: Texas - Thank god we've got so many straight white people voting to decide the rights of the minorities in this country. :rolleyes:

http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/topstory/3451194

It appears that the Hispanic, Black, and other Democrats voted <B>for</B> the amendment as much, and in some cases more, than Republicans in Texas.

classicman2
11-10-05, 08:27 AM
ELECTION 2005
Gay marriage ban crossed political lines, analysts say
By POLLY ROSS HUGHES and R.G. RATCLIFFE
Copyright 2005 Houston Chronicle Austin Bureau
RESOURCES

AUSTIN - Blacks and Hispanics who traditionally vote Democratic strongly backed the state's gay marriage ban at the ballot box this week, sometimes outpolling Republicans, analysts said Wednesday.


That broad interest across political lines contributed to the highest participation in a constitutional amendment election since 1991, with roughly 18 percent of registered voters turning out for Tuesday's election.

CRM114
11-10-05, 08:29 AM
But the SCOTUS does need to step in and decide something, mainly because we will end up with some states that don't allow it, and some that do, and that can't be a good trend in crossing state lines and not having things recognized by all states.

Thats what the pro-lifers want though. :lol:

Lets do it. Then we'll have the uptight states that no one wants to live in and the progressive states where liberty is preserved.

classicman2
11-10-05, 08:37 AM
Progressive - why not use the correct word? ;)

Nazgul
11-10-05, 08:39 AM
Lets do it. Then we'll have the uptight states that no one wants to live in and the progressive states where liberty is preserved.

:lol:

Did you type that with a straight face?

Geofferson
11-10-05, 08:59 AM
Regarding this:


http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/topstory/3451194

It appears that the Hispanic, Black, and other Democrats voted <B>for</B> the amendment as much, and in some cases more, than Republicans in Texas.
I assumed this back on page 1 - no surprise to me. :)

Geofferson
11-10-05, 08:59 AM
Progressive - why not use the correct word? ;)
:up:

CRM114
11-10-05, 09:10 AM
. . . do you ever think about what you type before submitting it or does it just roll out?

if a guy likes to "be penetrated in the ass by dildos" (as you so eloquently put it), one would think that makes him a homosexual.

I personally don't understand it but how in the hell would that make a person a homosexual? Wow.

CRM114
11-10-05, 09:13 AM
:lol:

Did you type that with a straight face?

Look at the population map sometime. Apparently, this is lost on you since your state of Kansas just passed intelligent design nonsense in their public schools. :lol:

CRM114
11-10-05, 09:15 AM
Progressive - why not use the correct word? ;)

Are you intimating that I should use the word "liberal?" I could have but I thought our readers were able to know the difference between the two. Progressive in this case means moving the rights of Americans FORWARD. Thus - pro-gress-ive. Get it?

-rolleyes-

Goldblum
11-10-05, 09:18 AM
Regarding this:


http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/topstory/3451194

It appears that the Hispanic, Black, and other Democrats voted <B>for</B> the amendment as much, and in some cases more, than Republicans in Texas.
Hush up. We want to ignore this point. Maybe then it won't exist. ;)

Nazgul
11-10-05, 10:03 AM
Look at the population map sometime.

I understand your mentality completley. :lol:

Tracer Bullet
11-10-05, 10:03 AM
Hush up. We want to ignore this point. Maybe then it won't exist. ;)

So what? A bigot is still a bigot, no matter their race or political leanings.

LiquidSky
11-10-05, 10:17 AM
So what? A bigot is still a bigot, no matter their race or political leanings.

:up:

maxfisher
11-10-05, 10:19 AM
Not to make too light of a serious issue, but does anyone else find it funny that when this thread shows up on the main forum page under 'Last Post...', it reads 'Texans approve gay marriage'. As a person who doesn't keep up with what Texans are voting on, I was quite surprised until I clicked on the thread. I'm sure there have been other threads whose meaning is lost in the truncation, but this seems like an extreme example.

Groucho
11-10-05, 10:20 AM
I keep reading it as "Texans approve gay miscarriage ban"

Michael T Hudson
11-10-05, 10:52 AM
I keep reading it as "Texans approve gay miscarriage ban"


:lol:

DVD Polizei
11-10-05, 11:12 AM
Not to make too light of a serious issue, but does anyone else find it funny that when this thread shows up on the main forum page under 'Last Post...', it reads 'Texans approve gay marriage'. As a person who doesn't keep up with what Texans are voting on, I was quite surprised until I clicked on the thread. I'm sure there have been other threads whose meaning is lost in the truncation, but this seems like an extreme example.

It's an obvuious attempt by Liberals to lie! :D

Xander
11-10-05, 12:08 PM
ok fine.

So the quote should be:

RE: The US - Thank god we've got so many ignorant, bigoted homophobic assholes voting to decide the rights of the minorities in this country.

Exactly. THAT'S what I meant. :)


Ever been to NYC? It's that in a nutshell.

I'm not even looking for "hot" people where I live. There are tons of hot people in NYC but they're too self-involved to notice anyone else.

I'm looking for normal, nice, friendly, sweet, cute. That's the marrying type.

You should come to Iowa. Lot's of those folks are here. Some are even gay. ;)

Goldblum
11-10-05, 12:12 PM
So what? A bigot is still a bigot, no matter their race or political leanings.
I agree. I was responding to this:


RE: Texas - Thank god we've got so many straight white people voting to decide the rights of the minorities in this country.

movielib
11-10-05, 03:03 PM
Are you intimating that I should use the word "liberal?" I could have but I thought our readers were able to know the difference between the two. Progressive in this case means moving the rights of Americans FORWARD. Thus - pro-gress-ive. Get it?

-rolleyes-
Is that what it means?

I thought it meant "Hold onto your wallet because they're coming to take away your money for counterproductive programs and take away your economic rights in the name of 'social justice'."

(It's always wise to use a good sounding word for a bad political philosophy.)

But that's just me.

digitalfreaknyc
11-10-05, 03:51 PM
But that's just me.

Yup. Just you.

CRM114
11-10-05, 03:59 PM
Is that what it means?

I thought it meant "Hold onto your wallet because they're coming to take away your money for counterproductive programs and take away your economic rights in the name of 'social justice'."

(It's always wise to use a good sounding word for a bad political philosophy.)

But that's just me.

Funny. I thought the "Conservatives" did a hell of a lot more spending than anyone. Look at the budget lately. Nice try though.


I should mention that another way to look at it. Liberals use the Constitution to GIVE people rights. Conservatives like to take rights away. See this thread.

digitalfreaknyc
11-10-05, 04:12 PM
You should come to Iowa. Lot's of those folks are here. Some are even gay. ;)

You know...some of the nicest people I've met haven't been from the big cities but escaped the countryside. ;)

Groucho
11-10-05, 04:14 PM
I should mention that another way to look at it. Liberals use the Constitution to GIVE people rights. Conservatives like to take rights away.Such as the recent handgun ban in San Francisco? Damn those conservatives! :shakesfist:

digitalfreaknyc
11-10-05, 04:21 PM
Such as the recent handgun ban in San Francisco? Damn those conservatives! :shakesfist:

Oh please. They accidentally wrote "handbag" on the ballot and the queens naturally said "yes! we need more!"

CRM114
11-10-05, 05:02 PM
Such as the recent handgun ban in San Francisco? Damn those conservatives! :shakesfist:

The gay marriage ban was a STATE constitutional amendment (if I'm not mistaken).

I don't advocate the SF law but it does not ban shotguns or rifles so its not a complete denial of rights such as the Texas law. The Constitution does not read that is a right to bear handguns.

movielib
11-10-05, 05:14 PM
Funny. I thought the "Conservatives" did a hell of a lot more spending than anyone. Look at the budget lately. Nice try though.
I totally agree. The conservatives talk fiscal responsibility. It's been decades since they've practiced it, if ever. And, as a libertarian, I have as much disdain for conservativism as I have for "progessivism." Nice try though. (I add this last sentence only because you thought it necessary to say it to me.)

I should mention that another way to look at it. Liberals use the Constitution to GIVE people rights. Conservatives like to take rights away. See this thread.
Conservatives like to take personal rights away. Liberals like to take economic rights away. And actually, they both do a pretty good job of taking away many of the rights their respective sides supposedly defend.

spainlinx0
11-10-05, 05:35 PM
Just thought I would mention more HETEROSEXUAL MEN like to be penetrated in the ass by dildos than homosexual men. In fact, you can Google it if you like.

Are we talking as a percentage of total they are higher, or there are just more of them? I wouldn't think it's fair to compare since there are so many more straight males than gay ones.

crazyronin
11-10-05, 05:47 PM
Lets do it. Then we'll have the uptight states that no one wants to live in and the progressive states where liberty is preserved.

I want to fix that so bad...:hairpull:



...and the progressive states where we are taxed into the stone age

not really fixed:D2:

BKenn01
11-10-05, 08:33 PM
Conservatives like to take personal rights away. Liberals like to take economic rights away.

Its not conservatives who are taking the rights of gun owners and smokers away.

I know what you are saying, but I dont think it is fair to say that Liberals are always on the side of personal liberty.

movielib
11-10-05, 09:52 PM
Its not conservatives who are taking the rights of gun owners and smokers away.

I know what you are saying, but I dont think it is fair to say that Liberals are always on the side of personal liberty.
I didn't say anything of the sort. Strange that you seemed to have missed the next sentence of my post. I don't understand why as it immediately followed the sentence you quoted. Again, the complete paragraph:

Conservatives like to take personal rights away. Liberals like to take economic rights away. And actually, they both do a pretty good job of taking away many of the rights their respective sides supposedly defend.

Supermallet
11-10-05, 09:59 PM
Its not conservatives who are taking the rights of gun owners and smokers away.

Does the Constitution give people the right to smoke?

Honestly, defending smokers' rights is like defending people's right to swallow gasoline.

Grimfarrow
11-10-05, 10:23 PM
I think people DO have the right to swallow gasoline. And smoke. Hey, it's their health.

The smoking laws in certain states, like in CA, are almost fascist. And I've never smoked a cigarette in my life.

But then, I'm one of those crazy people who like both my economic rights AND my full liberties. Seriously, I didn't know how easy I had it when I was in Hong Kong with 17% flat tax on my income. Then I came to Canada.... To think I thought US tax rates were bad!

Chaos
11-10-05, 10:38 PM
I think people DO have the right to swallow gasoline. And smoke. Hey, it's their health.

The smoking laws in certain states, like in CA, are almost fascist. And I've never smoked a cigarette in my life.

But then, I'm one of those crazy people who like both my economic rights AND my full liberties. Seriously, I didn't know how easy I had it when I was in Hong Kong with 17% flat tax on my income. Then I came to Canada.... To think I thought US tax rates were bad!

:thumbsup:

Supermallet
11-10-05, 10:52 PM
I think people DO have the right to swallow gasoline. And smoke. Hey, it's their health.

If it were swallowing gasoline, I would agree. But smoking affects my health, too. I want the liberty to breathe air not clouded with nicotine and tobacco smoke.

The smoking laws in certain states, like in CA, are almost fascist. And I've never smoked a cigarette in my life.

I live in CA, and it is so nice to be able to go into a restaurant and not have the smoke from the smoking section waft over to ruin my food and the atmosphere.

But then, I'm one of those crazy people who like both my economic rights AND my full liberties.

I like both of those things as well, and for me that includes the right to breathe clean, smoke-free air. If people want to smoke in their own home, fine. But not everything is legal to do in public, and I think smoking should be included in that.

And just to throw this thread back on topic: I'm in full favor of gay marriage and think it is barbaric that we actually have laws against it. You may say I'm a hypocrite liberal because I want to widen marriage laws but limit smoking laws, but gay marriage hurts no one, and smoking hurts everyone but tobacco executives.

Grimfarrow
11-10-05, 11:05 PM
If it were swallowing gasoline, I would agree. But smoking affects my health, too. I want the liberty to breathe air not clouded with nicotine and tobacco smoke.

I live in CA, and it is so nice to be able to go into a restaurant and not have the smoke from the smoking section waft over to ruin my food and the atmosphere.


Then set a law whereby a restaurant should have clear division between smoking and non-smoking section. If they won't or cannot afford it, then have the restaurant voluntarily designate themselves smoking OR non-smoking only. This way, you know what you're getting into when you go in. And it applies to both sides, since smokers then cannot complain that they can't smoke in a clearly non-smoking restaurant.

Lemdog
11-10-05, 11:08 PM
Then set a law whereby a restaurant should have clear division between smoking and non-smoking section. If they won't or cannot afford it, then have the restaurant voluntarily designate themselves smoking OR non-smoking only. This way, you know what you're getting into when you go in. And it applies to both sides, since smokers then cannot complain that they can't smoke in a clearly non-smoking restaurant.

Grim that just makes too much sense. We can have that.

natevines
11-10-05, 11:15 PM
This is democracy. Suck it up.

Supermallet
11-10-05, 11:17 PM
Then set a law whereby a restaurant should have clear division between smoking and non-smoking section. If they won't or cannot afford it, then have the restaurant voluntarily designate themselves smoking OR non-smoking only. This way, you know what you're getting into when you go in. And it applies to both sides, since smokers then cannot complain that they can't smoke in a clearly non-smoking restaurant.

That would never work. No restaurant wants to build twice as many establishments for half the customers. And what if you're married to a smoker? Which one do you go to? And then the smoking restaurants couldn't turn away non-smoking applicants, and if any of them get lung cancer or even asthma, they could claim it was from working in a smoke-filled environment all day and sue the restaurant.

And what clear divisions would you have between smoking and non-smoking? A second restaurant attached to the first? Again, same problems. You can't just have a wide walkway, the smoke travels.

Personally, I think smoking should be prohibited to private residences or personal vehicles.

Grimfarrow
11-10-05, 11:39 PM
You're way overexaggerating. No one will build" twice" the amount of establishments - how many smokers do you think there are!??! And sorry, but this is what they do here in Toronto - bars/restaurants have separate balconies/rooms for smoking only, like airport lounges.

And when you step into a smoking restaurants - you know what you're getting into. Don't like it? Leave. That's freedom. You like the food too much? Then stay and "risk" your health. But it's your choice, and not the government ramming down your throat. And it's up to the business to calculate himself whether he "risks" losing clients one way or another.

And if you're married to a smoker then the restaurant is the least of your worries.

Supermallet
11-10-05, 11:51 PM
Look, many behaviors are relegated to private places. You can't have sex or be nude in a public place, for example. I just think smoking is one of those behaviors, as it is harmful. More harmful than sex or nudity. That's not the government taking away your god-given right to smoke. Your personal liberty would still be there, it would just be limited in scope. Like many of our personal liberties are. So I'm hoping for more strict smoking laws instead of less, and full gay marriage across not just the states, but the world.

In the end, it boils down to this: What you propose causes harm, and what I propose is to minimize that harm. Plain and simple.

Grimfarrow
11-11-05, 12:05 AM
But this isn't about harmful or not harmful - there are a ton of "harmful" things you can do to yourself that's not illegal. It's about how people are willing to give away their rights to the control of the state, and I for one find it disturbing. Plus, I think public nudity in designated areas are perfectly fine.

Tracer Bullet
11-11-05, 08:07 AM
This is democracy. Suck it up.

I thought these were anti-smoking laws?

Or if you meant that in a gay way: come on over!

Groucho
11-11-05, 09:46 AM
Its not conservatives who are taking the rights of gun owners and smokers away.Not true on the smoking issue. Utah has always been at the forefront of smoking bans, and we're the most conservative state in the union.

wildcatlh
11-11-05, 09:52 AM
Look, many behaviors are relegated to private places. You can't have sex or be nude in a public place, for example. I just think smoking is one of those behaviors, as it is harmful. More harmful than sex or nudity. That's not the government taking away your god-given right to smoke. Your personal liberty would still be there, it would just be limited in scope. Like many of our personal liberties are. So I'm hoping for more strict smoking laws instead of less, and full gay marriage across not just the states, but the world.

In the end, it boils down to this: What you propose causes harm, and what I propose is to minimize that harm. Plain and simple.

The point you're purposefully ignoring is that nobody's putting a gun to your head and forcing you to go to a restaurant that allows smoking. If a restaurant wants to allow smoking, they should be able to. If enough people like you choose not to patronize that restaurant due to their policy allowing smoking, then the restaurant is going to be forced to make the business decision to not allow smoking. And for the record, nobody said anything about restaurants building two establishments, one for smoking and one for non-smoking. Any single restaurant has the right to declare themselves "smoking" or "non-smoking" (or at least they should).

As you talked about smokers not having the god-given right to smoke wherever you want... you don't have the god-given right to eat at any restaurant you want.

Geofferson
11-11-05, 11:34 AM
Not true on the smoking issue. Utah has always been at the forefront of smoking bans, and we're the most conservative state in the union.
I would definitely say that is the exception rather than the rule. All I know is that if Rob Reiner had his way, all tobacco shops in California would be non-existent right now.

kvrdave
11-11-05, 12:01 PM
Originally Posted by DVD Polizei
Just thought I would mention more HETEROSEXUAL MEN like to be penetrated in the ass by dildos than homosexual men. In fact, you can Google it if you like.

:lol: Where do you get this? For fun, I will assume that it is 100% correct. That still leaves some pretty big problems with even suggesting it. Since heterosexual men don't want to be penetrated by a penis, it seems that they would use something else, like a dildo, if they liked anal penetration. And homosexual men obviously don't have a lot of need for a dildo up the rear, since they tend to prefer a penis back there. Doesn't that seem intuitive?

It seems more like a suggestion that heterosexual men are secretly homosexual men, though. And that also seems to make the assumption that just because a guy wants something up their ass, it should have some bearing on their attraction to the same sex. That seems like a big assumption as well. And that all assumes that what you have said is 100% true.

Exit only, and plan on keeping it that way. Life's too short for a log jam. :)

adamblast
11-11-05, 01:12 PM
Exit only, and plan on keeping it that way. Life's too short for a log jam. :)Ahh, of course. You'd rather stick yours someplace where piss comes out. Understood. :D

Groucho
11-11-05, 01:15 PM
adamblast needs a quick primer on female anatomy, methinks.

adamblast
11-11-05, 01:16 PM
adamblast needs a quick primer on female anatomy, methinks.Evidentally. But naah, that's ok.

Th0r S1mpson
11-11-05, 01:24 PM
Mulva, is that you? Aretha?

adamblast
11-11-05, 01:29 PM
I don't get out much. Or in, as the case may be.

DVD Polizei
11-11-05, 01:37 PM
How about we get kinky and freaknasty by just goin' in without approval. :up:

RoyalTea
11-12-05, 10:08 AM
i was reading this thread quickly and backwards and for a while, I thought this was a discussion of restaurants making two sections: one for people who like being penetrated in the ass with a dildo, and one for people who didn't like being penetrated in the ass with a dildo.

Tracer Bullet
11-12-05, 10:24 AM
adamblast needs a quick primer on female anatomy, methinks.

Yeah. Apparently women have three holes (or something- this is not counting the mouth, and I didn't ask for details). Gross. I'm not getting the whole vagina scene at all.

DVD Polizei
11-12-05, 11:00 AM
i was reading this thread quickly and backwards and for a while, I thought this was a discussion of restaurants making two sections: one for people who like being penetrated in the ass with a dildo, and one for people who didn't like being penetrated in the ass with a dildo.

If any state is going to bring back segregation, it's Texas. And I would expect mostly "straight" men sitting in the I like dildo penetration section.


Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.2.0